Hey, everybody, welcome to another all in podcast.
This is an all bestie, no guestie episode of all in.
The last time you heard from the besties, it was election night
and it was a shit show, a fucking crazy shit show.
Let’s be honest.
I mean, we if we go back and look at that historical document,
we had moments where we thought Trump was going to absolutely crush.
Then we had moments of confusion.
And now here we are.
And I think we have to give a couple of bestie kudos to first off Chamath
pointing out Pennsylvania was going to be big.
And then second, when we went through the possible scenarios of who
what what could possibly happen, a big giant blue wave,
Trump winning it all, and then maybe something in the middle
option three came through.
And that was Saksipu nailed it.
I think that was your assumption, Sax.
The soft landing, the soft landing. Yeah.
So why don’t we just for the people who didn’t tune in live?
Sorry, Jason, can I ask a question?
Saksipu, Saksipu, was that your
like projection or was it from that
from that guy who lives in his dad’s basement, his mom’s basement?
My my researcher.
Well, Newman, Newman works for me.
Yeah. Newman, Newman and I worked together on on those takes.
But yeah, the take that we thought was was possible, but probably unlikely,
but could represent a really good scenario was the soft landing
where you get a split decision.
And I think that’s what the American people voted for.
You know, you had the Democratic frame on the election
was that we needed a return to normalcy and decency.
The Republican frame was that the radical left cannot be trusted with power.
And voters basically said they were both right.
They sort of surgically removed Donald Trump while thwarting
the radical left’s dream of total control in Washington.
And what the electorate seems to be saying is they want the parties
now to work together instead of voting for extreme ideology.
But TBD, Sax, I mean, Georgia is still up for grabs.
They’re going to go after it hard, right?
I mean, they filed in Pennsylvania.
Yeah, so I think there’s a series of court challenges we can talk about.
I think that they’re unlikely to prevail.
Very, very unlikely.
I think Joe Biden will be the next president.
We can kind of compare this to, you know, Bush v.
Gore from 2000.
And if you you want to compare Trump’s case to Gore’s case,
it’s weaker in every respect.
I mean, first of all, with Bush v.
Gore, Gore only had to overturn one state, which was Florida,
whereas Trump has to now contest and overturn three or four states
simultaneously. Second, you know, Gore was within a few hundred votes of Bush.
It was extremely close.
Trump is no closer than about 12000 votes in Georgia.
That’s the closest one.
Third, you know, Gore
or Bush never trailed Gore in any in any recount.
And and Trump has that problem that he’s never
and he’s very far behind Gore as well.
So you look at those three things and you’d say, you know, Gore couldn’t overcome it.
And he had a closer situation than this.
And of course, I’d say finally, you know, W had the velvet
hammer, James Baker, working for him, whereas Trump frankly has Rudy Giuliani,
who’s throwing press conferences in the parking lot of forces and landscaping
between a dildo shop and a crematorium.
And I mean, you can’t make this stuff up.
I think somebody was tweeting, you know, it’s this is perfect
because, you know, they were saying they wanted Rudy to fuck off and die.
So it was so appropriate
that this press conference was held between a dildo shop and a crematorium.
So, you know, it’s not exactly the A team
that Trump’s got playing for him here in the courts.
But I mean, David Bossie, by the way, David Bossie, who is in charge of the whole
thing, David Bossie is not even a lawyer.
And then he gets covid.
So he’s on the sidelines.
I mean, just there’s so many angles we can take here,
including the fact that am I correct that?
Trump’s campaign adviser got covid
like the day after or no, no, no.
Mark Meadows, Chief of Staff, Chief of Staff got it.
But David Bossie, who’s in charge of this whole recount process, got covid as well.
OK, so I want to just shift us now to what could have so many things
went right for the Democrats.
But there was also something very clear here that happened, which is the
what I call the HSP, the Hysterical Socialist Party of America,
I think was dealt a death blow.
If you look, this was very close.
And so, you know, even if we want to talk about the Electoral College,
et cetera, these are still very low numbers.
I believe if the Pfizer news comes out last week,
Trump wins or if any combination
of AOC Biden, AOC, Bernie or Warren
were in any way involved in this election process
and weren’t pushed to the side, the squad was squashed
because we knew that if they got any kind of play.
Trump sails into victory.
So when we look at what happens going forward
and I’ll let any one of the three of you take this,
what does this say about the Hysterical Socialist Party,
the HSP, the squad, the Bernie bros?
What does this say about them?
Well, you have a you have a look, you have a you have a loud group
of people on both sides.
And the reality is that both extremes of both parties
actually after this election have very little to stand on that’s unique,
because if you think about what the plurality of Americans want
is actually just a common, decent, centrist, do no harm alternative.
And they’re going to pick that more times
than they’re not going to pick it.
It’s only when things get extreme, like in 2016,
in order to send a message, will they do it?
And until it’s resolved, they tried to do it again now.
So we should actually talk about that.
I don’t think that this was, you know, a runaway.
It was way too close on too many dimensions that actually matter
for the future prosperity of America.
But that being said, what does it mean for the future?
I think the future is like a Pete Buttigieg must be high fiving,
you know, the people in his camp right now, because a common,
decent, thoughtful, centrist platform will win.
For example, like let’s just say you believe in gay rights.
You don’t need to be at the fringes to believe in that.
You believe in like a reasonable form of health care.
If you believe in climate change, it’s mainstream.
You start to go and tick off the things that the extremes
would want to believe.
There’s very little room for them to stand on.
So one party is going to be basically about like a federalized
nanny state, and the other party will be a bunch of conspiracy
And I think it’s going to force more and more people to the middle.
I think that’s the future.
To me, that’s that’s a much safer place to be than I think
where we could have been if, you know, Trump had won or if
the extreme left had basically been been validated with
a candidate that won.
And I would add to that, that the proof of that, the proof
of the electorate’s desire to attack towards the center as
you look at the down ballot election.
So, you know, in the Senate, the Republicans are still holding
on to a majority pending the Florida runoff, but the Democrats
failed to take out Susan Collins, Tom Tillis, Steve Daines.
These were three incumbent Republicans who are way behind
in the polls heading into election day.
They didn’t come close to taking out Lindsey Graham or Mitch
McConnell, despite spending a million dollars.
Get out of this one alive.
No, Lady G.
Oh, I see.
You know, Lindsey Graham, they said that it was neck and
neck, and he actually ended up winning that state by like
It wasn’t close.
The polls were wildly off.
And you saw that across the board in the House to Democrats
expected a gain of 10 to 15 seats.
Instead, they’ve lost about 10 seats.
They failed to defeat a single GOP incumbent.
The GOP House members ran about two or three points ahead
of President Trump, and then the Democrats were completely
shut out in Texas, which was supposed to be going purple.
There were eight open GOP seats.
Democrats won none of them.
So anyway, I’m providing some support to the idea that this
was a split decision election.
The voters voted to remove both of the or voted against
the extremes of both parties.
So, Friedberg, when you look at this, you see, I think,
an absolute just people don’t want to deal with Trump anymore.
How much of this do you think is Trump derangement system
syndrome and what got Trump into office, eventually taking
him out, which is the guy just takes up too much oxygen
in the room.
And that’s coming from me.
And the guy is just incredibly annoying to have to deal
with day to day.
That’s also coming from you.
And that’s also coming from me.
Friedberg, what do you think?
I think we’ve been at a rave for four years, and everyone’s
coming down from the Mali.
And you’re not going to go to a Marilyn Manson concert right
after being at a rave.
You want to go sit in the parking lot, and you just want
to chill out a little bit.
And we all just want to have a beer and relax.
You know, like, I mean, I think I need some five HTP and
You want to go sit in the 7-Eleven parking lot at four in
the morning, and you want to, like, go get a fucking sweet
cappuccino and smoke a cigarette and relax.
Like, it’s been too much.
And I think it’s like, everyone’s just kind of ready to chill
out a bit.
And so this whole fucking swinging back to the concert across
the road sounds just as bad as what we’ve just been through.
So let’s just, you know, let’s just live our lives a little
bit. And we’ll come back in four years and figure out how
to fuck things up again.
I think that’s kind of the psyche.
I think voters want a presidency they can forget about.
You know, I think Trump’s sort of Achilles heel as he demanded
too much of the voters constant time and attention.
There was, like, this psychic cost to it.
It obviously antagonized the other side and drove turnout
for the Democrats.
But it seems like voters are saying, look, just leave us
alone. We want to just forget about what’s happening in
Washington for four years.
And now they can, because pending the Georgia runoff, it
looks like Mitch McConnell and Joe Biden will have to be in
a power sharing arrangement, and nothing gets done unless
the two of them agree.
And by the way, just on that, there was a great tweet by
He said the day after the election, something to the effect
of it feels like some background process in my computer
had was just killed that was consuming 5% of my CPU.
And it’s and it’s so it’s so true.
Mac operating system spinning wheel of death.
But it’s David is so right.
It’s like, you know, it’s been this omnipresent thing in all
of our lives over the last four years.
And it’s just exhausting.
And, you know, there wasn’t that much value that came from
paying so much attention and worrying so much.
And so it’s just a great opportunity to come off the
sugar high and reset ourselves and take a nap.
I think that’s a very astute point, Chamath, in that what
was gained from this Trump derangement from this Trump
sucking all of the attention and constantly tweeting.
And, you know, I think the big win here, Freeberg is, if you
look, the proof is in the pudding.
Trump, we find out on Saturday morning that Trump is, you
know, has lost and Biden has won.
And 48 hours later, we find out Pfizer has 90% efficacy
on their vaccine.
Obviously, these two things are highly correlated.
Biden has already delivered the vaccine in just 48 hours.
And then today we got the rapid testing has been approved
by the FDA.
I mean, look at this.
But if at this rate, Biden is going to cure global warming
by the end of the year.
Look, first off, I think it’s a little it is pretty
paradoxical that the vaccine news came 48 hours.
Yeah, and I don’t think it’s paradoxical.
I mean, that was crazy.
I mean, there’s supposed to be an October surprise, not a
I think if Trump has any legitimate argument about being
done dirty in this election, it is over this vaccine news,
because, you know, the Chinese announced it three hours after
Biden’s declared president.
Pfizer announces it a day after Biden’s declared president.
I mean, when Trump went around the was campaigning, saying
a vaccine was mere weeks away, everyone thought that was
But as it turns out, he was telling the truth.
And if those guys had announced it, Jason, like you’re saying
two weeks before the election, it might have changed this
But you guys might have 100% and this is not something he can
go to the courts.
It’s not like he can go to the courts and get the election
recounted overturned because of this.
So it’s not something that’s legally actionable.
But I do think that on this news alone, Trump in four years
will be able to claim on some level that this was a stolen
But couldn’t the same be said about Hillary’s email server,
So like 100% news came out like, oh, and it was like timed
around the election.
And I do think that there was a concerted effort to not let
you know, the progress with COVID get in the way of the
election in any way, you know, biased it either way.
And I think it’s like pretty reasonable and fair to say,
like, let’s just not make this part of the news cycle leading
into the election.
And this was expected, like, if you guys go back a couple of
podcasts, like you had a prediction on when we would have
a vaccine, I think I predicted end of September, because of
the way that they set up the production cycle in parallel
with the testing cycle, and the way that they were fast
tracking a lot of the testing in a way that wasn’t normal
for this sort of development.
And it was it was going to happen this fall.
If I’m an executive at one of these companies, I don’t want
my vaccine to become a politicized event, right?
Like, I just want to be like, I think it’s it’s the reasonable
thing to say, like, let’s just put it on hold.
Let’s deal with it all after the election.
We’re still moving forward.
We’re not holding anything up in terms of production and getting
this thing across the finish line.
It’s just the announcement of where we are.
So why make that part of the new cycle, you know, and I think
like people learned their lesson with Hillary’s server last
It’s like this one news, you know, bombshell drops in the
news cycle spins up and she loses the election.
Everyone blames her losing the election for that coming out.
No one wants to be culpable for that.
I’m a Pfizer exec.
I’m just trying to make fucking medicine.
Like, I don’t want to be on the hook for said another way.
Someone winning or losing an election said another way.
Nobody wants to go to a Warriors finals game versus the Lakers
and have the refs called, you know, decide the game in the
final couple of minutes.
So do you think Chamath this is if you were running Pfizer, if
you were on the board of Pfizer and you have this information
and you know, it can come out in this two week window at any
time, what decision would you make Chamath?
Well, just imagine that the vaccine was 90% ineffective,
and it was announced two weeks before the election.
You’d have an entire cohort of people saying this was meant to
basically sabotage the election and the other direction.
So the point is, it’s a no win situation.
The only answer is to wait until after the election, because
that’s the only way that you can actually say, you know, we
were not we were being impartial.
So I’m sympathetic to this idea that all the news had to wait
two or three days, or maybe it was two or three weeks.
Now, knowing in advance what the answer was, obviously, you
can read into that.
But I think even if it was 90% ineffective, it should have
waited till after the election as well.
I don’t get the sense that you do agree with that.
Well, let’s put it this way.
I mean, we know from our time working in large companies that
it takes them weeks to even approve a press release.
And so Pfizer had this news weeks ago.
Now, I understand their reason for not wanting to appear to be
influencing the outcome of the election.
So that’s why they held on to it.
I think everybody saw the way that Facebook was scapegoated
four years ago for the election, and no one wants to no
corporation wants to put themselves in that position of
being accused of affecting the election outcome one way or
another. I’m sure that’s why they did it as opposed to a
conspiracy against Trump.
But this news was available.
I think we will find out weeks ago.
And so I guess you’d have to blame or there’d be some
culpability on the part of Trump’s election team or his
head of the FDA or what have you.
They must have known some of this information, and you would
think they would have done a better job getting it out there.
No, he did say it every rally.
It’s just around the corner.
It’s just around the corner.
We’re around in the corner, and we all thought it was bullshit.
You thought it was bullshit.
We thought it was bullshit, right?
And you know why we thought it was bullshit?
Well, because Trump Trump does have a tendency towards
hyperbole, hyperbole on Trump’s most honest day.
On Trump’s average day, he is lying incessantly.
So if anything, if he was right, and he was right that we were
turning the corner and the vaccine was coming, and it was
going to be beautiful, beautiful, perfect vaccine, and everybody
was going to get it.
He’s paying the price for being a liar for four years.
But it’s the kind of thing.
Boy who cried wolf.
Well, and so does the media, by the way, but but yeah, look,
in order for a piece of news this big to be believed before
the election, it can’t come from a candidate.
And it’s it’s it’s pretty amazing that none of this news
got out there through some other source, you would think that
some of the people on the health care task force that Trump
appointed might have been, you know, surfacing this or paying
attention to it.
Maybe Pfizer did a really good job of hiding it.
I don’t know.
But it is pretty amazing that didn’t come out sooner.
Well, the other crazy thing is like, you know, even the Pfizer
team didn’t exactly know what was going on.
The chief, the head of vaccine research, she said, we’re not
part of the federal government’s, you know, warp speed
And then two days later, Pfizer was like, actually, we are part
of the warp speed program.
It’s just that, you know, we’re a supplier.
The whole point is that I’m not sure that Pfizer actually
knew two weeks in advance, David, I think that they were
probably trickling stuff together, and they probably had
a sense of it at the end of the last week.
I’m surprised it didn’t leak.
To be quite honest, that’s the more shocking thing, which
means that it was probably something that very, very, very
few people knew about.
Well, the CEO, the CEO put out a statement saying that he would
be first in line to take the new vaccine, which I thought was,
you know, a great statement, because a lot of people were
questioning whether you know how real it was, or how rushed
But in order for him to do that, and in order just to get like a
press release announced, I don’t think that’s the kind of thing
that comes together in the, you know, one or two day period
between the announcement of Joe Biden winning the election and
their and their announcement.
So, you know, I just think they had to know weeks ago.
I just want to say to my Greek brother, Alberto Borlas, the CEO
of Pfizer, a great Greek, who has led to the saving of the
Saganaki is on me.
If you if you if you take 90% efficacy, and you assume at most
in the United States, 40% of people will take the actual
vaccination, you’ll have 36% of the population covered, which is
still not enough to get the are not less than one.
Is that correct?
What do you know?
I don’t know.
I’m not an epidemiologist.
I’d have to.
What I mean, does it sound directionally correct to you
that people in the States are going to take it?
I think I think you don’t take it.
Isn’t this like,
everyone who’s high risk will take it?
And as of about two months ago, you know, it was estimated that
30% of people on the East Coast had already developed immunity
due to the seroprevalence studies that showed antibodies.
On the West Coast, it was much lower, closer to 3%.
You can estimate based on the growth in cases since then, and
assuming we’re kind of missing a bunch, we’re probably on a
national basis, we’re at 10% back then, on a national basis,
you’re probably up to 20% right now of Americans have already
been effectively immunized by getting the virus.
So, you know, if that’s true, then you’re at 55%.
And you’re getting pretty close to a, you know, an ability to
kind of inhibit this thing from, from spreading rapidly again.
So how do we each feel?
I’ll just go around the horn.
How do we each feel about the COVID-19 endgame?
When will we see all schools open, all NBA arenas open with
no distancing, give us a quarter in 2021, when in America,
enough vaccines will have been delivered and distributed and
rapid testing, that life goes back to, let’s call it 85% of
Yeah, I don’t think you ever get there.
I mean, it’s like, we talked about this a couple episodes
ago, but it’s after 911, you know, the TSA emerged, and
American travel never went back to the way it was before.
And I think there’ll be a lot about the way we live that’s
going to be, you know, kind of permanently scarred and
permanently changed here for a while, whether it is taking
people’s temperatures at football games, wearing masks,
and, you know, farmers markets, who knows, it’s going to be all
these weird rules are going to pop up, they’re going to last
for years, regardless of how much immunization takes place,
regardless of how cheap and available testing is, we’re
going to have this scar for a long time, in terms of how we
live as a society.
I don’t think we should kid ourselves that we’re going to
go back to quote, unquote, normal.
And I do think kids are going to get tested and schools are
going to be like, this friggin, you know, almost like TSAs now,
you know, kids are going to go into school and get tested
regularly, and they’re going to do all sorts of stuff that we
would have never dreamed imaginable in a free country a
And I think that’s permanent.
I think, you know, we’re going to, you’re already seeing
people going nuts at bars and restaurants, and people that
have had it are out there partying and living their life
again. So there’s certainly don’t you think if you get the
vaccine, you’re just going to be like YOLO? I’ve had enough of
this? Yeah, but I don’t think that that systems are going to
change back to normal. I think systems have changed to the
point that we’ve now got a way of living that we think is
safer that we think is we are now kind of inhibited because of
You agree? Yeah, there’ll be a lot fewer. It’s what Dave
Chappelle said on Saturday, there’ll be a lot fewer mass
shootings. The pandemic has done a great job of keeping the
whites at home.
We watched it. All you besties watched it together. All you
all you guys got on your mass shooting rampages. You know, the
whites are at home. They’re frustrated, but they’re at home.
Thank God. So I think there’ll be some advantages.
Well, I mean, but let’s talk about it. Chamath does does 2021
mean kids go back to school? I think 2021 September, no
problem. No, I think free burgers, right? I think that the
best we’ll get back to is sort of this 80% state and I don’t
think it happens until probably 2022. And maybe 2023. But
probably 2022. Because you have to remember, like, we have to
ramp up now billions of vaccine production. Like it’s a this is
a non trivial path from here to quote unquote, mass market. And
that takes a long time. I think we have to figure out how we’re
going to administer it. By the way, it’s and the way that the
Pfizer vaccine works, and maybe these other folks is you get the
shot. And then, you know, three months, three weeks later, I
think you get a booster. So you have to take two cycles of this
thing. And it’s not gonna last forever. And it’s not gonna
last forever. So this is a free burgers, right? It’s the
beginning of a very different way of living. I think I think
that the good part about it is that, you know, we’ve made a lot
of changes that makes our lives a lot more efficient. The bad
part about it is we’re even more detached from our neighbors.
And, you know, we’re probably even more likely to be a little
bit more separated if we don’t make an effort to be together.
Saks, do you buy this? Because I get the sense that you might be
more optimistic than free bird. Yeah.
I guess I guess I am. I think COVID is going to be a distant
memory by next summer. I think we’ll have one to two quarters
of transition. But I think that once the vaccines widely
available, plus the treatment and the testings for the people
who slip through the cracks. Yeah, I tend to think things are
going to snap back very fast. And COVID will just be this bad
memory, a very distant, bad memory. And I think, in fact, I
think things may bounce back the other way. Everyone having been
cooped up and afraid of getting some life threatening illness
are going to come out of this really wanting to party. I think
the whole world’s going to be like Tel Aviv for, you know, a
few months or something. And, yeah, I mean, I really do think
it’s going to bounce back, I think, to the point politically,
where a few years from now, people could ask, wait, what,
why? Why was it again, that Trump lost, you know, you know,
this COVID thing will be, it will be so in the rearview
mirror that will wonder why we were so afraid of it.
I think this is, I’m going to go with David’s saxes position
here, because of the simple fact that we had 130,000 confirmed
cases, you know, up until this election period, the last week
or so, and deaths, still, not spiking, it’s a little just a
major minor uptick, you know, we had a day with like, I think,
maybe 1500, but still staying in that, you know, 1000 range,
even with cases spiking. And I think that we were so
incompetent with test and trace in this country, that we didn’t
see exactly what happens in an authoritarian country, or a
country that is lucky enough to be an island and has easy
borders, which we almost do. I mean, we basically have two
borders, we’re like, two thirds of two, you know, 50% island.
But Hawaii, Taiwan, Japan, and Australia, all quarantine
people on the way in, they tested them, and they had
extremely, extremely low death counts, and extremely low case
counts, with the vaccine, being half as effective as you know,
they claim, and rapid testing, which some of us have no, some
of us know people who have experienced rapid testing at
homes. That combination, I believe, is going to make this
go so low. And the people who are high risk are still going to
be scared staying home. I think, like David, come the summer of
next summer, people are going to be at a rave with freebirds,
you know, custom made Molly or whatever he’s making during this
downtime, going absolutely bonkers. I think Burning Man
next year, becomes like the, the greatest Burning Man ever,
there’ll be it’ll be the burn of all burns. Why was let’s shift
a bit over to the economy. What a rip? Did we see when that
Pfizer, I mean, the election and Pfizer this week, led to a huge
rip. Obviously, there’s a little bit of cyclical movement,
the tech stocks were the big winners. Now people are starting
to buy Disney back up to 140. I guess people assume the parks
will reopen. What’s our outlook for the stock market in David
saxes, you know, scenario three, you know, I don’t say gridlock
government, but forced to compromise government, what do
we think the markets look like the next two years? I think you
have to go ahead.
I was gonna say gridlock is great for the markets. But both
when Bill Clinton was president with a Republican House, and
when Obama was president, and there was a Republican House,
and I guess, Senate for a period of time, gridlock is great for
the markets, especially given the amount of stimulus that’s
taken place. I mean, you had the Trump tax cuts, especially
those corporate tax cuts, really set the market on fire. And
then you’ve got this pumping by the Fed and the Treasury, all
the stimulus money for COVID. I mean, those conditions, and then
you know, why is gridlock good? We didn’t explain that here.
Well, because we’re playing to somebody who doesn’t understand
why gridlock is good. Why gridlock is good? Well, because
it creates predictability for business. And it means that
Washington’s not going to get in the way and do something to
screw up the good times. I mean, we have fundamentally, you know,
great underlying conditions for economic growth, which is we
have now pretty low taxes. And we had this, for better or worse,
we had this tremendous amount of stimulus, fiscal stimulus.
What we know historically is over the past 100 years, right
since the 20s, independent of Republican administrations or
democratic administrations, you know, more progressive, less
progressive, more conservative, less conservative, during world
wars, not during world wars. The markets go up 8% a year. So
the do no harm solution is that things inflate naturally by 8%,
especially if those things are public stocks. So you know, the
markets love the fact that there’s nothing that could
theoretically get in the way of that natural 8%. And then when
you layer on top of it, as David said, all this free money,
that’s just like, rocket fuel, jet fuel. But you know, but you
saw, though, that there was a rotation, right, there was a
rotation out of these high growth software names,
particularly the work from home bid kind of got crushed, you
know, I mean, I think zoom was off 25% over two days or some
crazy thing like that. Meanwhile, sort of all of these
theme park stocks and cruise lines and airlines all of a
sudden ripped. So I mean, look, the reality is the scary thing
about all of this is if any of that stuff actually comes to
pass, we’re going to see inflation. And the reason is
because if you start going out and spending a bunch of money on
tickets and vacations and flights and this and that and
pumping money into the economy and taking all that stimulus
money, and putting it back to work, prices will go up. And by
the way, that’s not such a bad thing for the economy, which
which needs a little bit of it. So all of this is, I think,
generally very, very good news.
Friedberg, do you have a position on what you think will
happen in the coming? Let’s look, I would think the midterm
is what people care most about. So that would be, let’s call it
two to six quarters.
There’s one potential speed bump still, which is what I
mentioned at the beginning, which is Georgia. The Democrats
could still win both runoffs in Georgia for Senate. And they
could, because Kamala Harris would then have the breaking
vote, it would be a 50, Republican 50, Democrat Senate,
and the Vice President would, would break any ties.
The question is, if you have that same turnout, where do the
libertarians break? Because I think the libertarians were
almost 2% of the vote?
Well, I think, yeah, what’s interesting is, um, the I don’t
know if you guys have, but I’ve gotten emails from a lot of
people asking me to donate money for this runoff campaign in
Georgia. I think we’re
God, I got so many, so many.
I think we’re gonna see literally the biggest, the
biggest funding for a Senate runoff race in history by far,
don’t you think sacks like probably north of $100 million
being spent, maybe 100 to $200 million being spent on
advertisements in Georgia to try and get people to go vote one
way or the other. The Democrats think they have a real run at
this, they think it’s make or break two years to kind of get
their, you know, history changing policies in effect,
Republicans think it’s saved the nation time. So everyone’s
rushing to Georgia right now. So the markets are going to have
a very close eye on what’s going on over there. I think I’m, you
know, I’m very nervous about it. If the Democrats look like
they’re getting much more money into the state, and they’re
actually going to, you know, get people to the polls and to the
voting booths and actually get into this runoff on January 5,
and actually flip, get both of those seats to be to be blue,
it’s going to be a very different market environment. I
mean, you could see the market drop by 30 40% in the next six
months, we have a situation where it’s 4848. There are two
seats up for grabs, those two seats are in a runoff. And I
want to get into the let me correct that Jason. It’s 4850.
Yes, the Republicans have a 50 to 48 advantage with two open
seats in the runoff. Actually, sorry, what one seat is open the
other. It has an incumbent Purdue who’s facing awesome.
Purdue one in the last election, he got like 49.9% 50. If you get
50%, you get to this runoff in January, Georgia, the only place
that has this where you have to get to 50 in order to win. It’s
crazy. It’s crazy. So weird. Is this just they want the extra
attention? Or who came up with this idea? This seems just like
every state’s got its own history. It’s crazy. It is one
of the unique things about living in the United States of
America, as opposed to America. Let’s talk about exit polls.
Well, this is what’s incredible here. Let me tee this up for
you. So in in 2020, Biden got 80% of the black vote, Trump got
six, this is aggregate. So we can break this down by man and
age group. And you can, it looks even, even more interesting.
Latinos, Biden got 67. Trump got 22% of the Latino vote between
the ages of 18 to 34. So boomers, or sorry, pardon me,
Gen Z, and millennials. Again, I would have thought 100% Biden,
it was on it was 62%. Biden 23% went for Trump, one in four,
amongst women. And again, you know, we thought, okay, you know,
suburban women are breaking Biden 8020. It turned out Biden
got 58% of women, Trump got 35% of all the female vote and the
coup de gras whites with the degree. Again, you would have
thought this would have been 8020 9010 and said it was 53%
Biden 38% Trump.
So this really was something that if we look at this, if we
look back on this, the pollsters were completely wrong in
thinking that once again, that these groups of people are
monolithic. And then I think the most the most mind boggling
to me, and I had a candid discussion about this was the
term Latin x is a catch all term for people who are of Latino,
Spanish speaking descent. And what somebody told me who is in
this Latin x group is that it’s the most insulting thing they’ve
ever been told. It’s almost as a term, like the term saying
Oriental to describe people from Asia, you’re just grouping us
all into one thing, people from Cuba, Venezuela, and Mexico all
think the same. This is the absolute, you know, endgame of
identity politics, which is, we have to put you in a corner, we
own you, we own your opinion, and you belong to our party,
whichever party it is, oh, you don’t have a degree. You’re a
GOP hillbilly. Oh, you, you’re Latin x. Okay, well, then we own
you. You’re a democrat, David, what I know, and I know that
this is an area where, you know, you have a lot of expertise,
what are your thoughts?
Well, as it turns out, promoting socialism to people who fled
Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela to escape it turns out not to be a
great election strategy. And, and so yeah, it’s this, this
idea that Latin x is is one block, it’s not it consists of a
bunch of different, of immigrants from a bunch of
different nations. And the ones who fled socialism are not eager
to reenact it in the United States. The Republicans flipped
to house seats in South Florida, where there’s a lot of Cuban
Americans. And even in the, the heavily Mexican American
counties in along the Rio Grande in Texas, Trump improved.
Let’s see, it looks like he improved 59 and 30% 39%,
respectively over his 2016 showing. So this is not just
some fluke of the exit polls. It seems like Trump really made
progress in a lot of these groups that seem to defy their,
you know, what, what the promoters of identity politics,
the way that they want them to vote. Gay Americans were another
one. I think Trump improved his share of the gay vote from 14%
in 2016 to 28% this year. So I mean, really, it’s, it’s pretty
amazing. People are not voting the way that they’re supposed to
vote. Trump also improved from 12 to 18% with black men, and
four to 8% of black women. I mean, those are still pretty
low numbers, but there was improvement there. And I think
part of the reason is that not all of the African American
community is on board with defunding the police.
Well, I also think what it means is identity politics is a
stupid strategy, forget whether you’re offended by it or not.
At this point, what’s clear is it’s a stupid fucking strategy.
It doesn’t work. It’s a path to losing. Because the more and
more you do it, the more and more you’re going to
disenfranchise individuals who want to be judged sort of sound
mind and body. Right? I mean, if he took 1000 Sri Lankans and
put them in a room and said, Jamal, I’m going to judge you as
a Sri Lankan vote, I would tell you to go fuck yourself.
I would be deeply offended by that.
And this is where I think the radical left is going to have to
retool because their theory of how they take power in America
was always that demographics is destiny, that, you know, as the
country simply becomes more diverse, we’re gonna, they’re
automatically going to vote for us. And there’s a lot of data
in this election to show that that’s not what’s going to
happen. You actually have to run on issues that people care
about. Let’s think about this in the context of internet
advertising, right? The world prior to internet advertising,
you had, you know, channels, and you would have an audience
that was estimated to be made up of some demographic set on that
channel, and you would buy an ad spot on that channel. And
that’s who you would reach. And so you would create a message
for that. Now, today, we can create personalized ads and
personalized messages. And internet advertisers are much
more thoughtful about targeting, targeting based on
psychographic profiling, behavioral targeting. And I
think that’s where politics has to head in the United States is
kind of keeping up with this personalization of both
products, but also of media and ads. And, and I think that’s
what we’re going to see. If you listen to James Carville, who’s
like, you know, a classic kind of democratic campaign advisor,
and he did a podcast just leading up to the election. And
if you listen to this podcast, these guys are very old school,
it’s like the whites are going to do this, and the blacks are
going to do that. And the college educator are going to do
this, and the others are going to do that. And they don’t
realize that the segmentation that’s possible today, I think,
reveals a lot more about the character of the of the
population. They’re basically I think it’s such an astute point
for a break. They’re basically living in the level of
granularity of network cable. It’s like cable TV. Yeah.
Got to cable TV. And they’re like, okay, bet ESPN, NASCAR,
and get guess what, like, like, the world is much more complex
individuals have found their own personal voice. And they found
their own personal voice through social media, through Instagram
through this ability to kind of define themselves not fit within
a cohort. And I think that’s what maybe they always did feel
that way. And we just had never had the technology to get there.
Yeah, but I think it’s I think it’s also about people like
people have complex points of view, you know, the four of us
sit here and none of neither of us, none of us identify as a
party anymore. We all identify with with certain points that we
think are important to us individually. And then we have a
point of view on those points. And I think that’s the case for
the majority of the population in the United States. I don’t
think people are like, I’m just a fucking Democrat, no matter
what number Republican, no matter what people care more
deeply, in a more complex way. And I think politics needs to
resolve to that. And, and that’s going to require a shift in how
you communicate, how you message how you get feedback,
how you drive blocks for voting, and it’s gonna it’s gonna, you
know, be a really interesting change over the next 15 to 20
years. And it may be what saves the republic.
I think this is an incredible observation. It might be the
observation of the episode. And I just want to point to a tweet
I did because this is this election has really led to me
doing two things. One, I’ve been just thinking deeply about what
do I actually understand about Americans in America. And then I
also, you know, there’s all these red pills around. So I
decided I would crush up a red pill. And I would just, you
know, put a little on my finger, and I try a little red pill for
a second. And everybody told me I’ve been red pilled now on
Twitter, and then I’m a Trump fan. I’m not I hate the guy. I
think it’s horrible. But I did this quick survey here. I said,
if you voted for Trump, I want to understand what percentage of
your vote vote was based on the combination of a cancel culture
be identity politics, see socialism, D coastal elites
telling you how to live, explain other issues that contributed
in a reply, ie spending, immigration, SC, the Supreme
Court, etc. And I just said, 0% 1 to 2526 to 50, and over 50.
And and I got 12,000 votes, go ahead and look at the results.
Not the replies, but go ahead and vote. It doesn’t matter
which one you pick. Over 50% of people who voted for Trump, and
I know this is unscientific. It’s my followers, but it’s
definitely feels directionally correct. The people who felt 26
to over 50% was part of the cancel culture identity culture
was what they were trying to communicate with their vote.
Well, this is this is such an important thing, because I think
this is what we’re fighting over the every single 70% of them,
every single election going forward, like if you if you put
this on top of the 70 odd million people that voted, this
kind of roughly makes sense, which is that, you know, there’s
probably about 20 million people who will completely vote
Democrat, no matter what, and 20 million people who will
completely vote Republican, no matter what, their their just
eyes are closed, their ears are closed, they don’t care. But
when you take those people out, there’s this enormous amount of
people in the middle, who have the ability to vote a split
ticket, you know, and as and as and as sexy poo said, like
they’ll vote a Democrat into the White House, but then down
ballot, they’ll vote a bunch of Republicans, and they’ll just
make sure there’s a balance of power. So they’ve been telling
us about this kind of centricity for years. And so if you want to
win an election, you do two things. Part one is you
understand this dynamic that centrism wins. And part two is
what Friedberg says, which is you understand that we need to
enter sort of the Google CPC world of political advertising,
and really cater not just the ads, but also the message to
individual people and stop the you know, the cat, the gross
high level categorization, which isn’t working anymore.
Yeah, and Jason, let me can I can I add the connection between
cancel culture and the selection. So, you know,
obviously, the pollsters got everything completely wrong.
And again, again, and but the reason is because of cancel
culture. So in exit polling, 45% of Republicans with college
degrees, express fear that their careers could be at risk if
their views became known, compared to only 23% of
Democrats saying that. And so there were these, you know,
quote, unquote, shy Trump voters, who are afraid to tell
pollsters what they really think. Now, it wasn’t the Trump
voters that you think of, when you see the pickup trucks and
the convoys go by or the rallies, sort of those, those
were the voters from 2016, who weren’t counted, it was sort of
the non college blue collar voters, the Michael Moore, you
know, people who turned out for Trump and big numbers and
weren’t properly counted four years ago, the pollsters
actually counted those people correctly this time, the people
they completely underestimated was actually the white college
vote, who swung for a lot of swung from Democrat to
Republican, they voted for Trump because of this issue,
and they were afraid to say anything about it, because
they’re afraid of getting cancelled.
And by the way, they, they are every other person, everybody
listening to this podcast works with. And so deal with that one.
Right, exactly. Anybody who’s not actively virtue signaling
on Twitter for Biden is a Trump voter.
Not sure if that’s exactly correct, but I think it’s wrong.
Roughly, you know, if people aren’t, if people in tech,
aren’t explicitly endorsing Biden on Twitter, they’re
probably closet Trump voters.
It is going to be very interesting for people to go
back to offices, because now we have had a resolution, and
identity politics, cancel culture, and extreme is among
both sides, hysterical and trolling, trolling Republicans
hysterical libs. This has been a loss for both of those
parties. And now the pandemic is ending. We’re going to be
back in offices at some point. I mean, what is office culture
going to be like, are people going to go with the Brian
Armstrong? Let’s just get work done here. Let’s not talk about
politics. It’s just too charged or not. It’s going to be a very
It’s every it’s every, it’s every company’s right. You know,
it’s every company’s right to care about what they want to
care about every board, every CEO, every controlling
shareholder, and then it’s every employee’s right to vote with
their feet about whether that’s okay or not. And I think that
look, I mean, the whole Brian Armstrong thing, again, just to
say, one of the most pathetically poorly written, you
know, pieces of English prose I’ve ever fucking seen, you
know, he’s a crypto in fairness, my dog, my dogs, he’s not a
coder, he’s a he’s a CEO, my dog slamming his her paw on the
keyboard would have created a better pros in that, but he was
coming from a reasonable place, he had the right to say what he
said. The problem is that it’s so antithetical to what you’re
allowed to believe, for example, living in San Francisco. But I
think that that’s going to change because you can’t ignore
every other person telling you that there are meaningful
economic issues that matter, and that the prioritization and
the policing of these, you know, sort of high value social
signaling issues are no longer a priority. And I think that
what’s going to happen is there will be room for a party that
focuses on that, and a group of people, but they will be
relegated, just like on the other side, that will happen to
the Republican version of that as well. I just think this whole
thing to this, honestly, for me, it was, it seems like such a
tight election it is, but I really think the huge winner
here is centrism.
I agree with that. And I would say that this election proves
that Brian Armstrong was right. Because the average American is
tired of these highly charged political situations. And the
last thing they want to do is have these conversations at
work, where they can get reported to where they can
offend their co workers and get reported to HR, but it can make
them feel unsafe. They don’t want to have these conversations
at work. Certainly, by the way, only 5% of Coinbase’s employees
took Armstrong up on that offer to leave. So the number of
people who actually want to have a politically charged workplace
is very, very small. They’re just the noisiest. They’re the
squeakiest wheel. I mean, that was a ridiculous deal. I mean,
what did he say six months and we vest as he made it really
attractive to leave if you didn’t agree with this policy
that was that written because I couldn’t figure that out. It was
an attractive deal to leave if you wanted to leave and 95% chose
to sit Yeah, I did I say it was poorly written. I didn’t
understand it because it was so poorly written. So anyway, so
9095% stayed. So my point is just the number of people who
actually like this highly polarized politically charged
situation in which we’re all arguing with our friends over
politics, and children are divorcing their parents because
they’re not woke enough. I mean, people don’t want to live
in that kind of country anymore. And I think this is the thing
that Joe Biden really got right in his campaign. I mean, this is
why I mean, this is the only way that his basement strategy
could actually work and result in him getting elected, elected
is people actually do want this return to normalcy.
You know who the biggest loser is going to be coming out of
this, I think not when you think holistically about the
ecosystem. It’s going to be the media, because they have made
an absolute fortune over the last four or five years picking
aside. What is the point of watching Rachel Maddow, January
20? What is the point of tuning into Fox News, or reading the
hysterical opinion page of the New York Times, all of these
places that were being propped up by either Trump ism, or
anti Trump ism are now going to find themselves where they
started, which is a job without a job. And we just wanted you to
tell us the news. And there was a straight, there was a great
article, the New York Times have an opinion page, rip the
opinion page out of the New York Times, rip it out of the
Wall Street. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, I, no, I disagree. I
think the opposite happens, which is that opinion page was
meant to be where people could have an opinion so that
everything else was fact. And the problem is that all the
other pages became opinion as well. Nobody told anybody.
Nobody can tell the difference.
That’s right. They can’t tell the difference. And look at that
expose about how Barry or Barry Weiss was run out of the New
York Times. It basically the activists ran her out. And the
reality is activists have completely captured the New York
Times and CNN and MSNBC. And there is no they always had Fox
and the New York they always had Fox, but but now we have no
objective neutral media. And so who’s going to call the
election? I mean, you complain about the fact that Trump is
sowing dissent, but who is the universally trusted spokesperson
for neutrality the way that Walter Cronkite was, when he
could just declare it, and that’s the way it is. And
people believe that’s the way it is.
Who did the best job Friedberg that night when we were doing
that? Let’s reflect on the live stream. I have two questions
for the live stream. Number one, who was your bestie guestie?
Who did you think added the most as a guestie? And why? And
then number two, or do we’re doing whatever we’re gonna do a
poll, a human value.
Got a lot of feedback on the guesties. There were girly
people. Can I say one more thing? Brad, before before we
go there, there was a there was a really good article in the
New York Times about Maggie Haberman, right? And Maggie,
who’s a fantastic journalist, but built an entire career,
it really amplified came to a head in 2016. And she just
scoop after scoop about Trump. But the most impelling thing
about that whole article was somewhere near the, you know,
third of the way from the bottom. She’s like, look, at the
end of the day, she said something like, I’m dispensable,
and I know it. And it was the most honest thing, because it’s
like, despite her popularity, and despite sort of, you know,
how big of a stick she carries, the reality is sans Trump.
There’s just nothing to do. There’s nothing to leak. There’s
there, there just is not nearly as much to do.
I did just put in the, the chat here, the Washington Post, Fox
News, The Hill, basically, like the full gamut of, of, of media
opinion, have highlighted that the media generally is the
biggest loser of the of the 2020 election. And I think I think
they’ve just lost the the faith of their audience. And, you
know, it’s, it’s, I mean, it’s just access point, I don’t know
how many people were, you’re either looking for objective,
and you’ve lost it, or you’re looking for opinionated, and you
feel like you’re, you know, you’re aligned opinion setting
media partner has betrayed you. You know, the fact that Fox
called it for, for Trump, and Trump’s now saying Fox is a
liar. The fact that the New York Times doesn’t feel like they’re
being objective anymore. And they’re, you know, they’re
running people out of the out of the newsroom. In general, I
just feel like we’ve been disenfranchised. And I think
that’s, that’s something that’s going to be really hard to kind
of recover from and resolve. And for the love of God, can
somebody please get I don’t want you to break any laws. But
however, if we could read the slack channel of the New York
Times reporters leading up to the hundred days of this
election, that would become the greatest best selling book of
all time to watch the New York Times writers bicker with each
other, sacks. I mean, we could do 10 hours on that. No problem.
Let’s talk. Okay, bestie guest. Guesties. What’d you think of
our guests? I thought they were all great. I thought they’re all
great. Are we now becoming a media critics? We’re gonna now?
Yeah. What do we like? Why don’t you go? Why are you that
navel gazing? You go.
Jason wants Jason wants to throw mute under the bus. Go ahead,
Jason. No, no, no, no, no, no. Oh, contraire. Does anyone have
a video they want to person on the
mute in his place? And it was not the it was not the point
guard in this case. Somebody pulled a dream on and pulled
help me up the side and said, Stop, you got to pass the ball.
I do think Brad did a great job. He had some great insights. I
think Bill Gurley had some great insights. We I think we’re just
really good job of getting some people to rotate in. I enjoyed
it. Yeah, I thought it was really everyone was great. I’ll
give a shout out to my bestie Newman. He was better. He was
better as a political analyst and all those jokers on CNN and
Fox and MSNBC. The dude with the with the map and he kept
touching the map and yeah, it’s like that guy gets paid to do
that. I can’t believe he gets paid to do that. I’m gonna get
my daughter on CNN. She can do that. When the guy on CNN who
does that john john king john king. God bless this guy.
Because I don’t know how much Adderall he’s on. But I turned
it on at 8am. And he was zooming into Pennsylvania. And he’s
like, Oh, well, of course, in 2018. This I’m 2016. He’s like,
let’s zoom out. Let’s go back to Arizona. Of course, in
Arizona, this place. I was like, is this guy a geography
teacher? I mean, he was amazing. And just the dexterity. He
looked like he was Tom Cruise and minority report with the
finger. I don’t know. I don’t know if I’d call him Tom
Cruise. When I look like Tom Cruise, but the minority report
pinch and zoom in and out. It was incredible when when when
does Trump call this thing? That’s a great question. Well,
I think he has to run out these court challenges, which will
take a few weeks, but I predict by Thanksgiving, but it may have
to go up to the Supreme Court. But he’s gonna he’s gonna dot
the dot every i and cross every T that he’s got legally. But
he’s got like we talked about the very beginning, he’s got a
huge uphill challenge. I see the court ultimately ruling
against him or throwing it out. What is the point, David? What
is well, because why shouldn’t he? He’s not gonna win? No, I
don’t I don’t know that he he knows that he he I think it’s
his right to exhaust every legal possibility. And let’s remember
Al Gore didn’t concede for 37 days after the election. So I
certainly think Trump is within his rights over the next few
weeks to run this out. In terms of what the point is, I mean,
other than the obvious attempt to challenge it legally, I do
think this is partly a branding exercise by Trump. It’s a
marketing exercise, I don’t think he’s going to come up with
enough malfeasance to overturn an election. But I do think
he’ll probably produce a lot of smoke. And this is about
protecting his brand as a winner. And, you know, if he
kicks up enough, you know, examples of voter fraud, or
what have you, he’ll always be able to say, you know, years
from now that this was, it was a stolen election. And when you
combine the fact that COVID really did drive this, this
election, you could call that Chinese election interference,
if you want the fact that the vaccine is now here already,
you could call that, you know, some sort of election
interference, he’s going to have enough arguments where if he
wants to run four years from now, I think he probably gets
the Republican nomination again, what what’s the
percentage chance to math that he runs again in four years?
Yeah. I think he’s gonna be making so much money. He’s not
gonna know what to do with himself. He’s not going back to
that fucking tortures. He didn’t even think about the
White House, like some terrible Blumhouse production movie set.
He’s like, fuck that. I’m not going back there. It was awful.
Where’s he going? Where’s he going? He’s going to Shanghai?
Is he going to? You can be in New York, he’s gonna buy a law
firm because you’re gonna need a law firm to keep everyone at
bay. And he’s gonna be probably printing 100 million bucks a
month. You know, put it at Dubai, Saudi Arabia. I think I
think I think he’s definitely gonna launch a media business.
And he’ll, he’ll try to become kingmaker.
I think he will become a kingmaker Republican politics,
he will launch a competitor to Fox News, but it will also be
Fox News hybridized with a grassroots movement like the Tea
Party. And every Republican will need to go get his
endorsement or they will be primaried by the Trump Party.
And I would not put it
agree more, could not disagree more. I think he’s a disgrace.
I think he will be. I think what David said is gonna come not
you, David, I’m talking about Trump. I think David’s
incredible. No, I think the stuff that comes out after this
the deluge, the number of SDNY suits, all the grift and the
graft, it’s all coming out. Not only is he not going to be a
kingmaker, he will not be able to get the backing for this
network. It’ll be Breitbart light, and it’ll be shut down
within 24 months, he’ll fail so miserably, that when he walks
into a restaurant, it’ll be like Game of Thrones, shame, shame.
Well, I don’t, I don’t, I don’t, I don’t think so. I think that
it’s very likely that the Donald Trump that runs for
President 2024 is Donald Trump Jr.
Oh, God, no, he’s horrible. whole Republican Party has to
start over. Let’s end on this. Pompeo did a press conference.
Is the State Department currently preparing to engage
with the Biden transition team? And if not, at what point does a
delay hamper a smooth transition or pose a risk to
national security? There will be a smooth transition to a
second Trump administration. All right, we’re ready. The world
is watching what’s taking place here. We’re going to count all
the votes. When the process is complete, there’ll be electors
selected. There’s a process the Constitution lays it out pretty
clearly. The world should have every confidence that the
transition necessary to make sure that the State Department
is functional today, successful today, and successful with the
president who’s in office on January 20. A minute afternoon
will also be successful. Can I just say I don’t disagree with
the position they’re taking. It’s not immoral. It’s customary
and traditional to concede your election. But, you know,
December 15 is the date that Congress ratifies the electoral
votes to determine who the next president is going to be. And
these guys are just taking a very kind of pragmatic legal
line that is not immoral in a way. They believe that they have
some case on what the vote should be. The votes are all very
close, yada yada. I’m not saying that he’s going to win by any
chance. But I don’t think that folks saying like, let the votes
be counted and let Congress do their job of having the states
tell them who their electoral votes are going to is an
inappropriate position to take. I sound like I might sound like
some conservative, you know, Trump head, but I’m not. I think
that these guys, what I’m just saying is that these guys aren’t
that immoral in kind of asking for that for that, you know,
sorry, I also think at the fringes of the Republican Party,
this is what you keep all these militia folks and all these
other folks at bay is just you show a really methodical, you
know, stepping away from the spotlight. And I think that this
is, you know, honestly, it’s, this is a very deliberate, safe,
calming thing to do. Because there’s been nothing about the
Trump administration from 2016, through to this very moment that
has been customary or traditional. And so I don’t know
why we all expected him to step in and say, like, I can see like
the way that we’ve been doing it. It would be worse. It’d be
worse if he had conceded and all of a sudden was holding a bunch
of protests and rallies all over the country that he’s not
doing anything illegal. No one has any legal requirement to
concede. And, you know, and I think as long as these guys on
December 15, which is the date that we should all be watching
and waiting for, as long as these guys do the appropriate
thing at that point, then, you know, that that’s the only point
in which I would have any sort of concern or worry about what’s
going on with the transition in the government. But sorry, I
think this is about saving face and saving brand a sexy percent.
He’ll he’ll be out by December 15. Meaning it’ll this will all
be done. Yeah, I agree. And look, let’s remember that Al
Gore was able to challenge the election result for 37 days
without being hysterically accused of undermining
democracy. So let Trump have his day in court. It’ll play out
over the next few weeks. I expect that the obstacles he
has has to overcome are too large and he will lose these
lawsuits. It might go to the Supreme Court. It would not be
a bad thing if the Supreme Court were the ones to make this
decision. They’re one of the last institutions that still
trusted. Clearly, the media are not. And I think that, you know,
Trump will accept the result, he may not concede, but he will
accept the result when it comes from the Supreme Court.
Is there a nonzero chance that he could win on a recount?
He would have to prove systemic fraud, because it’s not like
Florida, where there’s just one state and a few hundred votes,
he’s got to overcome over 12,000 votes in at least three
states. So that’s the issue is, is it’s
a percent on its acts if you had to lay money on it?
Oh, I mean, it’s like sub 10% chance, I think.
Sub 10% chance one in 10, you’d give 10 to one odds.
No, I’m saying it’s under 10%. I’m saying it’s a very small
Well, here’s the thing. So Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court ruled
seven to two. I mean, you would have thought it was nine to zero.
So clearly, there was some sympathizers in Bush v. Gore. So
hopefully, you know, it’s something like seven to two.
And, you know, we move on.
I believe if it gets the Supreme Court, it will be at least
seven to two, if not a one or nine zero. Just because I think
Trump has a much harder case to prove. In Florida, the issue
was simply whether the recount should be allowed to continue.
James Baker went to the Supreme Court to stop the recount
that was in process, because of the fear that the local corrupt
election officials basically steal the election for Gore that
you know, but but but Bush was always ahead in that election.
There was never a time when Bush was behind.
Biden is now ahead in every swing state that matters.
Trump has to now overturn that result in at least three of
those states. I don’t know how he does that by 10s of thousands
of votes. I just don’t know how he does that. He has to prove
some sort of systemic fraud that took place across the nation
that and look, I think from like a marketing or branding
standpoint, he’ll be able to create a lot of smoke. I think
they will actually find quite a bit of misconduct because I
don’t think our elections are perfect. But will it rise to the
standard that the Supreme Court is going to set for overturning
an election? I don’t think so. I don’t think so.
I mean, they’ll probably find it on both sides. There’s got to
be some crazy. Well, the other Trump supporter who has 10
ballots they signed and there’ll be some crazy liberal who did
this. Well, the nuance on that out, the nuanced issue is
whether they can do a constitutionally valid recount by
you know, the time necessary as well. So the longer that this
delays on, then they’ll be forced to basically say no to
that also, because otherwise it will be effectively throwing
out an election. And so as we wrap here, San Francisco’s
continuous to devolve revenue down 40% in terms of taxes,
budget is double what it’s been just a few years ago, crime is
going crazy. Walmart is closing their stores and leaving
Walgreens because of Walgreens, I’m sorry, Walgreens, we don’t
have a Walmart here. And there’s 20 there’s more homes on the
market now than there have been too much of anything is a bad
thing. If you eat too much broccoli, it’s a bad thing. You
know what I mean? So too much of a single party monoculture is
bad. Whether it’s Republican or Democrat, you need a diverse
centrist plurality. And in the absence of that, many cities
that veer in one direction or the other will decay and die.
And San Francisco is going to be the tip of the spear for the
left’s version. And there’s been a bunch of cities that have
already been the examples of the rights version. So you know
what, apparently the water is warm, and they want to join.
I can’t find a lot to disagree with there. I think San
Francisco, we’re basically an Atlas shrugged. I mean, the
half the storefronts are closed, they’re boarded up, the city is
completely surrendered to the criminal element, you can’t park
your car anywhere in the city without having it getting broken
into they won’t prosecute people for crimes, including
increasingly violent crimes. The, you know, the, the city is
about to go bankrupt, and the entrepreneurs are all
disappearing. They’re all leaving. I mean, it’s right out
of the shrugged.
Yeah, I mean, it’s, it’s the, the action is the wrong action,
right? So San Francisco, the biggest disappointment of
election night for me was the new business taxes that were
passed for San Francisco businesses. And, and there was
also this, like, for 99.9999999% of people, they’re gonna shrug
and say, I don’t give a shit. But there was this new tax of 6%
for homes that get sold over $10 million. Now, if you’re a
successful entrepreneur, an investor, or a CEO of a company
in San Francisco, and you know, it’s, it’s like a slap in the
face. You add the business tax with that kind of high end
property tax. And it’s almost like an invitation to leave the
city. And some people are nodding their head. This 6% is on
leaving or buying transaction when you sell. So you literally
6% off the top. When you sell a home, the city basically just
took 6% of my house. Yeah, the city just took 6% of my house.
It’s now they’re now a part owner of my house. Yeah, it’s an
estate tax. And so there are people like there are people in
San Francisco, who we all know, how much warning did you have
before they took your non bedroom? Yeah, I mean, there’s a
London breed put some people in taxes their 13th bedroom on the
third floor. They’re all living there right now. But it’s okay.
I got like wings I don’t even know about. It’s like, it’s like
Richie Rich’s house or something. So look, no, nobody
cries. Nobody cries for super rich people. And you know, but
it was short sighted is the point, right? Right? Exactly.
I’m not complaining about the taxes on me, but it’s going to
do tremendous damage to the city. People are not going to
want to move here. And we Yeah, yeah, I look I’ve built
businesses in San Francisco since 2006. And I will not build
another business in San Francisco. And I hear the same
from other entrepreneurs, if you’re going to build a
business, do it in the South Bay, do it in the East Bay, do
it in the North Bay or do it in Austin or LA or somewhere else.
But this is just not a place to build businesses. The city is
basically saying we don’t want you here. Now, that would be
fine and dandy if the city was being conservative in the way
that they spend and if they were actually reducing their
budget and you know, kind of reducing the city’s activities.
The problem is these these taxes diverge with the budget
because the taxes are now going to go down because businesses
are leaving people are selling their homes, they’re not going
to buy expensive homes anymore. And we are seeing a budget
crisis, San Francisco, I think it’s looking at a 1.7 to $2
billion budget shortfall this year. I mean, like, where’s that
money gonna come from? This is a city with 800,000 and we have
and there was that expose in the San Francisco Chronicle
talking about how there’s over 20,000 city workers making over
$150,000 a year, 30,000. Yeah, what are we getting for all of
that? The evidence is not apparent. And this is where
okay, look, I’d be happy to give the city 6% of my house and pay
all these high taxes if we actually got something for it.
But the city just keeps getting less and less livable.
Yes, city budget in 2013.
And so we have a fiscal crisis and we have a livability crisis
that I think is even worse. And that’s a huge problem. And let’s
be frank, San Francisco was always the accidental
beneficiary of Silicon Valley. If you will, San Francisco was
the accidental billionaire. It was Silicon Valley that created
this enormous wealth and all the jobs and the companies. It
wasn’t San Francisco policies or politics that created any of
that. It just so happens that Silicon Valley got big enough.
It started around Stanford, it got big enough that San Francisco
as the nearest metropolitan area really was a beneficiary of
that. And, and, you know, because they never really did
anything to create the conditions for that prosperity,
frankly, they took it for granted. And now that the rug’s
been pulled out from under them, I don’t think they’re really
going to know what to do.
Local San Francisco politicians treated Silicon Valley success
as a grab bag. And Uber set up here and Twitter and Square and
Salesforce. And San Francisco politicians put their hand in
the honey jar and took as much as they could. And it’s now
backfiring because new businesses don’t want to set up
here. Entrepreneurs don’t want to operate here. And as Saks is
pointing out, the, you know, the rapid kind of inflation has
caused this tremendous decline in the quality of service.
There’s zero accountability, zero checks and balances. So San
Francisco is in for a really, frank, scary reckoning. And a
lot of people are really worried about it. And it’s like a very
real problem. It’s not like, oh, the city’s fucked. Ha ha, like
a $2 billion budget shortfall. You’re either going to have to
cut a lot of jobs of public employees, or you’re going to
have a city that’s going to go bankrupt. And you know, bonds
are going to get defaulted on. And at the same time, you’re
going to have this mass exodus of people and businesses. And it
is a it is a very kind of unwinding not right now. So it’s
it’s a scary moment. I don’t think there’s a real great
answer for what I think it’s more nuanced, but I think it I
think it will happen. Mark my words, San Francisco will file
for bankruptcy in the next 10 years.
Wow. I mean, Pelosi, you know, Pelosi held out a major city
filing for maybe 15, maybe 15 years. But yeah, 10, 15 years.
Remember, a big part of what Pelosi held out on the big
thing she held out on in the stimulus negotiations last
month, was for local and state governments to get bailout
support in this stimulus package. And she’s acutely
aware she lives one block away from me down the road here.
She’s acutely aware of what’s going on in San Francisco. And
the solution may not be to bail out these cities and these
states, if they’re going to continue to operate the way they
are, because it’s, it needs to break in order to rebuild.
Well, you need to cut budget. I mean, any of us running a
business? No, like, you know, if you have a little revenue
coming in, and you’re spending too much, where the fuck’s the
money coming from? You can’t just keep going to Big Papa in
DC and asking him for more money.
What about Masayoshi San? Maybe he’ll he consider coming in and
maybe it’s back? Maybe
I really I’m buying I’m going to SPAC San Francisco.
Kamasi Yoshi side do the secondary and then
Listen, I think Chamath Chamath is right about San Francisco
being the proof of what happens when you have a one party
system. And I really hope that the the tech community, the
tech liberals who are listening to this podcast, they’re not
gonna listen to me because they probably, you know, think I’m
too conservative. But, you know, Chamath is pretty liberal.
And, you know, he makes the right point. And, you know, we
cannot have a one party system that remains healthy for very
long. We need the pendulum to swing back towards the center.
And, you know, I really hope that, yeah,
power corrupts, absolute power corrupts. Absolutely. As you’ve
as you’ve said many times, it’s true.
That’s Lord Acton said that.
We this is literally what the Dark Knight Batman series is
about. It’s literally about not having a basic standard of
policing and allowing criminals to run a city. We’ve turned
into a goddamn comic book. Like, you have to arrest people who
commit crimes. And I’m sorry if that hurts your feelings. And
one of the things that beat people up. Yeah, you’re right.
Yeah, you’re right. And one of the things that’s like the
comic book is the sense of fatalism. You know, it’s like
everybody knows San Francisco is broken, but nobody thinks they
can do anything about it. That’s really the tragedy of it.
That is the tragedy. And you know what, if any of us I’ve
said it before, I’m like, I know exactly how you can stop all
these car break ins. You there’s a thing called the bait car, you
put 10 bay cars out, you put cameras in them. And now that
Einstein is spoken, boys, I love you. I love you all. I miss
you. I can’t wait to see again. And for those of you who’d like
to advertise on podcast, the advertising rate has been set at
$10 million a year for however many episodes we do. I will
read the ad at the end of the show if you give $10 million to
the charity of Chamath’s picking, which apparently is
going to be San Francisco. I think that’ll valid point 7% of
the budget. Follow Friedberg on the Twitter, follow David
Sachs, follow Chamath Palihapitiya. If you like the
show, tell your friends and write a review or don’t we don’t
care. We just do this because we like hanging out with each
other. We’ll see you all. Oh, and if you want to be a guest
on the show, we don’t accept any guest recommendations for
the love of God. I don’t know how many people are begging to
be on the show. It’s there’s room enough for four people
maybe on a live show bestie guesties. You’re not getting
your CEO of your whatever company on the show. Period. End
the story. And I cannot introduce you to Chamath to
SPAC your company enough of that. Love you besties