The Bulwark Podcast - S2 Ep1002: Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov: The Cheap Whore at the White House

Episode Date: March 18, 2025

The fastest growing demographic class in America is billionaires—we've gone from 500 to 2,500 in the past 10 years. And they know the cheapest, easiest way to get richer: Give a million bucks to Mr. Pay-to-Play in the Oval Office. Meanwhile, maybe just maybe POTUS's confidant in Moscow deposited some cash in his Swiss bank account AKA TrumpCoin, and that's why he is working so hard to get Ukraine to surrender. Also, Dems really need to focus on one or two issues to counter Trump's flood the zone strategy: like the threat to Social Security or questioning why Elon is not applying DOGE to his own Tesla subsidies. Plus, young men are the most anxious, depressed, and obese generation in history and we've really got to help them.  Jessie Tarlov and Scott Galloway join Tim Miller. show notes Raging Moderates podcast

Hello and welcome to the Bullard Podcast. I'm your host, Tim Miller. Could not be more delighted to be here today with the co-host of the Raging Moderates podcast, Scott Galloway, Professor of Marketing at NYU Stern School of Business, also host of the Prof G-Pod and co-host of Pivot with Kara Swisher. He's the only man, the pods more than I do out in the world. And you know Jessica Tarlov from the clips on Twitter. She's the co-host of the five on Fox News.

And I discovered when I was on y'all's show that you're actually Jesse. So we're friends now, so I can call you Jesse. Yeah, we're in. They didn't want their prime Jesse to be dunked on by a girl Jesse. I'm definitely backup Jesse. Yes, they kind of gave you some gender confirming name care over at Fox, I guess. Oh my God. That's a good argument to make, to be like, you guys are against this and yet look what

you have done to me, one of your liberal prize possessions. No, boy Jesse and girl Jesse is just too confusing. Though someone, another host on Fox called him Jessica Waters one day and he flipped out. Like on air, it was very funny. I like that. I'm going to keep that one in my back pocket. I want to start with you guys. I'm just, I'm very jealous of your brand of the podcast,

The Raging Moderates, and I want to, I want to know who gets the credit for it. Scott. Oh, Jess, I don't like gets the credit for it. Scott. Oh, Jess, I don't like to take credit for things. I appreciate that, but- Oh, go on. No, no, no, really.

I don't, I'm not comfortable talking about me. Yes, Tim, it was entirely my idea. There were forces against the idea. That was an easy one. And what's interesting is now every person from CNN has an idea for something called the normies or something. So anyways, it's all about the brand. Although people say we're more raging than we are moderate.

That's fine. Maybe. Yeah, that's fair. But regardless, it's a good brand actually. And you know, if you guys ever collapse or if you have a fight between the two of you and you need to kind of sell off some of your pod, you know, pod assets on the market, I might steal it from you. It's unlikely. Justice as way too easy going.

It would happen, a pivot that could happen, it almost happens every 48 hours, just as too easy going and too mature. Okay, well, I'm jealous and we'll figure something out. But I figured because I'm so jealous of the brand, that maybe a good way to start, because we're almost two months in now. I know it feels like it's been-

Isn't that crazy? I feel like the midterm should be tomorrow. The same. It's hard, I've like, I can watch myself age on YouTube now. It's really distressing that I get to like see daily, hourly, like wrinkle depth grow. But I thought maybe I would just, you know, give you guys a chance to talk about

what has made you rage the most in the first two months of Trump 2.0. Jesse, why don't you go first? So I appreciate the question, especially because it highlights our fantastic brand. So anytime the word rage is in. I'm here for brand awareness, brand lift. That's all we're doing here. Totally.

We're AB testing this. I have two answers. The first answer is that the Trump administration is implementing Project 2025. We were told that that was what was going to happen, and then they did everything that they could to say it wasn't going to happen. Then it's so clearly happening that the guy who actually created Project 2025, who was pushed to the side when the press got so bad about it before the election, is now back saying this is beyond his wildest imagination.

They are doing such a good job subverting Congress, destroying our institutions, firing people, expanding executive power. The Department of Education has to be technically an act of Congress to get rid of it. But like, who knows at this point, right? If you have judges orders that you're openly flouting and then saying, and we're going to continue to do it, sky's the limit, essentially in this. And so I'm most mad about, or most ragey about what's actually gone on in the practical terms.

So you're rage is about what's happened, not the fact that they got away with the fact that they pretended like they weren't going to do Project 2025. Well, that's the second part. Listening to you, that's where my rage goes. That's the second part of this. I don't want to just call it a messaging problem because I feel like that reduces it to something as simple as if we had just held Project 2025 up in better light and said, like, oh, look at this thing.

It's actually going to happen, that it all would have been fine and people would have realized the stakes on November 5th and it would be President Kamala. But I'm really ragey about how much capital has been blown by the left, myself included in this, kind of harping on the wrong things and then losing people when the stuff that really mattered that you really needed to get across, like that this was going to happen and this is what these people think of public service and of government and they're not there to help you, they're actually there to hurt you. And that's my biggest source of frustration.

And it's a very democratic thing in terms of the political party, not democracy, right, large thing to do that we're always self-flagellating, which Republicans never do. They're just like, no, moving on to the next thing. But I live in this world of just focusing on what we could have done better or what I could have done better. And that's my big frustration that I didn't do better. There's an unbelievable amount of self-flagellation.

Isn't it crazy? Something that I've learned as an immigrant to the democratic side, ostensibly. Yeah, it's unbelievable. Yeah, you're like, get on with it. Yeah, Donald Trump was just like, I won. I didn't lose, actually. And I'm going to keep doing all the same shit I did. And nobody was like, have you thought, have you reflected on what the voters told you? Have you listened more to the suburban moms going to Pilates and going to yoga class?

Maybe you should have listened to them more. There was none of that on Fox in 2021. No, he's like, and I will protect you. And I mean that in the most violent way. And it's like, oh, well, actually, no, I'm going to vote for you this time. So yeah. Okay. That has my blood boiling. That's not like at a six and a half for me, but that's pretty good. Yeah.

Six and a half. There's a lot of angry shit out there. Scott, what's making you rage? I'm raging about wealthy progressives who clutch their pearls and, yeah, dinner parties talk about how outrageous the activities of the administration usurping or blowing by every branch of government, whether it's we were hoping Congress would get in the way or at least be able to slow things down. That's why we have checks and balances.

The administration is just usurping congressional power. And then we thought, well, at least we have the courts and it appears as of a few days ago, they are now blatantly ignoring court orders. But that's not what has me raging. What has me raging is that I believe there's a conspiracy between the most powerful among us who are the richest among us, who pretend to give a flying fuck about the violation of the constitution and the slow burn erosion of our democracy, but don't really speak out. Don't really contact our representatives.

Don't really risk their own reputations. Don't protest. Don't call their senator. Don't use their platforms to really aggressively punch back because here's the bottom line, we're getting richer. And that's the conspiracy the Conspiracy is the following that rights are portable and rich people have figured that out Everyone in my life will have access to messifestron

If anybody decides to weaponize the DOJ, I can lawyer up like like no tomorrow If things get really scary and they start rounding up people as they did 80 years ago I can put a USB with Bitcoin shove it up my ass and peace out to Dubai. Dubai is where you're going? I don't know. Madrid. That's a little dicey. Milan.

You name it. But the bottom line is rights and democracy have become purely a function of how wealthy you are in America. The wealthiest 1% are protected by the law, but they're not bound by it. And the bottom 99 are bound by the law, but not protected by it. And that in itself is incredibly upsetting. But the most powerful in the United States, which is disproportionately populated with progressives

or people who claim to be progressives, are kind of stop, stop, but hurt so good because they've uploaded their W-2s into chat GPT. And if the Trump tax cuts go through, they're going to get richer and so there's this unhealthy conspiracy where the wealthiest among us realize our rights are entirely portable our rights are not under threat I could be in deepest darkest red Mississippi and if someone I care about gets pregnant

no problem figuring it out none whatsoever rights in America are now a function of money and the whole point of the Constitution, the whole point of a democracy is that it's primarily there to protect the lower 50 because the top one have always figured out a way to have rights and it's never been more true. So what am I raging about? A bunch of very wealthy progressives who all claim that they're really upset about what's going on and aren't doing a fucking thing but bitching and moaning to their friends under their breath because they're getting richer and they know they are not truly under threat. Everybody you rage the most at the people that are like the nearest to you, right?

The family feud is going to be the most potent, right? And so you're nearer to mine because mine are the Wall Street Journal Republican wealthy who are actually more complicit than the folks you're talking about. Maybe less hypocritical, but more complicit. Every rich person I talk to, I ask this question, Scott, so I'm going to pose it to you. I'm hoping that someone will say something that will break the lock in my brain that is preventing me from understanding this.

But thinking particularly about the CEO class, Trump has been such a dumb bet. So I'm not talking here about the wealthy progressives that like voted against common law, but haven't haven't objected enough. I'm also mad at them. I'm talking about people that actually either went for Trump or just sat it out. Didn't really, you know, didn't really use their power and influence one way or the other. And like, this was such an obvious risk. Like the downside risk of him, I get the tax cuts,

but the downside risk of him, like who the fuck knows what's gonna happen with these trade wars? Who knows what's gonna happen in global affairs with somebody as erratic as him? Who knows what's gonna happen when he's 82 years old and might wanna hold onto power? Like don't rich people want stability? Didn't they all make money under Joe Biden?

I understand why somebody who was pissed about their grocery prices might've flipped. I don't understand why a rich person whose investment fund like doubled during the Biden era was willing to take a flyer on Trump. So can you explain that one to me? I think the math that's happening subconsciously is the following.

If you're part of the fastest growing demographic class in America, it's not Latinos, it's not seniors, it's billionaires. We've gone from 500 to 2,500 in the last 10 years. You're probably in your 60s. Yeah, climate change is a problem, but it's a problem for your grandkids. Yeah, having a move towards kleptocracy that creates a less competitive economy where nations do workarounds in terms of supply chain? Yeah, that impacts probably the next CEO or the next CEO If you're in your 60s and you're rich you think you've tapped into just the easiest way to get richer

And that is this guy is pay-for-play If I know someone who knows someone and I can get a I can donate a million bucks to the campaign and get a lunch at Mar-a-Lago, that day he announces, this happened, that Ripple will be one of the cryptocurrencies included in the new strategic Bitcoin treasury program. And Ripple surges in value. So oh, I'm the head of a tech company, give him a million bucks, be paraded around like some fucking whore for his benefit. This is the cheapest, easiest way to get rich over the next five or 10, maybe even 20 years. The long-term damage to our democracy, just as climate change probably will not affect

us. It may, but it probably won't. Who's really going to get screwed as our kids? My generation has proven that we're just not long-term thinkers. Then when you see everyone else getting really rich, really fast, the downward spiral is fuck it, I'm going to get really rich, really fast. I'm going to play the game. The game is cheap.

The most disappointing thing about our elected representatives, including the president, is not that they're whores. We've known that for a long time. It's that they're such cheap whores. And the wealthy and corporations have figured out for a small amount of money, they can weaponize government to their benefit. So I just think it's a lot of short term thinking as as evidenced by my generation, which continues to vote themselves

more money, continue to ignore the long term effects of climate change, continue to see this oncoming train wreck of deficits. Because baby, I'm in the club doing rails of cocaine with champagne and young people, you can give me your credit card, but sorry, boss, I'm the one in the club. You're outside. You'll have to pay my bill when I die, but until then, the credit card keeps getting approved and going through.

I'm sorry, JD Vance and Theo Von said you can't do cocaine anymore because of the fentanyl risk. So we're not doing cocaine anymore. What was that one? Yeah, ketamine, yeah, micro-dosing. DeleteMe makes it easy, quick, and safe to remove your personal data online at a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable. DeleteMe does all the hard work of wiping you and your

family's personal information from data broker websites. DeleteMe sends you regular personalized privacy reports showing what info they found, where they found it, and what they removed. DeleteMe isn't just a one-time service. They're always working for you, constantly monitoring and removing the personal information you don't want on the internet. As I mentioned, I've been turning to Delete Me. I actually needed to use it recently because I never was familiar with one of these. So here's a little scam tip for everybody.

I've never heard about this one before. It was an email bomb. I was worried that the Russians were coming for me at first because I had this spam email bomb that went into my Gmail. And I was trying to figure out what happened. And what happens in this situation is that it's a person that's trying to use your credit card or use your one of your accounts. In my case, it was like one of my like my mileage accounts. And so they like hide the one email where they're actually trying to steal your miles. In the middle of just this insane hurricane of like, we've signed you up for a French

lingerie and we've signed you up for a new wine club and we've signed, you know, like all of this other stuff. It's a creative scam, but I caught them. I caught them. We sniffed it out and we're using Delete Me to continue to protect me. So take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me now at a special discount for our listeners. Today get 20% off your Delete Me plan by texting BULWARK to 64000. The only way to get 20% off is to text BULWARK to 64000.

That's BULWARK to 64000, message and data rates applied. The economy thing, I want to push back just because even in short-term thinking, their argument is kind of failing already. The amount of wealth that has been lost by those rich guys that were sitting in front of the cabinet at the inauguration in the first two months, just in the stock market is pretty astonishing. Like, what is your sense for kind of the short-term, you know, economic situation we're looking at right now? Well, first off, I think most of those guys voted for Harris. I don't think they were excited about showing up to the inauguration, but they decided

under the auspices of, they should never use the term stakeholder value again because they clearly don't care about the long-term health of America or the Constitution or some of the people in their organization that aren't rich. They've decided and they can make the argument that for shareholder value it's worth it for them to show up in a tie, say he's handsome, give a million dollars to the inauguration committee, let him put out a fake press release that is totally fabricated saying we're spending an additional $400 billion on cloud-based infrastructure in Texas, which they were always planning to spend somewhere else, but at least repackage it and pretend it's his doing. They've done the math that for short-term shareholder value, this is the way to go.

The reality in terms of the marketplace, we would like to think the market's crashing. It's not. It's back to pre-Trump levels. We've done away with the Trump bump, but inflation, while sticky, does not seem to be skyrocketing. The markets are still at historic highs. Yeah, they're not at their all-time highs, but it's not like they've crashed. I wouldn't even say they've corrected. They've just come down a bit.

So right now, all the catastrophizing around the economy, I think it could happen. I think it may happen. But so far, it would be unfair to say that the economy is crashing and there's evidence that these policies, I mean, economic history shows these policies don't work. But the loss in capital here, we've lost $5 trillion in market cap, but we're just back to where we were six months ago and we're still up year on year. So things are bad, but they've been a lot worse before. Jesse, that takes me kind of to the political question on this because I agree with Scott's

assessment, right? So it's not like this is an economic calamity right now. It is true though that the Republicans successfully ran on kind of annoying inflation, staying high that the economy wasn't running on those cylinders under Sleepy Joe Biden or whatever. They successfully made the economic argument and all the indicators have gotten worse in the next two months. Despite all of the horrors of the Project 2025 and all the stuff that gets us really upset about democracy. Is this the play, I guess, for Democrats to focus on economic matters? How do you think they should take that on?

I think so. The most important color in the election was the color green. That was the lesson in all of this when you look at how many black and Latino voters switched the way that they vote, not in the billionaire class, but regular 40-somethings, right? 30 and 40-somethings, Gen Z is coming into this thinking that if you have a big bad businessman, he's going to make my life financially better, even if I find him to be repellent, which has always been the play with Trump, right? That people say, I don't like who he is, don't listen to what he's saying, I don't think about women this way, I don't think about minorities this way. But he obviously knows what he's doing because he's run this big business that's had like

40,000 bankruptcies or whatever. But yes, this is to my mind, basically the only play. I think there will be some folks who get animated about what happens on the immigration front. That would have been my rage rant if you yelled at me. But I agree with you. It's probably not the most politically salient. It's just most personally enraging. Yes. That one for me, I mean, I had a due process fight yesterday on the five that made my head spin. Was there a lot of respect for due process around the table yesterday?

I didn't catch the five yesterday, I apologize. Tim, how could you not at least watch the day before we come on your podcast? I'm sorry. No, not a lot of respect for it if it's for certain kind of people. That's always been the standard, right? If it's me, it's a huge problem. If it's you and you have tattoos and are, you know, seeking asylum, then I don't really care.

And that's obviously frustrating. And I think that that will animate some people when they go and vote again, then they say, oh, you told me that you were just getting out convicted criminals who had crossed the border illegally. No, actually you're happy to get rid of anyone who's here undocumented. And I think that might be a fine position for hardcore MAGA folks. And they should just own it. Tom Homan should just say, you know what, on the campaign trail, we lied to you.

And we said that this was about getting the most dangerous out. And it's actually about getting everybody out who's not here legally. And I'm going to go about my business doing that. I would respect that a lot more and also have to do less research for every show, which I'm looking for in life. But, um, on the economy front, it seems like, and I've looked at a ton of message testing for this, and I know you guys do as well and Sarah's constantly in focus groups and looking at the data,

the messaging that works is they're going for tax cuts while they take away your Medicaid. That's it. It's pretty plain and simple. Like they're in this for themselves. They promised you that they weren't going to touch their entitlements, but actually $880 billion is going to come out of these programs. And that's kind of it.

And you put a neat and tidy bow around it. You have posters with it constantly. Hakeem Jeffries has already started doing this. And I think that's the only way that you get through it. So you talk about how tariffs are attacks, though there are people on the democratic side that are pushing back on this. There are protectionist Democrats. I thought actually, I don't know if anyone else listened to Steve

Vanden on Gavin Newsom's podcast. Unfortunately. But he makes a pretty strong argument for it. And he's talking about Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders and Ro Khanna, you know, people who are hardcore blue Dems, right? That think that there have to be some protectionist tariffs to keep American industry alive and to raise wages, which we're all foreign in this. So yeah, I think the economy is the only way that you're going to be able to go.

But Scott and I were talking about this yesterday on raging moderates. Like it feels so shitty to have to think that you need to root against the country, right? That you want the stock market to go lower. You want people to have higher grocery prices so that they realize that the people in charge are just out for themselves. And I, as perhaps too emotional as a person, I have high doses of estrogen and maybe some postpartum.

I don't think it's about your femininity. I think it's the fact that you come from the progressive. Yeah, the progressive background. As a former Republican, this does not bother me. It seems like a problem for your therapist. Your eggs should be a million dollars. This is a totally aside, but you start talking about the message testing.

I have the two of you, so I might as well get your expertise on this. My most unpopular opinion in campaign consulting circles is I think campaign message testing is mostly bullshit. I'm curious your take on this. I just think that I've sat through enough of these things where I think there's value in obviously looking at data, focus grouping, but you have this thing where we play an ad. You play five ads for people who are sitting there playing video games, and then they press

up or down on the thing about whether they like it or not or whether it moves them or not. And then it's like, hey, do these people even know what they want? I don't think consumers even actually know what convinces them and what doesn't. And two, one was plus 8.2 and one was plus 7.4. It's like, we got to go with the plus. Where do you fall on that? I think, and I worked in this world, so I'm a little bit defensive, I guess, that I'm probably still having meals on the money that I made in it.

But I think what message testing can do that is important is it can get you away from third rails. If anyone had done message testing or paid attention to, hey, don't talk about trans rights constantly, right? Where you're on the campaign trail, it can help you with that or to know people are feeling economically uncertain. Now, go out there and say something meaningful in that space. But I do think that you're right. The commonsensical, which it's so weird to me that that's a real word. Anytime anyone says it, I think that they're saying it wrong, but yet it's real. Anyway, if you're talking like a commonsensical person, which is frankly why people are into AOC right

now, they're still not into her politics, but she just talks like someone who gives a fuck, right? And believes in people and wanting them to do better and knows what the government is doing, et cetera. So yeah, you just need to go out there and kind of sound like a human being, but the message testing does help you know where you should not be going. And frankly, we would have done a lot better

in the election, I think, if we had paid attention to the big flashing red lights that did come out of these focus groups. Because they were all saying, stop being preachy, you look down on me. I want to be treated as an equal. Do I sound like the old guy, like Charles Barclay going against analytics in sports when I say this? Or is there something here? The two of you are going to forget more about this than I'm gonna know. Well, you do corporate, it's interesting. Is there something that could be learned

from the corporate side? Well, I'm technically a professor of brand strategy, and I don't understand the nuance of political messaging. What I would say is that first you have to understand the comm strategy of the other side. You have to empathize with the enemy such that you can respond. The enemy right now has developed a comm strategy

that is straight out of the GRU, which is flooding the zone. And that is there are so many things at them, some are true, some are not, some are, they know ridiculous and will invoke an emotional reaction to misdirect you away from the key points we should be focused on. And so the key is all right, if you know they're deploying this flood the zone strategy, and trying to create so much noise and such an emotional sclerotic hysterical reaction, which is how I would describe the democratic reaction right now, then the question is all right, let's slow down and figure out how do you combat the flood the zone strategy or calm strategy. And the way you combat it is the following. You realize you don't need to respond to everything. You don't need to cry or scream into Twitter or TikTok on every issue. You don't need to have a viewpoint on the Gulf

of cheaper eggs. You pick one or two key issues that resonate with Americans. You're disciplined. You're calm. You're measured. You're bringing experts. You're bringing data. The two issues I'm focused on are one, surrendering to Putin over Ukraine for what is not a lot of money, $60 billion, 8% of our budget, the majority of which serves as stimulus back home, the majority of which goes to red states. We are one, taking out a third of Russia's kinetic power, two, giving China pause before it invades Taiwan,

knowing that a motivated army armed with western technology is a formidable foe, Europe is a union again, NATO is out of a brain coma. This is the best return on investment Americans have made in a generation and we should continue to do it. That's an issue for me. And then that we are in fact about to ramp up the deficits by $800 billion a year to give the wealthy a tax cut.

Those are the two issues that I'm focused on. I'm not interested in talking about whether a helicopter crash was a function of DEI, whether passports should have a third box for male and female. That is all a giant weapon of mass distraction. We should focus on the one or two things that are really important to Americans, be calm, be the adults in the room, and also just in general, move from being the party of indignance to the party of ideas. Start proposing big ideas, put them up for a vote. Even if they go down, say, all right,

why wouldn't we raise minimum wage to $25 an hour? Why wouldn't we lower Medicare eligibility by two years a year for 30 years and have nationalized health care? Why wouldn't we have mandatory national service instead of just getting indignant and waiting, being outraged for other people, being outraged at the lack of outrage? We need to have a more focused, disciplined response. We need to be the party of ideas instead of the party of indignance and clutching our pearls all the goddamn time. That's a personal attack on me.

The 800 million, I just- Billion. I bet 800 billion. sorry, thank you. That's like the heritage number even. I think it's actually going to be way worse. The deficit increase on this is going to- Yeah, that's annual. Yeah.

That's annual. The number I've seen, what have you seen, Tim? I've seen $5 trillion- Yeah, 4.5. ... additional deficit. Yeah, 4.5. Yeah, 4.5 to five over the course of the but it's interesting that these tax cuts versus Trump tax cuts from the first term

Actually do not spread the wealth in the same way because that was a major Talking point that they could hang on to that there was at least something for the little guy like a very tiny Well, that's right. They might add on the no tax on tips and all that stuff, which takes the number up even higher. This is one of my massive frustrations. I get that it's a function of where I work, that I have to be so detail-oriented about every single thing that, quote unquote, sounds good. We appreciate that. But the fact that no one talks about tax on tips the way Trump is doing it versus the

way the Democrats do it, kills me. Trump has no limit to how much you can earn to still get no tax on tips, which means that you can be a hedge fund manager or a corporate lawyer and do your overtime as quote unquote tips. Because there's no limit. I don't remember what Kamala's was, like 85,000 or something like that. That's actually for people who are waiters or waitresses or have these jobs that are really dependent Bartenders on tips and they're talking about it. Like it's gonna be some give back

For the working class and again, it's just for the cronies. It's so frustrating to me We're gonna do an ad test right now just among just among the three of us because I This is the first real midterm ad I've seen so far. It's out this morning. Our friends at VoteVets, we have an article about it in the Bullock today, and I just want to play a clip for it for the two of you and have you react. I served in the military for over 33 years, just accepted a new position in the VA. Come into the office, fire up my computer, and I come back, and there's an email sitting

there for me. I knew then. I knew what was coming. I have not had a single negative performance review in my 10 years. It feels like veterans are being personally attacked by Elon Musk. I did not put my life on the line for some tech bro billionaire from South Africa to come in here and try to destroy our country. That goes on from there, but I'm wondering your, uh, your thoughts.

I think anytime you roll out veterans, it's a pretty powerful strategy. The only thing I would argue is that I think people have empathy, but I've thought the whole these good people are being fired argument is not our best argument, because I think the majority of people in the private sector have experienced something similar. And the capitalism quite frankly, I think a lot of moderates in the back of the head are like, welcome to the work week boss. I received one of those emails when I was working at a car dealership for 20 years and then somebody, a private equity firm came in and rolled up the car dealership and I got one of those emails. One of the cruel truths of capitalism is on a regular basis, there's a lot of injustice in the

labor force. This is kind of feel bad for me I got fired is not the foot I would lead with. It's that we're doing this in an incompetent way. I'd go after the wall of receipts. I would say that we're doing stupid things that will end up costing us more in the future, that they're not spending your money well, that the way they're going about this is incompetent. But going after the injustice and the emotional argument, I worry it falls flat because I think there's maybe incorrectly a perception that government employees have had it too soft or too long and that they're facing some of the harsh reality that the private sector faces every day.

What about you Jess? I'm not mad at Scott's analysis. I think I haven't been out in the real world as much as a lot of people, which is one of the criticisms. You're in the real world, girl. You're walking around the News Corp hallways. I do work for a big corporation. But I was in school. You got a judge box of wine in there. All right, Tim. And people with all kinds of different backgrounds. Yes. We do have a diverse set of backgrounds there and a lot of veterans that work here who love

Donald Trump and would never think that he would do anything to hurt veterans. That's still how they feel about it. I think Scott's probably right that the idea of just getting fired willy-nilly or whatever, it's not going to resonate because people have gotten fired, but it's the approach to it that's going to be something that can maybe get people on board with the idea that Elon Musk is up to no good. And I don't want to be ad testy or campaign message testy about this, but something that I do think resonates with people is that Elon Musk, I think he's getting another $8 million a

day in government contracts while other people are losing their jobs or we're not paying 12 cents a day through USAID to keep people who have HIV in Africa alive. I found that article in the New York Times over the weekend to be particularly moving. And everything has to be contrasts, or at least I feel that way, to be like this stuff is going on while this is also going on. And one side of the equation is just getting richer. And they're getting richer off of you. They're not having to go through the same doge process, right? No one is looking under the hood of Elon Musk's companies at the same time that they're holding you to this standard.

And one thing, and I don't know if it's just a mistake to be talking about DEI at all, because obviously that blew up in Democrats' faces in the election, but the amount of people who don't think that veterans would be a protected class within DEI is astounding to me. I do think that that's powerful. I've seen conservatives in real time realize that veterans are hired for a specific kind of background because they fill a certain kind of quota. They're like, oh, that's weird. That's the same thing that you're talking about, where maybe there are folks who come from X background

that would be good for this job. And I do think that that's an important argument to make. This kind of like, they could come for you. There is no one that is actually safe from this because they're living the next four years in a total YOLO state of mind, right? Trump can't run again. I mean, we will probably get to the point where he says he can't run again.

But if we're just treating this as four years, I don't think they care about the future for JD Vance or whoever's going to be the standard bearer after this. They are going to create as much chaos and as much wealth for themselves as they possibly can in the next four years. And you have to try every single approach to make that clear to the American public that that is what's happening. Yeah There's a lot there that I agree with I also want to just point out You're mentioning that the after this assault on DEI. I was pretty offended

I don't know about you guys about the Irish DEI at the White House yesterday Yeah, why we have to fuck it we do we turn the pond green? Why are we acknowledging the Irish? They're a special category. We're getting rid of the pride flags. We're getting rid of Black History Month. I don't get why the Irish deserve a car val. I think you know why. D.E.

Irish yesterday at the White House. I was not fucking pleased about that. That was my issue with the ad is that Elon wants to ruin the country. Do people really buy that? I'm not sure. Elon is cashing in, you know, and I think that maybe the empathy thing might work if it kind of combines the incompetence and we're picking a specific person. And it's like, this person has a very central job at the VA, right? And like, I worked at the VA and I served veterans who were injured or whatever.

I worked at VA hospital, right? Like a specific story. And it's like, and I make, you know, whatever, $68,000 a year. And like, I got canned and Elon's taken in $8 million a day. You know, like, I just think that maybe there's a sharper, sharper way to do it. Scott, you've kind of already alluded to this.

So I guess we'll start with you. I want to do Dems in the wilderness stuff and like what they should be doing. You already talked about how you think they should be more focused in their message. How do you get attention though with a more focused message? Like tactically speaking, we had this big showdown on the hill that fizzled where Schumer decided not to really go to the mat on the government shutdown. So that opportunity's passed.

How do you get attention? I mean, like going out there and talking specifically about how tax cuts are for the rich are bad, like it's good, but like, how do you get, how do you get onto the five? Like, how do you break through to people? Well, first off, just to your point, you know, there's so many things to be enraged. I was trying to pick which one I wanted to put forward to not go upstream of

Musk and what I think is the illegal usurp of constitutional power and shut down the government just shows how fucking stupid we are. I just think that is outrageous that we've we're letting the government essentially become a vehicle for the transfer of wealth and rights from the poor and the middle class to the rich. We just sort of said, this isn't a government.

We're shutting it down. I think it's unforgivable that we didn't just say, look, fine, have at it, you've decided the government is no longer really about democracy and constitution, so we're not gonna continue to fund it. And let the chips fly. And I think we should have channeled Mitch McConnell, who has bested and beat the shit out of Charles Schumer

every round for 15 million rounds running. I was incredibly disappointed. I thought that was an enormous strategic error on our part. So one, it's discipline around messaging. What you guys are saying is really powerful. Go to the data. You want a 6X the Doge savings? All right, let's get efficient.

$2.6 billion, according to the Wall Street Journal so far, you want to 6X it? Stop all subsidies immediately to Tesla. $2.6 billion, according to the Wall Street Journal so far, you want a 6X it, stop all subsidies immediately to Tesla. Boom, 6X the efficiency of Doge. Let's get focused. Let's use data. I think one, we need more discipline around messaging, more data.

And then I also think we need to do a better job of synchronicity. If you look at the right, they're much better at coordinating their think tanks, their media, their politicians around a very synchronized message. We are somewhat like someone having a seizure with limbs flailing everywhere. So we need more discipline around messaging. No, don't spend your precious human capital and your platform on whether or not the helicopter crashes a DEI. Don't even go there on naming gold.

We just find, have at it. The tape brothers, don't fucking talk about them. That's just a distraction meant to enrage and distract people. Talk about these one or these two issues. And then what we really need help with is quite frankly, putting some of our senior citizens on an ice flow who are not able to reach people where they are right now. And that is some of our younger spokespeople need, in my opinion, greater license and rope

to meet people where they are and that is on these new mediums. Like who? Well, I think Crockett is good. I think O.C. is good. I actually think someone like Michael Bennett is got it. I think Chris Murphy has been a powerful voice I think Wes Moore coming out and saying that he was going to focus his entire administration on the struggles of young men was really Powerful. I think that rich Richie Torres is driving the far-left crazy because they don't know how to criticize his moderate policies with this intersectionality of being a black Hispanic gay man.

They just don't know how to react to someone like that who actually has moderate reasonable viewpoints. Well, it's hard to be singing from the same hymn book when you have AFC and Richie Torres though on your list. That's part of the problem though. I mean, they've got a pretty different perspective on things. Well, and to be blunt, that's a lack of leadership where they get the two of them in the room and say, okay, bitches, you both got to sign up and you got to get you, you're gonna have to give here,

you're gonna have to give here, there's huge vent overlap on what you guys believe. These are the two messages you're going to go after. And we're going to weaponize your platform and your incredibly strong voices and your ability to meet people where they are. And we're going to get more discipline. Look how disciplined the messaging is on the Republican side, even if it's to get everyone to look over here and be outraged about something stupid that we shouldn't be talking about,

they're just much more coordinated and disciplined. And we literally look like a giraffe having a seizure. You don't know which way its limbs are going to fly. It strikes me as a lack of leadership and coordination and discipline around messaging. Jesse, what do you make of that? Well, I certainly think with the CR that that's what happened.

We've known that this was gonna happen. The government could shut down March 14th if this doesn't get passed for months. And it feels like everyone woke up a week before and started freaking out about it. But this is the tune that we've been singing since Trump, not even since he got inaugurated because he de facto became president like four to six weeks before that, right? Everyone was still flying to Mar-a-Lago trying to figure out what's up.

Even foreign leaders were coming and doing it. So we were totally flat-footed. We didn't have a catchy name for the CR bill. We didn't talk about it as like Doge 2.0. So people didn't know what it was. And most people actually thought it was a clean CR. They thought it was the same spending bill that you would have gotten from Biden, Biden Harris.

That's on us, right? That we didn't get it out there. And then we didn't have an alternate proposal. I couldn't believe it. You know, everyone's saying like, oh, we want to try for our own amendments. Why didn't you have your own bill that you could hold up? And you say, you know what, Republicans could come over and they could look at our bill and let's take half from each of ours and mash it together and get something to keep the government open. That feels like a leadership problem on that front. And I mean, Chuck Schumer,

he basically lied to his caucus, right? He said they don't have the votes. He got all of these vulnerable senators to go out there, film their little video saying I'm a no on the CR. And then he said, actually, we don't have the votes for this. And I think it's going to be worse if the government shuts down because Russ vote will become the president. And maybe he's right about that. But the way he went about it was terrible. And Hakeem Jeffries was able to keep his caucus in line.

Jared Golden voted for it, but who cares? One person who has a very specific kind of district did it. Like no big deal. In terms of the message discipline overall, I don't know if this counts as like a pushback, but I just want to add to it that there is a message discipline that you feel coming from people like Thune or Mike Johnson. But what the Trump administration has done, and The Washington Post had a big piece about this, is they have invited in content creators and basically taken away levels of approval

that you would usually have to go through for the type of stuff that they're putting in. So they're giving them access to the inner workings of the White House in a way that you wouldn't expect content creators were able to have. And they don't have to necessarily get the highest level of sign-off on things. So the video that came out like a week or two ago of the people who are undocumented getting like perp walked essentially, that didn't have to go through the highest level of approval to get out there.

They were like, let's just throw shit at the wall. Let's put this out there and see what happens. And it ended up creating hundreds of millions of impressions. And we don't have that happening because at this particular moment also, politics is not cool in democratic circles. Everyone who wants to continue getting great ad sales is running away from politics. When is the next time you think you're going to get Alex Cooper to have someone on to talk about politics? 2040, by the time she's not calling her daddy anything, right?

Granddaddy, call her granddaddy. Call her grand... That'd be a sexy pot. Then they'll be on, yeah. Yeah, I hope we can go rage on that. But it's diametrically opposed what's happening right now. Joe Rogan is constantly going to have political people on. Andrew Schultz, Theo Vaughn, Bustin Boys, all of them are going to keep having these conversations because it's what's cool right now. On our side, it's so uncool and we're trying to replicate trends from two, three years

ago. These videos are so cringy or all the senators saying the same thing. And then they basically nuke us in one tweet, just being like, is this control alt F or like whatever, whatever. I'm not good on the computer, but you know what I mean? Like did they just cut and paste all of them? I have an idea that maybe there's nobody out there to execute this, but I think that somebody should start running for president now.

It's a really interesting idea. And I think that people are going to reject that out of hand because everybody is like, I'm so sick of fucking, you know, I'm sick of politics. And that's what people say. This is like, again, people, what people say does not match their actions. A lot of times, which is why I'm skeptical of ad testing. But, uh, there's no leadership because there's no leader and like, there's a huge attention gap because you have two co-presidents on one side, one who owns a social media platform, and then you have a bunch of people like some people

Scott mentioned who I agree are doing a good job, Chris Murphy, Jasmine Crockett. There's kind of like mid to back bench legislators. And I think that probably the person that starts running for president now will not actually become the president, but you never know. And I think it might be a good way to start getting it, to actually start getting attention and to becoming a heat shield for some of the other Democrats. I don't know. That's my off the wall.

That's my off the wall idea. I think that's a really powerful idea. I think if a Richie Torres or a Mark Cuban started every day, putting out two and three minute TikToks or videos with responses to this stuff, this is what we need to be doing. This is why this outrage, I think they get a ton of attention, the message would get out there.

And not only that, I think that the Republicans would take the bait and start responding. Right now they're just rolling over us. Yeah. And then all these people would have them on, right? Like the, like Theo von is not going to have on Chris Murphy, but if Mark Cuban said he's running for president or whatever, like, sure, like he'd be able to go on all these fucking things.

Isn't that what Rahm Emanuel is kind of doing? Is it? Maybe. Yeah, I assume so. Right. I mean, Politico is reporting that that is what he wants to do, but he is out there portraying himself as an option for us, right? Someone who is grounded in progressive values and has the

execution in the pragmatic world, which is all Democrats want at this point, right? Like someone who believes the same things as them, but has an actionable plan to affect policy and to also stop Republicans from what they're doing. So I mean, the problem is, is like, a lot of the folks that are going to be up on that 2028 stage are governors right now and can't say that they're leaving that job like Josh Shapiro, Wes Moore. Why not?

I think it kind of neuters you in terms of your current job. If you're doing it this far in advance, three and a half years out. I think we're to a point now where the public has said we value authenticity over or what appears to be authenticity of infinite coarseness and cruelty over, over decorum. I think it's pretty obvious. Gavin Newsom brings on Charlie Kirk and Stephen Bannon because he's running for president and he wants to become more, have the appearance of being more moderate. Okay, then just come out of the closet and say you're running for president. Just, I'm Gavin Newsom. I lead the fourth largest economy in the world. Our economy is growing. Our budget is

balanced. We have our issues. I know how to deal with these. What's going on is terrible here. I am running for president and this is what is important to me and what should be important to you. Josh Shapiro. I mean, these guys, they're running for president for God sakes. Be honest about it. I plan to run for president and this is why I'm qualified and these are the issues I would focus on

and this is what really bothers me right now. Instead they're like, well, I've got a job to do, I'm focused. Shut the fuck up. You're running for president. You wouldn't be on Bill Maher. All of these guys, I've got a job to do. I'm focused. Shut the fuck up. You're running for president. You wouldn't be on Bill Maher How are these guys? I'm sure Tim all of these guys are calling us. This is what they do I hear from all of these representatives who see themselves as a vice president or potentially president one day I'm pretty I'm fairly certain 90% of our

Representatives and our senators wake up in the morning look look in the mirror and say, hello, Mr. President. And I think if they just said, I want to be president, I think this is an incredible opportunity. I'm really distressed about what's happening in America. And every day they went on and hammered their points and their ideas. You know, Andrew Yang made UBI or the notion we'd be more empathetic towards just redistributing capital from the rich to the poor. He made it more palatable, he normalized it, he became a really important part of the dialogue. So there is an advantage to someone coming out right now

and just saying, where I was headed is the following. All these guys call us and they ask you two for the same thing and me for a third. They say, I'm really interested in your ideas. I'd like to come on your podcast, which is Latin for, I'm running for president. I want to start getting awareness, right? For me, they call me and they say they want my view

on things, which means they want my money. Convinced me I have some insight into issues and they want to have a discussion with me. What they're really saying is, give me a chance to agree with you and then write me a check. You hear from these people, Tim. All of, all of these people are running for president. There's like a half a dozen of them. Come out of the closet

and start occupying the space you want to command. And Fortune favors the bold, I don't know. If you guys look back in the past, like everybody, all the smart people, all the cautious smart people would have been like, it's ridiculous for Gavin Newsom or one of these people at the primary, Joe Biden, right? After 2022, that was the start.

It was, it was, it's hopeless. You have no chance. You shouldn't do it. Yeah. I don't know. There are at least a handful of them that look back on that now and think, boy, maybe I should have done it. Maybe it would have ended up being me, not Kamala.

A big vacuum right now. There's a big vacuum right now. Scott, you mentioned how Wesmore is focused on young men. You've got a lot of, you got a lot of good shtick on this topic. Last time I had you on, we did like 20 minutes on this. So I want the updated shtick. I want, I want your latest assessment for what is happening with young men and what, what Democrats should be doing about it.

The greatest innovation in history wasn't the iPhone or the semiconductor. It was the American middle class. And key to that was seven million men coming home in uniform who demonstrated heroics, were attractive to women. They were fit. We put money in their pocket through the National Highway Transportation Act, through FHA loans, through the GI bill.

And then they mated with a ton of people. They had a ton of kids. And they had such wonderful lives. They said, why wouldn't we extend these rights and these liberties and this prosperity to women? Why wouldn't we extend it to non-whites? And we built the greatest society in history. And the thing that is missing from the middle class

right now are economically and emotionally viable young men. They're 12 times as likely to be incarcerated, four times as likely to be addicted, four times as likely to kill themselves. Our young men are struggling. There's no group in the world that has ascended faster than women,

and we should do nothing to get in the way of that. Twice as many women elected to a parliament and democracies over the last 30 years. More women are seeking tertiary education globally, more single women-owned homes than single men. In urban areas, women under the age of 30 are making more money. You're gonna have probably two-to-one

female-to-male college grads in the next five years, and we have essentially gutted every on-ramp areas, women under the age of 30 are making more money. You're going to have probably two to one female to male college grads in the next five years. And we have essentially gutted every on-ramp for non-college-bound males, which is the majority of them. We've taken wood, metal, and auto shop away. There are very few paths to a romantic partnership for a man or to economic viability for a man who is not exceptional. And the result is that women nor our country will continue to flourish if men are flailing.

And there's a series of economic policies that have transferred so much money and opportunity for young people that it has disproportionately impacted young men. We have the most obese, anxious, and depressed generation in history. For the first time in our nation's history, a 30-year-old isn't doing as well as his or her parents were at 30. So what to do about it? You don't have identity politics, where you just level up young men.

You go minimum wage, $25 an hour, universal child care, vocational programming to restore some dignity to work, mandatory national service, more third places, encourage young people to drink more alcohol. The risk to their liver is much less than the risk of isolation and anxiety. There are a ton. We we fuck this up for young people, we can unfuck it. Every person under the age of 40, and I think this is the unifying theory of everything, should have the opportunity

to fall in love, should have the opportunity to have children, and the opportunity to have a house and a decent living wage. That is absolutely doable in the most, the wealthiest nation in the world. Minimum wage, 25 bucks an hour, universal child tax credit, tax holiday. Anyone under the age of 40, no federal income tax. It wouldn't be that much money

because they don't make that much money. Level up young people. And if you decide not to have kids and spend it on brunch in St. Barts, more power to you. The table stakes are the most prosperous nation in the world is everyone should have. St. Barts is fucking too expensive, okay? Not for Scott. You gotta be real, like, for St. Barts.

St. Barts is ridiculous. Go to Tulum or something. You can afford Tulum. I'm not telling people that they have to have kids to be happy. I'm saying America should be able to afford the opportunity for every person under the age of 40, the opportunity to meet someone, fall in love, have kids, and live a life that they can have as a family. And right now, we've gone from 60% of 30-year-olds used to have a kid to 27%. Every economic policy, I think, should be reverse engineered back from one thing.

How do we give young people the opportunity to have dignity, to have a reasonable standard of living, and the option should they choose to have children. Jesse, is that focus on young men still non-grata in democratic circles or people starting to get it? No, they're starting to get that they need it. I don't know how genuine it is because it felt like people were actually thriving off of a moment where they could only talk about women and protected classes and almost relished the ability to kind of push aside, specifically white men who they felt had been holding us back and tearing us down for so long. But they definitely got the memo. And you can see it in people having these proposals and how we talk about the issues.

But I just wanted to highlight from Westmore's program, a couple of things that are really important. This is the enhanced male paternity leave, which is part of what Scott was talking about, but he calls out specifically for increasing our male teacher share and our male healthcare provider share. And I think the visibility part of this is actually what's most important. And it kind of answers every question that we've been talking about for the last hour.

What is the answer? It's to show up no matter what. And you see the Congress people that are doing well, like the Pat Ryan's of the world, he goes and he bartends. He shows up at like a local pub in his district and he's the bartender. That's the same thing as you walk into, you know, you're waiting in a doctor's office and a male nurse walks in and you see that. You see someone who's part of your healthcare journey, someone who's taking care of you,

someone who has the kind of qualifications to be doing that. And I noticed and obviously it was made for very good jokes, but if, I don't know if you guys watched Andrew Schultz's newest Netflix special about his IVF journey or him and his wife's IVF journey. That dude's everywhere right now. His PR tour is great. I can't get away from him. He has a very funny bit about the male nurse that is on this journey for him.

It's like a hulking Italian guy who knows him from his comedy and is basically cracking jokes about him not being able to get his wife knocked up. And I was thinking, because everything kind of goes back to politics for me, besides enjoying it and finding it very funny, the whole special, like how important it is to normalize

those kinds of relationships, right? And let someone like Andrew Schultz, who has a ton of bravado, has some jokes, I mean, it's always very cheeky, but that certainly people think are sexist or misogynist, is portraying this male character in his journey to bring him the most beautiful thing and the most valued thing in his life, his baby, right? And to take care of his wife, who's another treasured part of his existence. And I love that that's a big part of what Westmore is proposing in this, because it's not about the messaging of it. It's literally how can we get more men to show up in

important places in people's lives, also for them to have jobs that, to Scott's point, like keep them afloat, get them a house, get them a vacation every year or not. St. Barts, maybe Disney World. New Orleans. Come visit me. Not for Mardi Gras though. It's too insane.

Last thing is for Scott. We're out of time, but I'm obsessed with the crypto scam Trump is running. So if you could just give me a rapid fire, like on what you think is the scale of the scam that is being run in this White House where we're letting off Chinese crypto magnets who are being under investigation by the SEC, and then they're in turn giving tens of millions of dollars to Trump.

So if you could just give me a couple of sentences on that. And then I had a listener request, they wanted investment advice for you if the economy is gonna go to shit. So those are my two final questions for you as brief as possible, or as long as possible. It's your time, not mine. I can order to be. This is pure speculation, but I think every piece of evidence shows that this may not

be speculation. This may be reality. Imagine if President Trump was able to open a Swiss bank account and anyone could deposit money in it, and nobody knew but him that the money went in and he didn't have to file with anybody when he took that money or sold it. And imagine Putin said, I'll give you $10 billion, it's untraceable. But by the way, isn't Europe's funding of Ukraine really a problem? Isn't your funding really extending this war?

Well, he's done that. The Trump coin is effectively a Swiss bank account that anyone could put money into and then call the president and say, I just put $10 billion in here. How would you like to be the wealthiest man in the world? And in unrelated news, are you going to continue to fund this war? That is what could be happening right now. And the notion that they put it out the Friday night before the inauguration, this is a level of grift that we haven't seen.

The Republicans would argue we're just more brazen and more less opaque about it. You've been doing it through lobbyists and Speaker Emerita. Pelosi is probably the most blatant, brazen insider trader in history. I mean, you got to admire if you're going to be corrupt, don't play small ball like Pelosi for millions, do it for billions like Trump. So I think that the Trump coin is nothing but pure unadulterated grift. It's the perfect scam.

We used to think it was Donald Trump media, where the stock that does three million a year, this company that does three million a year in business and loses three million in business and loses 300 million is worth five million dollars but here's the thing he's gonna have to follow the SEC when he sells shares he doesn't have to do that with the Trump coin as far as we know it's billions of dollars in pay-for-play that's what he's set up so I think that's happening in terms of the economy the reality is guys like me have predicted nine of the last three recessions. Nobody knows.

I can paint a scenario either way. These tariffs are to the economy, what leeches were to medicine. Like none of us who know anything about economics can believe they actually think this shit's gonna work again. Consumer confidence is crashing. The entire world and every large company and economy is trying to figure out workarounds

to reconfigure the supply chain to not include American companies or the American government because they can't trust what is actually going to happen here. That should take a real toll on the economy. The American stock market is still overvalued. If you were to summarize the world's value into $100 right now, including debt, the US costs 70 and the rest of the world costs 30. So let me ask you, Tim, if you could buy the US for $70 or the rest of the world for 30, what do you think is a better value?

I think I'd probably start investing in Germany and India and Brazil. That's exactly right. And that's what's happening. The capital flows are reversing, and we're seeing people start to look at other markets on the US because the US is just very expensive. Apple is trading at 34 times earnings even after this drawdown on a company that isn't growing and it traditionally trades at 18 and it's been as low as nine in the last 20 years. Having said that, what do you do?

I think you just diversify and that is nobody can time the markets, don't have an emotional reaction. What you may want to consider is not only diversifying through low cost index funds, but perhaps think about diversifying geographically and look at low-cost index funds in Latin America, Asia, and Europe. In sum, your Kevlar here is diversification. But don't listen to people like me because the reality is we just don't know. It's a wonderful place to leave it. And I always like to admit that I don't fucking know shit. And so, you know, we're just trying to do the best we can

to figure it out here on this podcast. I appreciate it folks, listen, it's the Raging Moderates. I appreciate you guys a lot. Let's keep doing this from time to time. And when you want to rage about something, doors always open, all right? Tim, I wanted to say, you're one of the few fearless voices out there.

I love you go on TikTok and say, basically, I know I can summarize almost every one of your TikToks, your videos. It's a good brand. It's eloquent. is out there. I love you go on TikTok and say, basically, I know I can summarize almost every one of your TikToks, your videos, but it's eloquent. It's basically what the actual fuck and then you go on and you provide data and a great argument. I think you're one of those key voices. So keep on keeping on brother. I'm doing my best. I appreciate that very much guys. Everybody else will be back here. Keep on keeping on tomorrow for another edition of the podcast. We'll see you all then. Peace.

Thanks for having us. Thanks, Tim. Life be getting stronger Boys, a lot of women love you Boys, you just make me mad All the little things that you do Ain't gonna make me sad Then I saw one again At me from afar Then I knew it was you All alone I knew it was you

All alone Suddenly I knew there was hope There was hope There was hope The Board podcast is produced by Katie Cooper with audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.