Timcast IRL - Kamala AND Trump Reportedly Joining Joe Rogan Claims Media w/WhatIfAltHist Rudyard Lynch

Episode Date: October 16, 2024

Tim, Hannah Claire, & Phil are joined by Rudyard Lynch of WhatIfAltHist to discuss rumors erupting that Joe Rogan will have Trump & Kamala on the JRE Podcast, Black Voters abandoning Democrats in staggering numbers, Trump skyrocketing in the betting markets, and a new documentary predicting Trump losing the 2024 election. Rudyard Lynch, known as "Whatifalthist" online, is a YouTuber and content creator who focuses on history, geopolitics, and alternative history scenarios. Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere)  Hannah Claire @hannahclaireb (everywhere) Phil @PhilThatRemains (X) Guest: Rudyard Lynch @WhatifAltHist (YouTube) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I'm absolutely loving this arc right now. Donald Trump is trying to earn female votes. Kamala Harris is trying to earn male votes. They're both having their difficulties. And the rumors are now that both Trump and Kamala Harris are set to appear on Joe Rogan. The funniest thing about this is that I'm imagining Joe Rogan at home being like, what? I have no idea what's going on. But of course, because he's he's a king of the castle when it comes to podcasting with one of the largest audiences and the largest, probably moderate audience. Everybody wants a piece of that pie. So Kamala Harris's team all across the media is saying she's going to make an appearance or working on it, whatever it is, they're trying to make it

seem like it's going to happen. Trump said he believes he is going on Rogan's podcast. I wonder how much of this is external media pressure to try and force Joe to accept this, because I'm sitting here being like, Joe ain't said nothing. And Joe's show is very straightforward. He tells you what he's doing. There's no secrets, no secret plans or anything like that. I kind of feel like if this was actually his idea, he would have come out of the show and say, yeah, we're talking to him because he's going to be off the cuff and say, yeah, we're talking to the campaigns. Maybe we'll have him on. But there's been nothing. So we'll talk about this and the underlying reasons why it's happening. Kamala Harris is now down 13 points on Polly Market.

She I'm sorry, I think it's 16 points. She's down 13, I believe, in aggregate for all betting markets. And Donald Trump is now up point seven in the battleground polling aggregate for all states. Trump's only losing one and barely. So it is looking rather apocalyptic for Kamala Harris. We'll talk about that. A bunch of other stories. Border Patrol says if Kamala wins, they're out. Mass exodus. And then we got this really funny story. Oh, you're gonna love this. A movie producer, a war game, hypothesizing what will happen if Trump loses and the military factions of the military, the National Guard join him in what they. Well, they don't use the word civil war, but we started off the show by saying it.

So, of course, smash that like button, subscribe, all that good stuff. Before we get started, head over to preserve gold dot com slash Tim Pool. They're sponsoring the show tonight. They say financial experts are urging Americans to prepare now with inflation soaring, a border crisis affecting cities and small towns and warnings of a recession. My friends, we are living in insane, unpredictable times. That's an understatement to protect your retirement accounts and 401ks. You should strongly consider physical gold and silver right now. Preserve Gold is an exclusive offer for my viewers where you can get up to fifteen,000 in free gold and silver with a qualified purchase as well as a free guide. Text TIM to 50505 to learn more or visit preservegold.com slash timpool. PreserveGold has hundreds of five-star reviews and millions of dollars in trusted transactions with happy clients.

Personally, I do have some gold. I don't want to say too much, you know, security reasons and all that stuff. But, uh, considering this year has probably had more historically unprecedented moments, preserve gold.com slash Tim pool, but also head over to Tim cast.com. Click sign up or join us to become a member and support our work directly because we can't do without you as a member. You'll get access to the members only discord channel where you can hang out with like-minded individuals and watch the members only uncensored show coming up at 10 p.m. tonight. Not so family friendly, but it is fun and funny.

And U.S. members get to call in. So, again, smash that like button. Subscribe to this channel. Share the show right now with everyone you know. If you're listening on the audio podcast on Apple or wherever you get your podcasts, leave us a good review. We really do appreciate it. It does help. Joining us tonight to talk about this

and everything else is What If Alt Hists, Redyard Lynch. Thank you so much for having me. It's a real pleasure. So you're a big YouTuber. Do you want to explain who you are and what you do? As I like to joke, I am a 23-year-old college dropout

without credentials who bets against God. And to unpack that... That's a heck of an introduction. Thank you. To unpack that, I'm from an hour outside Philly. I'm 23 years old. I dropped out of school. And I've been doing this channel for 10 years. I started on my 13th birthday. And I started out making alternate history content, like what if the Nazis won the Civil War and what if the South won World War II? And then over time, we moved over into anthropology and geopolitics and philosophy and history and that stuff. And so trying to look at the patterns in history to predict the future, how societies work, all that stuff. The thing I'm most known for is my prediction that America will spiral into an election into a civil war or a revolution within the next election. And I know that I know that's

something you've been on for years. I'm sure it'll be of interest to you and your audience. We should we should have a civil war off and see, you know, who can say civil war the most. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. Yeah, you have a bunch of really great in-depth analysis. And I think, you know, for me going on the surface and saying, like, here's a news article and I'll give you my opinion. You've done like a deep dive in the historical precedent of what, you know, I think you had one really big video where you talked about listless young men. So we're going to get into that because we do have a story that just dropped about the predictions of what happens in less than three months. Yo, it's 21 days to the election. Oh, boy, I'm excited. Anyway, thanks for hanging out. We got Phil three months. Yo, it's 21 days to the election. Oh boy, I'm excited.

Anyway, thanks for hanging out. We got Phil hanging out. Hello, everybody. My name is Phil Labonte. I'm the lead singer of the heavy metal band All That Remains. I'm an anti-communist and a counter-revolutionary. Hello, Hannah Clare.

Hi, it's good to see you both. I'm glad you could join us tonight. I'm Hannah Clare Brimlow. Let's get started. Here's the first story from the Postmillennial. Joe Rogan rumored to be in talks to host Kamala Harris on podcast. In fact, it's not just Kamala Harris. Ford, I'm sorry, Forbes says Trump and Harris may appear on Rogan, on Joe Rogan's podcast, despite his harsh comments about both. Well, that just explains why he should host them.

You know, it's fascinating that this story, I think, warrants a lead because we have begged for this. It feels like 2020 was a black hole where the things that many of us were saying and asking for went unanswered and only now are starting to be answered. For instance, I had said and it wasn't just my opinion. It was it was the American conservative. I think it was Pat Buchanan saying Trump should appoint Tulsi Gabbard for national security or national national security advisor or some position. And I said, yes, because I'm a big fan. We also have been saying endlessly, everybody, that Joe Rogan should be hosting some kind of political debate because we trust him and we know he's going to give us straightforward responses and answers to try and be fair in this breakdown. Well, now, Tulsi Gabbard is joining the Trump transition team and will be a part of his administration. And the rumors are that Joe Rogan

will be hosting Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. The question I have is, while the media keeps making these claims, Joe ain't said nothing. So I can only imagine Joe's like sitting back, you know, he's working out, smoking a cigar, playing pool or something. And then someone hits him up, be like, hey, Joe, are you doing this? He's like, bro, I have no idea. What are these crazy saying? I don't even know. I can I can totally hear it.

Yeah, I feel like he's going to his book or being like, what did you promise these people? I mean, it is interesting that theoretically this could just be social pressure because there was a backlash when he said, you know, I wouldn't I'm not going to have Donald Trump on. I think he made a statement basically saying he didn't want to delve into it. And there were a lot of Trump people who had a very strong reaction to it. I mean, good. I don't think this is going to happen for two reasons. The first is that Joe, as Tim said, never endorsed this. It's one of those things where this is just the public doing what the public does

and making up jabberings that they want to hear. Uh, the public just says crap and 90% of it never happens. Um, and secondly, Kamala's team would never put her on a podcast, Joe Rogan, because she lacks the verbal ability to look good. Uh, Kamala, I don't think she's a completely stupid person. Her verbal ability is not very good, though. And so in a podcast like Joe Rogan, which is not – even if Joe tried to be very friendly to her, his framing is not friendly enough to her. And it would just make her look very, very bad. And her team knows that, and they're very risk-averse in their strategy.

Yeah, it is fascinating. But I think – I love the way you you explained it the jabberings of the public they just say things that never happen that is that is true isn't it the people go on tv i mean even even me i'll be on here and i'll be like you know here's what i think and then how much of this stuff actually happens how exciting is real life but come on we got to be hopeful right i mean you're right i mean kamala harris's team would be insane to put her on joe rogan i am hoping they put her on right rogan yeah her polls will drop 10 points overnight if she goes on rogan's show but here's the issue donald trump said on the nalc boys podcast that

i i don't know if he said definitively he is doing it he says i think we are doing it didn't he yeah he said and i wonder if his team has just been talking with Joe saying like, hey, come on, like we're going to do this. Because I think Joe mentioned at one point he'd be really interested to have that conversation. He did intimate a possibility or an interest. Kamala Harris would have no choice but to go on his show. If Trump goes on Rogan, which is Everest of public. I mean, look, man, I said it before. Joe Joe often says he's just some dumb guy, but he's a really, really great interviewer and he's inquisitive.

So he's not going to sit there and let you speak BS. And that's why people trust him. And that's what people have been saying. We want a Joe Rogan moderated debate. Trump's got no problem doing this. Joe can sit there and say to Trump, what about this, that and otherwise? And Trump is going to bounce, deflect and answer the questions with no problem. But Kamala can't do that. How can she? I don't see a path forward if Trump and this is what Rogan said last time. He doesn't want to help Trump. If Trump goes on Rogan, Kamala,

it's it's it's it's over. Yeah, I think I think that I mean, I do think that Kamala Harris can't handle two or three hours with Joe Rogan talking. She's really bad when she has to test Adelaide when she's off teleprompter. Like, significantly bad. I don't see her wanting to sit down. It does make sense if she were competent because that would be the forum to attract male voters, which is where she's she's lagging significantly. But the risk of putting her in front of Joe Rogan is far too high. I mean, the same this is the same Joe Rogan that Michael Malice came to was sitting across and said that if you mock her, it's ableist because she's a retard. I sit in that chair. I go, I go.

I was just going to say, I think that the challenge is the personality mesh, right? And what the person is comfortable doing. And we know that Trump is just generally a more comfortable speaker. He's comfortable speaking in small groups, one-on-one at rallies. And she doesn't seem to have that. I don't know how many of you, I mean, you probably all watched the Elon Musk appearance on Joe Rogan all those years ago. But, you know, Elon Musk is sort of an unusual personality, right? Like, he's a little quieter and things like that. And I remember watching that interview, and it really was a little bit on Rogan to draw him out. But

that was with someone who felt as though he wanted to be there. And a joint. Right. That was kind of funny. But like, ultimately have this like conversation about these bigger issues. And I think Donald Trump is fine with that. He probably doesn't need any coaxing. Even if Joe Rogan wasn't aggressive towards Kamala Harris in any way, I think she would always be in politician mode and she would never shift into the authentic conversation that Joe Rogan's audience, you know, look for when they're listening to his podcast. So, you know, Phil mentioned Kamala needing those male voters. So I have to do it. I went on Piers Morgan today and I see a lot of people are chatting about it. And there was this lady on the show.

I don't know who she is. And she made this comment to me. I mean, she was really obsessed with me. It's kind of nuts. You should watch it. It was really fun. Shout out to Piers Morgan. And she made a comment about how we as men are not allowed to define what masculinity is because we criticized the men for

for Harris or whatever ad that was real cringe. And I'm just like, I think it was. Was it Vinnie from PBD who was just like, this is why I think it was him. He said, this is why men aren't voting Democrat, because it's these angry women who call men racist misogynists who aren't allowed to define masculinity. Yeah, I got to tell you, I was you see, I don't know if you guys saw the Bill Maher clip with Buck Sexton. And it's it's amazing that I'm just I am clapping and cheering, saying thank you for these leftist pundits. This woman's on the show on Bill on Bill Maher's show. And Buck Sexton makes the point that there are men who feel aggrieved. And her response is, well, now you get to she said something like now you get to experience the inequities that women

have felt. And he's like he's like, this is not this is going to cost you voters. Men are saying I'm suffering. And your response is, oh, well, now you get it. And then her response to him was, if we are going to have progress, men, particularly white men, are going to feel left behind. And that is what progress means. And I was like, holy crap. Kamala Harris is going to lose every single dude because they keep doing these interviews. They keep doubling down on these talking points. sit in their discomfort. These are things that are said in the literature by people like Robin DiAngelo and stuff. White men

must sit in their discomfort and they're not to be consoled. The point is to make them feel bad. The point is to have them be unhappy. And people are going to reject that. Any right-thinking person that is not motivated by malice is going to say that is bad and wrong.

You know what's funny is when this woman was telling me that men can't define – it's like you aren't allowed to define what masculinity is. And I was like – you know, that ad was clearly female-coded. It was written by women for men, and most men are going to look at that and be like, this doesn't in any way relate to my experiences. And you know what I think is really important when defining masculinity? Men know it. Not every single man, but men know it. That's why there are leaders. That's why there's hierarchy.

That's why there are men who follow other men. There was this really great 4chan post. It's inspiring. It is. And it was this fat dude. And he was saying that he went to a gym and he was really self-conscious. He was overweight, but he wanted to make a difference. And he sees this super tall, like ripped gym bro walk by and immediately start giving him pointers and say, here's how you do the weights. Like without question, here's how you do the lifts. Here's how you do the weights. I want to see this many. You can you do the lifts here's how you do the weights i want to see this many you can get it bro hey man i'll see you tomorrow it's leg day and then he was like is this what it feels to have a king i will serve you my like this dude was

trying to better himself and this guy came and said i'm gonna help you be better and that's what it felt like guys recognize it you you you look up to there there's somebody doing something that you see as honorable that you want to be that and when they make this ad where it's like i'm not scared of women it's like yeah guys don't relate to that nope they want to make an ad i'll tell you this i don't know that you can make an ad that would make kamala harris look good in the eyes of men i just really don't but they'd be better off making all here's what you do it's a here's how it starts there's a guy farming he's just a peasant farmer and then roman legion roll right up on horseback and they say you are needed to lead us war is coming he jumps on the horse and he goes he leads them to victory and they say you have

served admirably will you retain these powers and rule and he says no and then he goes back to his farm kamala harris 2024 that's a way more effective ad the story of cincinnatus instead of having a bunch of guys be like i ain't scared of no woman you know one of the things like i think that there are some inherent things about kamala harris that turns guys off like just the way that she calls her husband dougie like in public it doesn't seem respectful and that makes men say oh i don't like that. She can call him Dougie all she wants at home. Like they can have all the pet names they want. But in public, she should call him Doug and allow him to not seem emasculated. Because that's what Dougie sounds like.

And I guarantee there are people watching this that are like, oh, you're crazy, blah, blah, blah. But men are absolutely turned off by that kind of stuff in public you can have pet names in in private you can like it's perfectly fine but there are certain ways that you want to that you want to be perceived that men want to be the certain ways men want to be perceived in public and they want to be respected by their significant other. And other people will pick up on things that sound condescending, and something like Dougie sounds condescending. Yes, she is the condescending high school principal who you know is not very good at her job.

Let's pull up this story from the New York Times. Black voters drift from Democrats' imperiling Harris's bid poll shows. Dude, this is the New York Times, OK? And so when the media comes out and says, you know, the corporate press, I understand the New York Times. I mean, like the Democrat media, MSNBC. No, it's not true. It's not true.

It's like, OK, well, I think there's something to that, right? Republicans and there have been a lot of pundits who said in 2016 Trump's going to win the black vote. He didn't. They said in 2020 he's going to win the black vote. He didn't. They said in 2020, he's going to win the black vote. He didn't. There's a lot of support right now, but we're going to wait till Election Day because I think it's fair to say that the the the record shows that we may see these signals in the

press, but they they didn't manifest. To be fair, over the past several cycles, we have seen a massive drift from Democrats of black voters. And what they're reporting now is this is the biggest shift away from Democrats since I think like 1992 or whatever. We have the biggest for the first time since or actually I think it's going way back is maybe like the first time in generations and decades. The Republican Party is now larger than the Democratic Party. There's a saying I saw this in The Wall Street Journal several years ago that if if the Democrats cannot win at least 80 percent of the black community,

they will lose. And based on the numbers right now, 2024, the Democrats have 78 percent. So theoretically, if those numbers hold into the election, the Democrats can't win by any stretch of the imagination. I don't know. But you think so. So I was on peers earlier and Wajahat Ali had made the point that, you know, he made a similar point. We keep hearing that the polls are shifting, but he said it's going to be 88-12 like we

saw last time around, even though and I agreed because as much as we are seeing a lot of young black men saying they're going to be voting for Donald Trump, the question is, are they just saying this or are these young people just less likely to vote? It's not a factor of being black. It's a factor of being young. Young people tend not to turn out. You get young people on X like Harry Sisson bragging up a big game about voting for Biden and then Kamala. But then young people still don't turn out. So I'm not entirely convinced, but I'm curious what you guys think. I think of my home state, Pennsylvania, as an example, and people often forget the right and the left are coalitions of a lot of other different subgroups inside of it. And so

Pennsylvania doesn't have that many genuinely like woke people they exist but the people in california or new york city who are genuinely really for uh for very progressive social issues we found from studies they're only between 10 to 15 percent of america's population uh and what happens is if the black vote tilts slightly conservative and i don't know if it's going to happen this election, but I've noticed a very seismic shift, especially for young black men in their culture towards the right. You can see it with 50 Cent. You can see it with all the red pill influencers like Myron Gaines, Andrew Tate, like Lil Pump's not black,

but there's this huge move of conservative rappers. And I have a weird interest in pop culture. This is one of the things people don't know about me. But I was watching this video of this guy who's a Korean. He makes Korean jewelry for rappers and then one of the Island Boys. And they were debating together and they were both Republicans. And I thought this would not happen 10 years ago. And so the point I'm trying to summarize here is that the left actually doesn't give that much to most black men.

They give it to the black ruling class, and I can explain that point further. And then the black ruling class is able to co-opt the entire population. But if you got even a relative portion of black young men, you would tilt every single state in the Rust Belt hard red because you look at Pennsylvania, you look at Ohio, you look at Michigan. These are states where the white unions are already going already went from blue to red. If you got a certain part of the black population, every single state in the Rust Belt would be as red as Texas or South Carolina. I think it's true. One of the things that gets pointed out a lot this election cycle is that Trump is down among white voters than he was in 2016 and 2020.

And so there is obviously a component to this election in particular where courting racial groups is going to be part of it. True of most elections. Trump just has, and this is the Republicans in general right now, has the opportunity to continue to glean among, let's say, black men or the black community at large, among Hispanic voters. And we're seeing these numbers play out as well as white voters and really secure a victory. This is not true of the DNC and it's not true of Kamala Harris, in part because of the way they treat different racial groups. I think they're ultimately a very racially motivated party, but not in a way that makes voters feel empowered. And I think that

they would never court the white vote the same way that Republicans are more comfortable doing. And so they are dependent on smaller segments of the population, but they don't treat them with respect. And that's, I think, what you're seeing with the fallout of black voters. They, especially the difference between the way black men vote and black women vote, they are motivated by different things. And ultimately Kamala Harris maybe can appeal to black women, but she is not able to appeal to black men.

And so we're getting this large scale scolding, which I don't think will work either, but they have no ability to pivot. And to your point, I think some of that has to do with who's staffed. I think that you're right. A lot of people who are registered Democrats aren't necessarily progressive, but they are sympathetic to progressive causes because of the social acceptance factor.

But I think people who staff these campaigns and who are in the White House are much more likely to be radically progressive in their ideology. So they can't relate to moderate middle American voters. To what degree do you guys think the attempts to attract the ham-fisted attempts to attract male voters actually turns men off? Because I know. But how bad? Do you think that it's do you think that it's just a little bit or do you know, because we're we're right leaning people mostly around here. Do you think that it's just the right leaning people that are kind are kind of like oh we can see how clearly bad that is or do you think that normal people

that are like politically unaffiliated or do you think they're like bro this actually turns me off the rate i was saying that there's a lot of young men particularly black men who are saying they're voting for trump simply because it is cringe to say you're voting for kamala harris yes it's not even about whether you actually want to vote for Donald Trump or not. It's that if you walk up to your group of guy friends and you're like 20 something and you go, you know, I just voted for Kamala. They're going to bust out laughing. Being like, what?

That's just like the weirdest thing to say. Saying Trump is basically like saying, like, I'm on the outside. I'm punk rock, basically. It's kind of funny because they don't accept that it is. But when all the major corporations and everyone lines up against them, you're like, yeah, I'm the bad guy. I'm the rebel. And so you want to vote for Trump. They say he's a threat to democracy, J6 and all that stuff.

So when they come out with these ads and they got these guys and he's like, I eat carburetors for breakfast. He said carburetor, right? How many guys are fixing carburetors these days? Yo, honest question. What year was the last year cars had carburetor right like how many guys are fixing carburetors these days yo honest question what what year was the last year cars had carburetors i i get it like farm equipment i think still does when i worked at o'hare they have tugs tugs have carburetors but do guys talk about fixing carburetors no it's like someone someone looked up someone Google searched how to be manly from like the 1930s or from the 50s. And they were like, let's just roll with that.

Yeah. An important thing to keep in mind. And we had a recent there was a study that said that the average Republican has three times as accurate a psychological assessment as the average Democrat than vice versa. Pardon me? And so in this study, when they asked Republicans and Democrats to predict the positions the other party had, the right had an assessment of the left's predictions three times as accurate as vice versa. Yes.

And you can discount a single study, but we found this consistently where, and this is dozens of studies, the right is able to understand how the left thinks and not vice versa. And the way I imagine it with the left psychology, and I've made a bunch of videos about the psychology and anthropology behind the right and the left, is you should see the psychology of the people involved as closed emotional circuits where their social networks reward them for being completely emotional and hysterical. And if you're not openly hysterical at minor things, you're a bad person. So there are social networks that make them exceedingly emotional, but they also have these closed logical loops where they're right by definition.

So there's no actual interfacing with the world. And so when people talk about the elites being very crafty and having these secret cabals and these transcontinental plans, I think that's true to a certain degree. But also these are fundamentally not intelligent people. And this is something I've known for years. And it's something that I think we've seen very recently with the stuff where it's just completely obvious. These people have no comprehension of how other people think. And it's, they said back in the day or back in the days and thousands of years ago,

a dynasty in decline is ruled by harem girls, eunuchs and bureaucrats. We are at the harem girl, eunuch and bureaucrat phase. Harem girls is a good podcast name. I'm gonna write it down. And there's multiple Chinese dynasties where the emperor didn't know when the capital was being destroyed. Taiping Rebellion, the emperor was so drugged out of his mind out of opium.

He was a weird guy. This is an interesting story. I'm not going to get into it. Weird guy. He was living in his harem, drugged out in opium, and he had no comprehension that the war was happening. That happened a couple of times in Chinese history. Wow. Yeah, we're there, man. You've got politicians that are gargling nonsense. I think you make a great point. These people have no capability

to understand what other people are thinking. And we see that's very indicative of the left. There's a poll, a survey that I like to cite where it shows moderate voters in the United States get two thirds of their news from the left and one third from the right. Conservatives get two thirds from the right, one third from the left. And the liberal and left get 95 percent from the left. They are completely isolated and living in this bubble world. So, again, you know, I'm going to reference this because it's fresh in my mind. But when I was on peers earlier, one thing I didn't get to say to Wajahat Ali, he said, oh, Trump is ducking the press. He's ducking the media. He's not going on these shows. Kamala Harris is doing the press.

She's doing the adversarial media. She's going on the podcasts. And my response was right when she was out in the polls, she ducked the media and avoided the podcast. Donald Trump was down in the polls. So he did a bunch of press, even adversarial. He went on various corporate press outlets, much to the chagrin of many of supporters, saying, you know, they're going to lie about you. He's gone on the NELC Boys. He's gone on Our Show. He's gone on Favorable Media as well.

And now that he's up in the polls and dominating, he's avoiding the press. Much like Kamala Harris didn't want to do a debate at first. Then she did. The polls start shifting, and now it's inverting. Both parties have taken a similar strategy. It is not unique to one side. Now, I can say that because I know that this audience here watching the show is well aware of what Trump has done and what Kamala is now doing with the strategy there is. But Wajahat, presumably like many of these these liberal leftists, consume only MSNBC, CNN,

and they're completely unaware of the world around them. They live in a bubble. I mean, I think that's something that it would be nice if you could convince your liberal friends of, but I feel like the left has a, and when I say liberal, I mean more like progressives than liberals, but the left has an emotional reaction about their politics far more than people on the right or even in the center um they believe that the the right is evil which is why you get people saying oh trump is hitler and now today i've seen people talking about, you know, J.D. If Trump dies or if you vote for Trump, you might end up with J.D. Vance. And the implication is J.D. Vance is worse than Trump.

But I thought Donald Trump was already super Hitler. So figure it out. With J.D. Vance, we're up to like, it's like ultra. Yeah. You know, Giga Hitler. And at some point, people that are not actually leftists have to start addressing the fact that like, wait a minute.

They're going to start quantifying units of Hitler. So they're like, well, Trump is mega Hitler, which means that J.D. Vance is going to be Giga. And then whoever J.D. Vance picks for his VP, maybe Vivek in the future will be Terra Hitler. And then what comes after terabytes? Mega Hitler. So it's mega Hitler than mega Hitler.

Mega Hitler is the highest level. Yeah. There will be no highest because there's always someone next who will be worse. It scales up. But that's the point. You can only keep the intensity

at a 10 for so long before people start to say, okay, we can't actually respect these opinions because they're just histrionic. Really. And one of the great innovations that the DNC has not embraced is bringing on a new creative campaign strategist, because right now all of them run the same campaign. And this is true in pretty much every state at every level, which is Republicans

are so evil that if you let them anywhere near legislation, they will destroy your lives. And this is true of the state level Republicans, of any Republican governors, any Democratic strategist is running the same campaign right now, which is why since Trump is a known quantity, as soon as they announced J.D. Vance was was the candidate, they were suddenly like, oh, someone new to fearmonger about. But I've said it before. I just think that the American public is fear exhausted and especially in the wake of things like, you know, serious hurricanes that leave people devastated.

This appeal to fear doesn't work. And so they're not going to get the same compliance they're used to. Let's jump to this from Polymarket. Ladies and gentlemen, it's a good day to be Trump. He is currently up 15.7 in the Polymarket election forecast. My friends, I am flabbergasted at this result. This is this is insane. I mean, when we started the show, I think it was it was way lower than this. Now we're getting the rounding up 16, 16 point lead for Donald Trump. They're saying he's going to take Pennsylvania.

He's up 12 points. Again, this is polymarket. This is betting. This is people saying, I'm going to put my money where my mouth is. When we jump to the aggregate betting odds from Real Clear Politics, he's up 13.1 across all betting markets. I think money talks and BS walks. I think after Kamala Harris has done this string of press trying to improve her numbers because she was sinking, all it did was make it substantially

worse. If she goes on Joe Rogan, it's the apocalypse. I don't see how she turns things around. She went on with Charlamagne, the God, and I don't think that's going to do anything for her. She's trying. Don't get me wrong. But even right now, the top battleground states take a look at this. Donald Trump is up zero point seven points across all battlegrounds. If you take a look at the at the national where Harris is up one point three at this time in 2020, Joe Biden was up nine point four. Hillary Clinton was up six point seven and she's still lost. It is looking very, very much like Donald Trump is going to win. That being said, shadow campaign. So y'all better get out and vote because you look at this.

You think Trump's going to win. If you say Trump's going to win, he's going to lose. So I'm gonna tell you right now that 15 point lead, 16 point lead that he's got makes it neck and neck. The polls could be wrong, but you know know there's going to be shenanigans. You've got to swamp the vote. That's what Trump's been saying. Everyone's got to go vote. You got to bring your friends and family. Tell them, hey, you all got to go vote. You got to register to vote. Make sure because a deadline is coming up for a lot of places. Many places already passed.

You got to go vote. And then Trump's going to win if everybody goes vote. But what do you think? Do you think these betting markets are good or what? Or are as someone super chatted, are the betting markets just the jabberings of the public that won't come true? I publicly said yesterday that I think Trump's going to win. I said that in my YouTube community notes. I stand by that. And I say these things so that you know I'm not a charlatan, because only by being in a place where you can publicly lose do you know if you're just making stuff up. I think Trump's going to win. I mean, I thought he would win for the last six months because just all of the current

seems to flow in his favor. Almost every new piece of news is something that makes Trump look better. And almost every new piece of news is something that makes Kamala look worse. And I mean, just if you look at actions, the left is clearly desperate and the right is clearly optimistic. I think Trump's going to win. I think that like these markets are are important to look at because it's good to have the data. But I right now, I'm actually very skeptical of all polling. And again, in part, it's because part of the country just got knocked out by this hurricane.

I mean, how are you polling people in North Carolina in the red counties where they don't have internet right now? I think that we've known for a little while, I think it was something one of the major new polls put out, maybe it was Time Sienna, that there are like 4% of voters that respond to polls right now say they're undecided. And we know of those Sienna, that there are like 4% of voters that respond to polls right now say they're undecided. And we know of those, actually, it's more like 2% are truly, truly undecided.

The other two probably have an intention one way or the other. I think one of the things that Kamala is never going to be able to overcome, and definitely not now, this late in the game with so many things, to your point, working in Trump's favor, is that she is up against the personality of a future American folk hero. Even if you don't like Trump, he has a very distinct, distinct personality. He's developed a very unique political movement. And they can't just sort of drop Democrats into the same tired campaign and produce someone who becomes someone people are motivated to turn out for.

I mean, even if they put her on every cooking show in America and she made her collard greens, you know, it's not enough time to make her endearing. And if she was endearing, they would have done it by now. So they have this sort of paper candidate with a bad platform that, you know, as she releases specifics, and I don't know if we're going to talk about the marijuana conversation today, but it makes people more irritated with her. Whereas Trump gives specific, the media gets mad, but the American people listen. And to me, I mean, you'll see this reflected in the opinion polls or in betting, betting market odds where, where Trump is just more likable and there's no way she could overcome that. The criticism right now is that Kamala's pitch to black men is free money and free drugs.

I mean, it's that is essentially the attempt. But I it's just so disheartening that politicians on the left are blatantly trying to purchase votes like we'll give you free loans we will give you money it's it's as close to a direct an offer of a direct cash payment as you can possibly get joe biden made the offer of we're going to forgive student loans and they did some i know that they didn't do it really though i mean they failed on that promise that was the thing about this free money promise they'll say oh yeah we'll give you money and people are like i don't know maybe but they act without the authority without the agreement thankfully the supreme court has you know shut them down but they're i i don't know the details

but i i was under the impression that they did have a they did do some kind of programs or something like that where some were but even still the point is our government is not designed to be a service provider it's not supposed to be giving people money it's not supposed to be purchasing votes the the point of government is to protect private property rights to give you courts for redress of grievances and to protect the the border and it's failed at protecting the border it's questionable whether or not the courts are reliable anymore and it definitely doesn't protect private property when it's expropriating property so that way you can redistribute it so the the entire government has failed on every level the federal government has failed on every level and it's and the fact that the american people allow it to

continue to do this and don't vote for significant change kamala's out here saying we're ready for change they were they were i just heard her talking about one of her stump speeches talking about we're ready for a change we're ready for a change it's like you're coming from joe biden's administration there is no change if you get into office. Right. And it's just so ridiculous that the that there are there is a large enough portion of the American people that are believing this, that it's frustrating that that is the case, I suppose, is where I'm leading. It's frustrating that that there are people that think this is an acceptable state of affairs. I wonder

how many people do feel like it's an acceptable state of affairs. I wonder how many people do feel like it's an acceptable state of affairs. I think that there are a portion of 42 percent. The thing is, there are a portion of American voters. And this is true for both parties. I'm not trying to just be anti left here, but who will vote with in compliance with the party no matter what. So she could say anything. But if she is endorsed by the Democrats, they're going to vote for her.

So if we say that's like what I would say, that's close to 30 percent of that that percentage. But maybe it's 20. The other ones are either people who have decided that she is good or have some other reason for not wanting to vote for Trump. I mean, there is this this anti-Trump sentiment that exists, although I really think that he is a known quantity. He is not not this like random mystery they can run. You know, Kamala Harris just could not put on a good campaign if she wanted to, because there is no connection among her staff and her advisers to the rest of America. They don't know how to pitch things. And that's why you are seeing.

And again, you know, obviously, we have to acknowledge that her campaign is like, what, three months old. She she started July 21st. But but that's why you're seeing a huge late in the game pivot that there she's suddenly doing media. Suddenly she wants to have Republicans be part of her cabinet. Suddenly she wants to be bipartisan. Actually, after her history as a prosecutor, she's she doesn't think you should be arrested for for marijuana possession. Actually, she is open to all kinds of things. And she likes fracking. I mean, she wasn't even the same person that she was in July when she announced this candidacy, let alone who she was when she ran on her own in 2020. And I think that there is a certain portion of Americans that know that.

And even though they may ultimately cast a Democratic ticket, it's not because they love Kamala. It's because they feel loyal to the party. I'm going to throw out a strange combination, Aristotle and game theory. So I can explain why both of those vote for those demographics. And it's inside their self-interest if you look at those two things. In pre-modern political philosophy, they said that society is an ecosystem of basically different kinds of animals that have different interests. So there's the lion on top, there's the bear, whatever. It's symbolic. They didn't actually think France is divided between various animals. And I think it's important because we view the world as homogenous and the reality is there's a lot of different subgroups.

And so for game theory studies, as an example, consistently, you can move 60% of the population by changing the consensus. So in multiple game theory studies, if you can change what the consensus people believe, you'll jump from 20% support to 80% support. Furthermore, there's a 20% demographic that always try to do good and are selfless. And there's a 20% that are always parasitic no matter what in in game theory studies so as a society it's duty is to basically bully the parasitic 20 and then get the 60 to be part of a consensus for the 20 who are selfless that's part

of it second thing is that uh philobon philobonte really got onto this point well of it's the abdication of responsibility for Kamala's side of things. So their entire strategy is divesting of the national interest for private interest. And this is something Aristotle talked about, where all of Aristotle's political philosophy was based off how do you establish the best incentives for people to not predate from the system. And so what you're looking at here with Kamala's voters is you as an individual will get stuff at the expense of society. And this is largely people who don't conceptualize society at all. They're not thinking to themselves if we do this everything's

going to fall apart because that's not in their mental framework um and this is why the right and the left have different concepts of money where the right sees money as something that's actively generated so if you lower taxes more money is going to be generated the left doesn't mentally process that and so they just see the money as a pie to divide. So there's a lot of money to the divide and they have no concept. The left has no concept of things as living or as group phenomena. And so they'll just say, oh, they also can't just make a distinction between individual and group. So for example, if you let one trans person into a woman's bathroom, there would be no bad consequences. And they choose not to differentiate between that. And this is a social standard that will happen for decades because

it's a very different matter between, let's say, when you give money to one friend in distress to your entire society gives all your money to people in distress. Right. There's a funny meme where it says, one way to know if you're dealing with someone of low intelligence is to say something that is true, such as on average, Asians are shorter than Europeans. And if they respond with something like not all Asians, you know you're dealing with a person who can't think in abstract. Yes, that's knack salt. I'm not going to get into this, but you have theories at tiers of consciousness, and they're basically – Naxalt or not all X are like that. It's a weird mental tier the left exists in where you're so intelligent you argue yourself back into stupidity. Because if you're a tribal people in the Amazon, you just think you leave meat out for the ancestor gods, and the ancestor gods respect you.

That's a very simplistic worldview, but it works for you. Actually, it's not simplistic. There's lots of ancestor worldview, but it works for you. Actually, it's not simplistic. There's lots of ancestor gods, but we're not going to get into that. And so for the left, they're taking from all these advanced authors like Schopenhauer and Hegel, people who are very intelligent Marx, and then they drive it into the stupidest possible conclusion because they think if I can make an argument, that makes it the correct argument and all of their logic is based upon everyone being the same, everyone being equal, and then there are no consequences for actions. Michael Malice said that he defines the new right

simply by asking one question. Do you believe that some people are better than others? Yeah. I mean, easy answer, right? I don't, I don't like Malice's distinction of the right, because I think he was looking at it in the 2010s. And I think the ecosystem, I need to make a video about this. I was thinking when I was in the hotel here, I need to make a video on the factions of the new right, because I think those factions are going to end up dominating national and national politics and history. Random schizos on Twitter now will end up becoming the dominant ideology in 20 to 30 years. Like lefty weirdos on X, you're saying?

So the problem now is that there's no ideology that makes sense of the world today, which is why we're a civilization that's killing itself. And it should be. Another great question. Do you think... Real quick, do you mean that there's no dominant ideology? So the dominant ideology is leftism, but they're in absence of any ideology. They don't believe in anything. They just believe in stopping racism. They believe in stopping sexism. But it's not even that they are a swarm of bees with no direction. Yes. So it's actually I would describe the left as have you ever seen this? The ant circle of with no direction. Yes. So it's actually, I would describe the left as, have you ever seen the ant circle of death?

Yeah, yeah. When ants follow a pheromone trail from other ants that lead into a circle, it will spin in a circle until they die. That is the left today. Yes. Because in their system, everyone's equal, so no one can rise to leadership and give them direction. And so they end up following each other with no goal and no pursuit. And so when you look at what the left pursues, it seemingly makes no sense. They criticize the military industrial complex, but support the war in Ukraine.

Yes. These things are paradoxical. But Hassan himself on his show in within the span of three minutes did exactly that. Yes. If you want to look at thinkers like there's a lot of thinkers on the right. And the issue with the right is that there's too little unity. I spent my life at this point is a lot of conservative politics. And I talk to people who are who are who are really on the Christian side of things, who are more Nietzscheans, who are libertarians, foreign countries who have different nationalists. You have people who are boomer cons, Reagan cons,

people who are basically Nazis, people who, I don't know, worship Odin. So you have like 20 factions on the right. There's no unifying ideology and they can only agree with what they dislike under the left. Nature abhors a vacuum. And so if you have a vacuum in both the right and the left,

it means it's gonna be filled. And there are two ecosystems I find, because I've lived a strange life and I've looked into a lot of different industries, and most industries in America are high school, where it's done based off buddies, based off who you went to school with, who seems cool. And that's why nothing works. Nothing works because all of our leadership is done like high school. The two non-high school industries I see are parts of tech and parts of the right. And so those are the two factions I would look at to think this is where the next wave of creativity is going to come from. I agree. I've been having some conversations with some other business leaders and, you know, I'll keep it semi-private, but there's a management crisis. I i've been experiencing this and having spoken with some other managers other companies from small to

medium they keep saying the same thing we hear about gen z and millennials quiet quitting they don't want to work and so people are coasting they're doing the bare minimum and it's resulting in social disorder and collapse to bring it to the point of the right, I do think there's one thing that all the right factions tend to agree on. It's meritocracy in some form or another. But a meritocracy is not a unifying ideology with a leadership. So you might agree the best person for the job should have it. And then what happens? Every single person on the right says, hey, don't look at me. I don't want to be in charge. Yeah, no, no joke there. There is this issue with

the Republican Party where we wonder why it is they won't do anything. Yeah. It's fascinating how many of us are doing anything. I mean, granted, I host a show, but people say, Tim, will you run for office? And I'm like, no way I won't do it. Yes. We are power averse. The Republican Party is power averse and the Democrats are power craven with no direction. This is a recipe for an implosion. something that they find interesting or they find themselves good at or whatever, whereas people on the left, they can organize and they're looking for a way to access power so they can essentially, I feel like it should make the world align with the way that they emotionally feel that it should be. One of the facts that I never see people discuss on this topic, but I think it's fundamentally, this might be one of the most important facts I wish I could shove into the discourse,

is that the left has controlled institutions at least since World War I or World War II. And so conservatives will often be like, oh, the reason we can't have this degree of activism and this degree of social control is because we don't believe in ourselves hard enough because we don't take enough risks. And it's no.

A hundred years ago, leftists took over almost every single institution in the country, and they were very covert and they were very intelligent with manipulating the population until Trump. People didn't even know the left was in charge for a lot of that period. But it's why whenever news about Stalin or Mao got out, it was suppressed because our elites were sympathetic. The New York Times and the Hollywood. Exactly. That was way before World War II.

Yeah. I said World War I. Oh, sorry. World War I slash World War II. It's a gradual process. And so the left has had power. And the thing that they really hate about Trump is that he called their bluff because they were able to call a bluff. And this is what they mean by democracy. Democracy is the series of managerial institutions which they use to enact their will through unelected officials. And so Trump called their bluff on democracy and they hate him so much because Trump is forcing them to come to terms with that they were the elite because they had established this very advanced psychological manipulation of the population.

And this sounds schizo, but I can explain it. It's all very easy to understand if you'd like. That goes back decades. And the right has been so browbeaten by this where it's been generations of conservatives who, if they speak out on basic stuff, their entire lives could be ruined, who they can't operate through institutions. And so the left has become unspeakably arrogant while the right has become browbeaten. And it's, you know, uh, I think the unfortunate reality is, um, a degree of cowardice. I know people will be offended by that, but let me say a couple, two things on this. Someone asked me when I was in Newtown, they said, I work in an industry and it's very woke and i don't know what to do should i speak out and i said here's the hard

reality if you are the first to speak out you are in the trenches with a bunch of people and they're all terrified to look to see what's going on above and if you stick your head out because someone's got to do it it's you're going to get hurt right the problem is if nobody does then you're going to get hurt, right? The problem is if nobody does then you're all trapped forever. The pioneers who came to North America a quarter of them died on the way here. Then they landed on barren shores knowing they had limited supplies in their ship and they

arrived in fall. That's the craziest thing to me. They were like, well we have to. That's when they were able to set sail. They land on a barren shore and they're like, okay now most of us are going to starve to death. What a thought to be in Europe and say, you know what? It's time to take a risk. We're probably going to die. Let's do it anyway. And now there are people who are like, I could lose my job. And so I know it's tough because a lot of people are thinking, I can't risk losing my job. And if everyone thinks that you are all lemmings trapped

in a box until someone steps up. And I know a lot of people, they like to throw shade my way and say, easy for you to say, Tim, you're on this big show. You got a company. I worked for Vice and Disney and I spoke up and I lost those connections and I lost those contracts. And I started from scratch to start over. I stuck my head out and had to start rebuilding and got to this point. I don't think it's going to be the same for everybody. Some people might have it harder. But so long as everybody on the right just simply says, I'm going to stay hidden and not say anything, then the left will continue to dominate everything. The left dominated the 20th century because pre-internet, every single thing was a bureaucracy.

The media was a bureaucracy. The government, the military, corporate America, religion. And the left is the religion of the bureaucracy because in the leftist worldview, the bureaucracy is God, which can do anything. And so we only realized how much power the left had once the internet showed up because the internet gave us a degree of separation. And the reason the right is starting to build up its own culture is that we've moved away from the... Because in 1985, probably 100 people controlled almost all of the information flow in the West. Academia, the media, a variety of things. We shattered that glass. And as of now, we could use AI and the internet to completely automate out the managerial

class. And Balaji, I think, did a great – Balaji has done a great job thinking about this, of going through – he says the 19th century, God was the social fabric of society. 20th century, it was the state. 21st century, it's the network. And I think the network is – and the network is to our era what the bureaucracy was to the 20th century. And so you're seeing the new right emerge as this phenomena online due to that. Let's jump to the story where this from just security, the war game documentary and simulating a worse January 6.

Just say it. Just security. Civil war. That's what they're entertaining. The scenario is simply simply terrifying and sadly all too plausible, if not highly likely. It's January 6, 2025, a date now less than three months away. A major party presidential candidate has responded to his opponent's victory with false allegations of widespread election fraud. The losing candidate supporters joined by militias and some members of the National Guard and active duty U.S. military are moved to violence by disinformation. An American general rises against the commander in chief and rallies other troops to join. The attackers breach the U.S. Capitol and interrupt the counting electoral votes. They seize the Arizona state Capitol and take half its state senators hostage, amass threatening crowds in other state capitals and take over a major military base. A high-level simulation of

White House management of the scenario is what producer Jesse Moss and co-director Tony Gerber chronicle in their documentary film War Game, now streaming and in theaters. Overall, War Game is oppressive, but the film also has confusing elements and leaves key questions unanswered. They're certainly entertaining this. This is clearly written from the perspective of the managerial, bureaucratic, uniparty state, whatever you want to call it. But I'm curious, Rudyard, if you see anything plausible in this assessment of what's going to happen on January 6th, 2025. Every single thing the left says is projection. And that's a principle where I can explain why I came to it. It's something James Lindsay says as well. So you're saying it's, I don't want to say you're saying, but is the implication that it is more

likely that the left rejects Trump's victory and begins to make these moves to seize territory? I think my personal guess is I don't think we will get out of this election without blood because neither side can afford to have the other side to lose. And so I think both sides will dispute the election no matter what. And I think if the right wins, the left will dispute it. And what they're trying to say here is partly signaling to their own followers. And it's also to just lark the idea in their head. Yeah, I think they would not be opposed to to that sort of thing if trump won well i'll give you example it was um oh man what was the what was what was the name of that uh alaskan senator

he died and then they made a foundation after him do you remember what i'm talking about can you look at it no was it alaskan center maybe it wasn't it was um he was a congressman too there was there was a politician some young guy started running his account. And then they turned it into some foundation or whatever. I can't remember the name of it. Recently? No, no, no, no. I'll look it up in a second.

The chat knows for sure. But they tweeted after January 6th that January 6th was justified, but the wrong side did it. And these were progressives. Yeah. Progressive Democrats. There were multiple people, multiple organizations or whatever i think it was the grable grable institute yeah i was gonna bring that up yeah they said that that they endorsed the action if it wasn't for the right doing yeah the gravel gravel that's it mike gravel was a senator yeah he let some young guys

take over his account they were super lefty and then they they ended up posting after januaryth that it was the right, they believe it was the right tactic with the wrong people. Yeah. Yes. You guys should source check me on this, but there was a leftist think tank, which basically made war room projections of the left launching a coup if the right one. Yeah. And it's, I mean, what I say is that God's given us enough warning shots at this point. Any, if this crisis hits and you're not prepared for it, you've been warned. So you were saying, I don't know if you said this on the show before the show, that whenever a great dynasty is about to fall, there's a storm. Yeah. Explain that.

So these cycles of history I pull from, they've existed for as long as we have records. And Chinese authors have been writing about them for thousands of years. Herodotus, Livy, Machiavelli, the Bible alludes to them. The things I'm talking about, these are things we've always known about. And in Chinese political philosophy, going back to 1000 BC, they talk about the mandate of heaven. And they say that when a dynasty falls the earth shows its displeasure where there's famine there's increase in prices there's rebet there's peasant rebellions there's foreign wars and then there's great storms as nature throws horrifying cataclysms like tornadoes or hurricanes at in floods and droughts at the earth to show its displeasure. And these things are correlations where if your dynasty, if your society is falling apart, you're going to have all those sorts of things

because all these things are correlated together, whether external crises or local political crises or famines or that stuff. So these hurricanes that just slammed into the southeast, you're saying God is angry with the current dynasty of the United States and it's about to fall? I did not say that. But is there any kind of like, you know, I don't know, supernatural

explanation in these philosophical beliefs of a storm? So a major difference between how the ancient saw the world and the recent world that no one looks at is what charles taylor called the buffered personality and so people in the ancient world thought that our minds are basically living ecosystems and so their purpose for religion was to fill your mind with good bacteria to fight against negative stuff and so in the middle Ages, they called the church basically knights against demonic warfare. So they saw the church as basically a military force to fight Europe off from demonic possession.

And so I'm going through all of that to explain that back then their concept of the world was that things were sympathetically mystically connected and so they they would say that the earth is connected to the sky which is connected to the weather which is connected to astrological signs and their idea would be that the collapse of our government would be part of this broader like uh this broader uh cosmic shift and so we would be downstream of the sorts of things that would cause these shifts in weather rather than vice versa it's kind of like and i don't know if that's true it wouldn't surprise me to a certain degree because the science over the last couple decades has consistently found the world's vastly more interconnected than we believe it's weird stuff like you can correlate.

There's too many bizarre correlations we found in science with like a certain kind of genetics is with a certain kind of environment or string theory with particles jumping across the world. We know the world's connected in a myriad of ridiculous ways and that there's these, I mean, in the years 1348, in the year 1645, every major country in the world was fighting both a civil war and an external war at the same time. And so the world often, or Socrates, Lao Tzu, Buddha, and Confucius all lived at the exact same time. So there are these weird hollow similarities you find over history. An interesting book called by Victor Lieberman is how you can correlate political development in Southeast Asia in West Europe at the exact

same time. So there's a whole sub-industry of finding this stuff. And so the argument that if you dropped a philosopher from a thousand years ago, he would say that the reason you would have big storms, the collapse of a dynasty, this is part of God's plan is like there's these cosmic changes in the universe that you are part of this bigger correlation. I think so to a certain degree. But so I wanted to ask you with all the stuff that you've studied, you've made a couple of videos about listless men was a big one. Yeah. I think I'm in trouble for that one a little bit. But based on what you've studied you you said you don't think we get to this election without blood but that that could be a what a street fight maybe what

do you think is the highest probability maybe it's only seven percent because there's yeah yeah 50 different potentialities but what do you think is the is the highest has the highest highest likelihood of happening in in uh following the election I have a bet going with my good friend, Andrew Heaton, a thousand deaths by a thousand dollars for a thousand deaths by next April. All right. Really? Yeah. We have a bet going with each other that you believe there will be 1000 deaths by April.

Yes. That seems hard to believe. Outside the normal. When it rains, when it rains, it pours. You're saying politically motivated deaths. Oh, yeah. I think people will be killing each other in the streets. And is that just domestic?

Because, I mean, obviously there were huge assassinations, numbers of assassinations in Mexico. Are we counting international political deaths? So let me tell you what I'm thinking here. And keep in mind, I've been reading up on the French Revolution lately, where the last two books I've read were on the French Revolution. And people never think these historic crises are going to hit until they do. And it's one of those things when it rains, it pours. And you have really good sound insulation.

And so World War I, everyone, one of the things I like to say is the world is inherently incredibly unreasonable and expecting to be reasonable is in fact unreasonable. And you look over history, political tensions build up, build up, build up, war, and then a bunch of people die. And it's often not a little dribble. It's often a big shower, especially the more advanced your society is, the more likely it is to be a war and not political dribble. I think – I don't know the sheer scale of it. I think it'll be

pretty bad. And the four conflicts I've compared it to in the past are the French Revolution, the English Civil War, the American Civil War, and the fall of the Roman Republic. So that's the sort of event I'm talking on the scale. And I've drawn four connections between those. So I look for proxies between them. I had a conversation with Eric Prince, and I asked him, with all of his experience in these foreign countries that have been in conflict, crisis, or collapse, does he see a parallel here in the United States, something that we should be worried about? And his response was, well, I can tell you one thing. Every guy that he that he knows who's been in a country that has suffered some kind of

collapse, it happens overnight. Yeah. One day the lights are on. You're watching TV. You go to bed. You wake up. There's no electricity. There's no Internet.

Communications are severed. No one has any idea what's going on. And then conflict. Yes. Seemingly instantly. And I think people need to understand that there is a fine line between order and chaos. If you woke up one day and your TV couldn't turn on and your phone didn't work and you had no idea what was happening, without your phone, without the network, you can't use credit cards. You go to a cafe when the internet's down, sorry,'t take your credit cards do you have cash so you go to the grocery store and you're

like uh i need to get some food and they're like sorry you have cash it's like i need to go to atm sorry atm's down network's not working the chaos that will erupt in a matter of days but it would probably happen instantly because opportunists would take advantage yes leading uh a formation of neighborhood watches from local men getting together and being like, we've got to figure out what's going on because we have no idea. Now here's the crazy part. Let me ask you this one, Rudyard. Internet shuts down.

Communications are off. People walk out of their suburban sprawl homes, and they're looking around, and they see their neighbor Bill. He's like, hey, Bill, your internet's down. We have no idea what's going on. TV's not working. I can't get a signal. Do you have any idea what's going on. TV's not working. I can't get a signal. Do you have any idea what's happening?

No idea. Then you hear a boom off in the distance. And they're like, what is going on? Clueless. An APC pulls up. Some guys in seeming military uniforms jump out and they say, don't worry. You know, my name is, you know, Lieutenant such and such. We're here to make sure everybody's all right.

We got an outage. We're taking, you know, we're going to be making sure everyone's cool and everyone's happy. You don't know who these people are. Do you just trust them? Do you agree? Do you obey? What do you do? So without communication, how do you know what's going on? You can't verify. Let me tell you a story. When COVID started, I got out on the last call for the last flight out of Peru. I got out of Peru because I had a friend in China and I called him up and he said, COVID's really nasty. You should get out of there as soon as possible.

I booked a flight the next day. Little did I know the Peruvian government shut down its board, its border right after that without telling anyone in advance. And then I got back to Pennsylvania where I'm from and then we were already in lockdown. So we went from normal society to lockdown in like a week, several days. We all lived through that. And so that's the sort of thing that can

happen. And most people submit to authority if there's nothing else planned. Now, here's an add-on to that. APC pulls up and there's some military-looking guys, walks over, shakes a guy's hand and says, hey, my name's such and such and such. And communications are down. We don't know what's going on. There's some there's some conflict happening up the road, but we're here to secure everything. You know, we're National Guard. All of a sudden down the street, another APC pulls up. These guys jump out, train their weapons on the other group of guys in the APC. Shooting starts. Yeah. What I've consistently found with all of these historic conflicts, and it's funny to see how often history repeats. And that's one of the themes of my show. But it goes to a deeper degree than anyone thinks, where for the English Civil War, as an example, there was a commonly known thing that it the average Englishman was too weak to fight since it had been over a century since England had a major war. French Revolution, American Revolution, Russian Civil War, most people are completely inactive. And then small groups of radicals normally, between something like 1% to 3% of the population, dominate the discourse.

With the French Revolution, the Jacobins, who became the ruling military caste of France, they were a social club originally. They were a social club to push for social justice. They would like fund women's charities and stuff. The Bolsheviks were also all communists were less than three percent of Russia's population. The Bolsheviks were an even tinier amount than that. I would you be interested in hearing how I think a conflict like this would start? Because I have multiple. Let me ask you, you're saying, how do you think a civil war or a breakdown of the United States would begin? You have a theory? Yes, yes. I have multiple... Real quick, sorry. So I just want to make sure I'm clear here. Following the election, you have already said you think there will be 1,000 deaths, politically motivated deaths by April.

Is that correct? Yes. And either this will be the effect of or the beginning of what may be a collapse or breakdown? I think it'll be a war. I think you'll still probably get your groceries. You'll still be able to watch Netflix. Keep in mind, in Syria or people, the horrible thing is you'll still have to go to your job. You'll still have to pay your bills. You'll still watch Netflix with

the kids. It's just Chicago's being shelled. And I want to, I do want you to begin with your scenario, but I want to stress this too. It's a point that I like to make when I was in Egypt in 2013, across the street from the Hilton was McDonald's. Yes. There's a guy sitting down eating a cheeseburger and watching soccer and three blocks away was the revolution. Yeah. APCs were surrounding. Blackhawks were flying overhead. We got in a car and drove to Heliopolis and went to the mall where everybody was going

about their days. Yes. Nothing was happening. Yes. So with that in mind, people seem to think that a war starting means literally you're in your home and bolts are flying. Yes.

But explain to me what you think is going to happen in the next couple of months. So I've studied dozens of different historic crises. And the reason I think we're going to have a war is partly intuitive. You just look outside. But it's also I've studied almost every single model of the science of history where people have been trying to develop models to predict history, and about five different historic models, most of them dating to the 20th century, say that in the 2020s, America would have a civil war. And I was looking-

This is like Strauss-Haus generational theory. So Strauss-Haus, David Hackett Fisher, Peter Turchin, there's a handful of others. There's Goldstein, who's a really terrible author. The ones I pull on the most are Peter Turchin and David Hackett Fisher. They really get into the data computer science level. And there's a handful of – there's like four – there's three variables that Peter Turchin looked at where if you look at these variables – and he's used this for over a dozen crises over history. You can predict the years these historic crises happen in. Those are average wages, income inequality, and competition for elite jobs. Those three variables

were able to predict the fall of the Roman Republic, the English Civil War, the Black Death, the French Wars of Religion, the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and so many more. And these crises happen every 250 years like clockwork. The last real version in the Western world was the French Revolution. Before then, the wars of religion in the mid-1600s that killed a third of Europe's population. Before then, the Black Death in the 1300s, which killed half of Europe's population. So these are patterns that we have computer models to study. They're very consistent. And so I'm looking to all these historic examples to inform my analysis of what I'm about to say.

So how does it begin? So I have a tier list of multiple variables. My top one was a financial crisis, and that was going back years. I figured out a lot of this stuff in 2020. And financial crisis was my top bet because you look at the English Civil War, the French Revolution, and the – France's previous crises in the 13 and the 1600s, etc. And it's normally caused by a budget issue because leading up to these crises, one of the great books in this topic, The Great Wave by David Hackett Fisher, he found these crises because he was studying the history of inflation. And he found you could correlate the history of inflation with these crises because inflation is a parallel for the government instability. So the government's inflating its currency when it's feeling desperate. So long periods of inflation, which crest.

And the top predictors for these crises from the inflation analysis are increase in real estate prices, real estate and food crisis prices, oil prices. And this was stuff I saw in 2020. And I was thinking in 2020, oh, it's great that our real estate's not that bad. It's great that our food prices aren't that bad. And then now food and, and I got to tell you, real estate is insane, right? I know there was a house nearby that was like $250,000 and now it's $500,000. And it's been two years. And this isn't a super, like, this isn't like Miami or Los Angeles.

We're in West Virginia. Yeah, exactly. So do you believe that we will see a financial crisis then in the next few months? Maybe not the next few months. It wouldn't surprise me next few months, I think. So I want to try and get to this. You're saying that within the next three months or until April—sorry, it's not three months. It's five or six.

Political crisis. That's what I'm betting on. Let me tell you what I'm thinking. So for these crises, the number one thing is the budget issue. I don't think we're going to face the budget issue. It's still my number two probability. So historically, the budget issue is the top one because for all of these crises, the thing that instigated it was the budget crisis where neither side was willing to let the other

side have a concession. And I'm going to use the English Civil War and the French Revolution as an example. In the English Civil War, England was divided between the supporters of the king and the parliament. In all of these underlie certain class and ethnic and regional interests. For us, I say the right versus left is college educated versus non-college educated. And so English Civil War,

it was the nobility and the merchants. And so what happened was that they had a huge budget. They couldn't pay their bills at all. And then the royalists tried to get the parliamentarians to give a concession for a foreign war. And then the parliamentarians said, no, the king tried to shut down the parliament. French revolution is almost the exact same thing. The king tried to get the parliament to give a budget consensus. The parliament said, no, start of the war. So that was my top predictor where something, an example of that for us would be the, a great example. So for my whole stack of probabilities, my top probability now is

election dispute, then it's budget issue, then it's a foreign war, Trump assassination. I'd move Trump assassination to number three now, and then black swan or randomized event. A black swan would be, let's say there's a major riot in Los Angeles that the police don't respond to. And then that becomes a political issue, like what you saw in the UK. And so we're looking at a political crisis, political crisis. And that's very, that's probably the second historically. It's normally with the end of a monarchy where there's not someone to replace it. And with these wars, you reach a threshold where people want to kill each other and they're looking for plausible

deniability. And so it's going to be done in a certain way so that both sides have complete legal plausible deniability to kill the other. The French Revolution is a great example of this because I've been reading up on the topic. De Tocqueville's book on it is amazing. You guys should read it. But the thing I didn't know at the French Revolution until really recently is that it's a multi-year process. So what happened is that you had a political dispute between the parliament and the king. The king shut down the parliament. The parliament says, no, we're not going to do that.

Then there's this quiet coup. And the crazy thing with the French Revolution is there's no real violent point it happens. What just happens is the army mutinies. The army says, no, king, you're going to listen to the parliament. And then the peasants start burning down the Lord's land. But it was this gradual, let's say, three-year process where the monarch lost power. France then became a parliamentary democracy where only the rich could vote between the right and the left. The left killed the right.

They gave the poor the vote. France then became a military dictatorship. No, it became three people. Then it became the Jacobins who were the radical leftists who our social club took over. But real quick, it was a series of revolutions, wasn't it? Oh, yes.

And so that's what I think it would be where my best scenario is that both sides, the reason I say that we're going to have a civil war now is that neither side can afford to not have a civil war. And I'd explain that later. But the right and the left both want a war at this point, and I know that's true because both sides have completely given up on plausible deniability for the other side. They're just pandering to their own people. And most political pundits, most, a lot of big political pundits have openly pushed for violence at this point. And so even on the right, uh, I think, uh, so like the Nick Fuentes types, there are definitely people who would not be against it. And so I would put it this way on the left, we have seen extremist rhetoric bubbling up to the highest levels.

Yes. We have seen the excusing of extreme violence, such as at the Chaz Chop. There were a couple of teenagers that were shot. There was another guy who was shot and killed in Provo, Utah. BLM ran up to a car and just shot a guy for no reason. Yeah. Then when you look at what the quote unquote right has, there's there's there's no prominent right winger advocating for violence or calling for the use of violence or force. At most, Trump has, he came out and said the death penalty for illegal, I'm sorry, the penalty for migrants who kill Americans or cops. We do have the lower tier, more fringe elements of the right or anti-left who are absolutely calling for violence, but there's not the leadership faction calling for it.

Yeah, I understand you're not calling for violence and I hate to be this blunt, but you did put your capital in Harper's Ferry for a reason. It's like a revolutionary center. This is where the American Civil War started. Yeah, you're in Harper's Ferry for a reason. We're in Harper's Ferry because it's the closest we can get to DC without being in a liberal state.

John Brown, it's John Brown. I mean, that's obvious. But do you know the history of Harper's Ferry because it's the closest we can get to D.C. without being in a liberal state. John Brown. It's John Brown. I mean, that's obvious. But do you know the history of Harpers Ferry? Oh, yeah. It was impossible to defend. It was a military base that John Brown attacked because he wanted to launch a slave revolt across the South. It was the armory. Yeah, yeah. And during the Civil War, it was captured over and over again because it was impossible to defend. You could attack it, seize it, and then you couldn't defend it.

So the south and the north went back and forth. It is a terrible place to set up any kind of operation. Yes, it's surrounded and all sided by hills that you can rain artillery down from. Right. And the reason it exists was because, I can't remember the guy's name, but it was Harper. He had a ferry because that's where the river splits. And so he would ferry people and then they set up a trade and port in the area. And then John Brown, who I think was a nut job, he had been going to Kansas and just killing people with his sons, went to Harper's Ferry, seized the armory, attempting to start a slave revolt and then when they stopped a train he let the train leave the train immediately

made contact to the next stop and said yo this guy's taking over the town you need to send in the troops and this is you know and this was not the main point i was trying to convey i'm just saying harper's fair is a terrible place to be oh i'm not saying i never said you're trying to launch a revolt i'm just saying this place has historic significance that i get yes i'm just saying like for somebody like myself who talks about the probability of civil war this is the to launch a revolt. I'm just saying this place has historic significance. That I get. Yes. I'm just saying, like, for somebody like myself who talks about the probability of civil war, this is the worst place to go. Oh, I never, you're not

trying to launch a coup. There aren't enough guns here. I'm not saying you're suggesting that. I'm saying that if we were actually considering... No, I'm not saying that either. I'm saying that if we were actually concerned about conflict and wanted to avoid it, we would go. Oh, I'm not saying that. No, I'm saying that this place has a very significant historical significance. There are signs every 10 feet

with the history of the Civil War. You drive down the road and there's plaques everywhere telling you about these battles. There's cannons along the road. What I was trying to say is that picking this location, it shows the political discourse we're at. It shows that we're a very we're a society which I'm just saying we didn't pick this location for any political or historic reason. We chose it because it's the it's the eastern panhandle of West Virginia, which keeps us out of the liberal jurisdictions which ban guns, but allows us access to Baltimore and D.C DC airports. That's the only reason. Because the first place we built was actually in Western Maryland and then our guns were banned and we were like, okay, let's move over a little bit. It sounds like Rudd is alluding more to serendipitous selection

because... And I'll throw one more at you. We did a show on the culture war with these researchers who study weather patterns and geoengineering and things like this. Very much these guys were against the idea that the militaries and governments were controlling weather or anything like that, such that we can cloud seed their Operation Popeye was a real thing, but no one's creating and moving hurricanes. It's insane.

However, one gentleman did bring up a very interesting slide that shows there was a correlation between weather patterns over a long period of time and reserve currencies. And that empires collapsed in correlation somehow for some reason along with global weather pattern. Yeah, yeah. And so as you were mentioning the strange cosmology and the strange connections we can't map out, let me break it down this way. I may say something like we see a reserve currency collapse around the same time there's major storms, and you think that's spiritual hubbub, supernatural nonsense. It's a coincidence. However, there's a really great map that shows voting patterns as influenced by ancient coastlines. Yeah.

Have you seen this map? In the South, in the United States, where the coastline used to go up to the southern states, into the center of those states, a long strip. Those coasts created fertile soil. When the farmers moved in and brought slaves,

they farmed that specific area. When slavery ended, those areas became dominated by Democrat-leaning black communities who are now heavily Democrat. And they show you the correlation between ancient coastlines and how it affects modern voting today. Another really great story, which I'm sure you're aware of, is the distance of the train tracks and how it's based on the Roman chariots. Yes. This stuff is everywhere, though the universe is infinitely connected and everything's connected

to itself. Back in the 1600s, they were able to look at sunspot activity and correlate it with temperature levels. And the 1600s was a very cold society. And so they knew even in the 1600s that their political issues were correlated with these variations in sunspots because they knew the weather got colder and that caused them political issues. That's very interesting. Yeah.

So let's bring it back to the most immediate surface level stuff. We have an election in 21 days. Yeah. They say already we don't know who's going to win on the election day. We're planning actually multiple nights of live stream coverage because it is not likely that we're going to have any results. So we're going to be doing live special election coverage probably for days. Yeah. We have the safe harbor deadline in December. We have the electoral vote count January 6th. Do you have any any like guess as to what kicks off a political conflict in this time period? Is it going to be January 6th where Democrats refuse to certify? Is it going to be Trump wins, but then riots erupt across the country. I operate in certain probabilistic

ranges where if you're looking at something over a certain time frame, a group of people, you can make a genuine probabilistic bet. So I have an 80% probability the right wins when you operate in frames like that. But you're saying 80% chance that Trump wins the election. Oh, so I think he's going to win the election. I also, that's not what I was saying. I think if there's a civil war, 80% chance the right wins. And, and so I'm comfortable saying that with a frame, like a one month period, you're operating on a scale of size that's too dependent on individual variables. Yeah. And, um, I think neither side is going to accept the results of the election. And the thing is they don't have to convince the other side. They just have to give

their own side enough plausible deniability. And so I think we would end up with, let's say, an American people's government based out of Washington, D.C., and an American patriots government based out of Austin. And so if you want to look at English Civil War, French Revolution, it is the right city. let's say, electoral issue. And I think there's going to be a lot of cheating this election because there's no incentive to not cheat. Right. Because people have disputed the last two elections and Democrats have disputed every election they've lost going back, I think. So there's but now it's come to 2016. Exactly Russians. 2020 was stolen by Biden. Yes. And so you have complete validity in saying that this election isn't fair. And so that gives you complete legal plausible deniability.

And so the right could say the left was falsifying the elections. The left can say the right is a threat to democracy. Both of them could have their supporters behind them. Then they have independent governments. And then they basically conscript young men. This isn't going to be the end of society. It wouldn't be a nuclear holocaust. It would be like one of those wars you see in a country you don't want to travel to.

Like if you look at Ethiopia, where the Tigray and the Amhara are having a civil war. And it just happened. And they conscripted men of those ethnicities. You look at a variety of countries around the world. And these sorts of civil wars are very normal. And the sad thing is that an African saying that goes, when the elephants fight, the grass loses. Oh, wow. Because when these great political conflicts happen, I'm from one of the most politically contentious parts of the country. I'm from outside Philadelphia. My hometown is one of the most electorally important places. And so I know that places like my hometown would get screwed over in a civil war. And that's the that's or American patriots government because so. Texas is the only state you could put a conservative capital in because it's in the middle of the map.

It has the industrial base. But Austin is the pre-established government of Texas is in Austin. So if you run a government, you need to have the human capital. Austin's government human capital is pre-established in Austin. Austin, they also it has no defensible borders. It's surrounded by highways. It has a big conservative intellectual group there. It's – the left could not defend Austin, and Texas has the biggest national guard in the country.

So they could just steamroll Austin overnight and establish it as a conservative base. And then you have – you said the right would win. Yes. And I think that's true just because urban centers are where the liberals are and urban centers can be choked out by a couple blockades. Yes. It's a variety of things. The biggest variable I would look at here is the military is the military tilts these conflicts and the military tilts right. And that's probably more pronounced over the last few years. Young men tilt right. Sorry, sorry. The theory is the reason why the military has been going drag queen woke is because they're trying to purge out more conservative leaning members. Yes. It's like the Spanish Civil War, where in the Spanish Civil War,

the military tilted right. And then they the the elected leftist government trying to purge the military, the top brass of the military. But if you want to look at the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution, what happened is that the top brass were political appointments while most of the military were sympathetic to the rebels. And then when push came to shove, the men sided with their colonels and their sergeants, not with the generals and the admirals. I wonder for those that are listening that served, if you believe either you or others would choose to go with their immediate chain of command, the people you know, or the generals, because I got a feeling a lot of people are going to be like when you're looking at leadership, like Millie, and he's giving and he's the one who's giving orders. And then you got your buddies, the people you know, and trust and have led you well. But I don't know. I haven't served, so I wouldn't know.

Yes. Having the military mutiny and go for the non-ruling class, you see it in a lot of these revolutions. It's the determinant variable. Besides it, young men tilt right as a demographic. Besides that, gun owners tilt right. The right has the manufacturing. It has the electricity. It has the food. It has a geographically coherent territory. And then the left is a bunch of city states. And even on the east or the west coast, you could cut off Philly from D.C., from New York. The left also is just so delusional. And they're so the left thinks hunting is immoral, let alone killing people. I just read a story. The left doesn't know the difference between men and women exactly i was i was i watched this story on lotus cedars yesterday about the uh

about there was this danish ship off uh nigeria and the danes they were attacked by a one-legged pirate. And then after beating the pirate, they sent him back in a boat with enough food to make it because they couldn't legally determine what nationality the pirate was. And I thought, this is insane. In no other era of history are you attacked by a pirate and you treat it like a bird that got lost in your house. How about this? Venezuelan gangs have taken over several apartment complexes in Aurora. The media lied, said it wasn't happening. Now they admit it's happening, but they say it's only a handful. Yes. In what history, historical period, and I'm sure there is one. Yes. Would a nation allow a foreign group of violent attackers to seize its territory

in any capacity? Yes. I have to imagine the references you'd bring up would be the fallen declination of a society. Yeah. Aristotle said that a tyranny will bring in the outsiders in order to... The outsiders can be trusted by a tyrant because they have no loyalty to the society. And so Aristotle said a tyrant will naturally bring in foreigners to oppress his own population because they won't have any investment. My isn't that pressing today? I I want to tell you guys give a shout out to preserve gold dot com slash Tim Pool for sponsoring the show because, oh, boy, what a heck of a conversation.

You know, people often say that I've talked about civil war a lot. There was a joke I went on a recent podcast and they said, you know, Tim Pool has the record've talked about civil war a lot. There was a joke. I went on a recent podcast and they said, you know, Tim Poole has the record for saying civil war more than anyone else or whatever. And I'm just a guy who reads the news. I don't take credit for anything. Alex Jones famously predicted the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. And everybody was super impressed saying, wow, Alex Jones, he got this one. This is a huge thing to get right. I called Alex and we were talking. And one of the things that came up was, how did you know? And he was like, well, I just read the news. Like they

said Russia was amassing troops. They said they were concerned about movements when the weather got warmer. And I said, sounds like Russia is going to invade in the spring. And then they did. And everybody acted like it was some profound revelation when it was literally just I read the news. Yeah, that's what I feel like I've literally just, I read the news. Yeah. That's what I feel like I've been doing. I'm reading these news stories. I'm reading about far left extremists, the violence they've advocated for and gotten away with, the left supporting and advocating for violence, and then the real world violence that we've seen the summer of love riots, et cetera, the way the media has portrayed

everything. And the national security experts repeatedly saying either we're in a cold civil war, civil war is coming. And the authors security experts repeatedly saying either we're in a cold civil war, civil war is coming. And the authors and the experts, former CIA even. And I'm like, wow, seems like we might be on path for a civil war. And they're like, Tim, you're crazy. Why would you make that up? And I'm like, guys.

I predicted the invasion of Ukraine two years in advance. And then before it happened, I got it to the exact week it occurred. Because I was going off the Peter Zayhan analysis of Russia's demographics. And it was reading the news too. I was looking at Olympic Games and weather patterns for when they could move troops in Ukraine. It's just people are in denial. And one of my friends likes to say denial is an evolutionary strategy to avoid dealing things you can't deal with. Yeah, indeed. And then it's, as they say, gradually, then suddenly. And so on November 5th, you know, let me also add, you mentioned the strange connections in

cosmology and the universe, and how strange is it that we find ourselves in Harper's Ferry, that there is a street across from our old studio called Sandy Hook. And that on November 5th, the election is to take place. Remember, remember the 5th of November, the gunpowder treason and plot. Yeah. Our generation, 12 years ago. No, I'm sorry. This is like 14 years ago or 16 years ago. Remember when Anonymous on 4chan gathered around, was marching down the streets of all these major cities wearing Guy Fawkes masks?

Yeah. During Occupy Wall Street, people maintained the Guy Fawkes mask. Guy Fawkes, this was largely from V for Vendetta. Yeah. about an anarchist revolutionary who overthrows the tyrannical British government that seized power through a fake viral infection that they manufactured, controlling quarantine zones, making sure people can't go out at night, creating militaristic fingermen who could do whatever they wanted. And people wore these masks and chanted, remember, remember the 5th of November. And as it was, I can't remember, what's the actor's name who played V? Oh, Viggo Morgensen?

No, no, no, no. That's Aragorn. That's Aragorn. It was the guy who played Elrond. Yeah, Elrond. I forget what his name was. Hugo Weaving. Hugo Weaving.

And he says, if you see as I see and if you feel as I feel and if you would seek as I seek, then meet me one year from today on the steps of parliament on November 5th. Yes. And I remember thinking it's fascinating because so many young people were like, yeah. And I was like, Guy Fawkes was a theocratic revolutionary. He wanted to overthrow parliament to install a Christian theocracy. Why are you young liberals cheering for this guy? It's seemingly nonsensical.

They didn't know what they were cheering for. But millennials had it hard-coded in their mind November 5th. And now we stand at the precipice of chaos. And it is November 5th, the date the election is to take place. Sam, do you know what a synchronicity is? Explain it to me. This is a concept from Carl Jung where, and it exists across societies. There's a brilliant book called Forgotten Truth by Houston Smith, who was possibly the best scholar of religion of the 20th century.

And Forgotten Truth, he goes to the philosophic points every major world religions share. And it's not stuff you expect. It's weird stuff. But synchronicity is one of them. It's, for example, let's say you break up with your old girlfriend on the day you meet your new one, or that you have a birthday on the same day as your best friend. It's weird details like that. And if you hang out in religious and spirituals of whatever circles, you run into this type of person who writes down all the synchronicities in their life. Well, I can explain to you rather simply. You see, in the code of the universe, there's only so many limited variables that were hard programmed by the creator. And so the procedural generation has to repeat terms and dates because there's... Or it's sympathetic connections. Like in string theory, there are

connections across the universe. And this is something physics believes in today. And in pre-industrial philosophy, it was called the law of sympathy. It's how if you stab a voodoo doll, the person suffers. Although I don't think if you actually do stab a voodoo doll, the person's going to die. And one of the things Peter Turchin, who's one of the biggest scholars in this topic, and he's more on the autist than the schizo axis. So if he says this, it's something that has a lot of validity, is that you see these patterns that happen again in the same society when they have these crises. So for France, as an example, three times in a row, they had their civil war due to the king having a budget issue, calling the parliament, the parliament saying no,

and twice they resolved the legal dispute in a tennis court. And Philippe Fabry has done a lot of work with this, where he does what I do in France, where he finds, for example, European societies repeat certain cultural patterns in their history, while Middle Eastern societies repeat different patterns in their history. And genetics codes a tremendous amount. I don't know how much of it's genetic or how much of it's cultural, but we can use genetics to predict how fast you drive, what music you listen to, how religious you are, what you name your cat. So it wouldn't surprise me if stuff like this is coded into our genetics to a certain degree. Phil has the heavy metal gene. Apparently I do.

Interesting. We're going to go to Super Chat. So if you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button? Give it a good old smash. Subscribe. Share the show with everyone you know. Become a member by going to timcast.com and clicking join us

because I can assure you the members only show is going to get a little spicy, I'd imagine. Not so family friendly, but always fun. This one's probably going to be way more serious because there's a lot more that I want to break down, but maybe not so... Not when the kids are sitting there in the living room with you guys because I know you're watching on the TV

and we'll keep this one for the members show. But we'll grab your Super Chats now. Quispy Joe says, Did you see Nintendo leaks? Poor Typhlosion. I did not. Did you guys... There was Nintendo leaks or something?

No. No idea. I bet Pop Culture Crisis talked about it. Certainly. poor typhlosion i did not did you guys there was a nintendo leaks or something no no idea that pop culture crisis talked about it certainly centurion says trump is not on the voter pamphlet for oregon well then wait really that's what someone's claiming you know what's a fact check all right what have we here my friends little says, Tim, money for that masterclass on uncensored being the real calm and logical one and defending us, your audience to kudos. I recommend you guys watch the Piers Morgan uncensored. I was on with a handful of people. It was just it was absolutely fascinating. And it's a cacophony of noise that will probably grind your ears and you will not enjoy it.

But, you know, shout out to Piers Morgan, because I think he was trying to do a good job, but he invited some people on where you can't do that. And the first thing that Piers opens up with is, you know, Trump is struggling with female voters, Kamala with male voters. I'm going to send it to you, Tim, what do you think? And I said, this is correct. You know, obviously Kamala is trying to court male voters, Joe Rogan, blah, blah, blah. And then I said, I think I think there are women that will hold their nose and vote for Donald Trump. But I think there are men that are sexist and just will not vote for a woman. And I don't know how Kamala Harris overcomes that. And then all of a sudden, you know, we get some we get some rational thought. But this woman is just like Tim Pool and his misogynist audience

of men and Tim Pool. And I was like, why are you saying my name? I didn't say anything to you like lady. Like, what are you yelling at me for? And she called me a COVID denier, said Tim Pool was a COVID denier who then got COVID and took ivermectin or something. And I was like, what? I never denied COVID. I rejected ivermectin. I told my doctor I didn't even want it. This is absolutely nuts.

I told everyone to go to their doctors to get prescribed what was right for them. And she had no answer. Every single time you talked about it, you to go to their doctors to get prescribed what was right for them. And she had no answer. Every single time you talked about it, you said, go to your doctor. I said, don't take advice from me. I'm some podcast. I don't know. I don't know, man. I read the news. But the fascinating thing is the what is exemplified here is the left gets their news and information from clips that are out of context and they don't read the news. So when she was saying things like your far right audience, I was like, what? I was like, I just opened the show by saying inherent sexism is a barrier for Kamala Harris that is difficult for her to overcome. Do you disagree with that? She's like, well, you're far right male misogynist audience. And I was like, the misogynist audience that agrees inherent sexism is a barrier for Kamala Harris. Like, what are you talking about?

Because they don't actually watch the show. They don't know what you or I think. Someone posts an out of context clip or a fake AI thing. I will tell you this right now. And I don't know if you factor this into any of your equations too. But when I look at the front page of YouTube, the default, I shouldn't call the front page. Will you go to youtube.com? I saw a couple of segments and I brought this up last week where they said that I was making comments about Cenk Uygur and they edited different things together to make a fake debate between me and Cenk under the guys that it was real. And so it was me saying something that wasn't about Cenk, but they claimed they said, look

at what he said about Cenk. And then I'm like, this guy's nuts. I can't believe you'd say it. And I'm talking about some crazy burglar or something. Then he showed a clip of Cenk saying something like, I can't do it with this guy, you know, making people believe that there was a feud. And when there are people online that said like 30,000 views who get their information from these sources, they are living in a paranoid, delusional state. Now, the scary thing is people need to realize this is why I say I'm not worried about Antifa.

When I when famously and I love I'm not worried about Antifa. Famously, and I love this, on the Antifa forums, they call me a liberal. They say Tim Pool's a liberal because the far left know what liberals are and they don't like them. They say behind every liberal is a fascist or something like that or, you know, what do they say, scratch a liberal watch a fascist bleed? Scratch a liberal

and a fascist bleeds. Something like that. They know. I said my concern is the crazy guy who thinks that I stole all of their spoons and are hiding them in my backyard. The people who go on social media or that woman on Piers Morgan who have been wound up into a tight ball of psychosis by people like Sam Seder into thinking that I believe these crazy things that are not true. Like that Sam Seder opened a segment claiming I supported the death penalty, which is absolutely false. Why? I assume he saw a 15 second clip on social media where the actual context was the law prescribes a death penalty for treason and not that I agree with it.

He then repeats it to his audience to millions of people and they live in this crackpot reality, which I think is spiraling out of control. Anyway, long story short, you can watch the Piers Morgan thing. I think it was pretty wild. And I'm going back on his show at some point, I think next week, because I'm just sitting there being like, can we just talk about why Walgreens

shut down 1,200 locations, 7-Eleven shut down 400, Big Lots is closing down, why groceries are becoming unaffordable, and everybody here is just screaming that Trump is racist or Kamala speaking in word sound. We cannot because you're a Trumper and you're a misogynist.

There you go. But I do think that the general result, if you look at the comments, was this lady lost her mind. And so be it. I want these people to expose themselves for being the irrational people who will lead others to to destruction. And so I can sit here and say we need a working economy for the American people. Let's talk about how to get it. And if they want to scream Tim Pool's far right, let them do it.

All right, let's go. Let's go. We'll grab some super chat so I don't keep rambling on this. All right. Jeffrey Jackson says, if Kamala actually goes on Rogan, she's intentionally undermining her campaign. She's looking to flop like a soccer player who got the ball stolen. I'm saying maybe she wants to lose. I don't know. I think Rogan's a bad fit for her. I don't think she could handle it. And I think that's the problem right now.

They're trying to drop her into situations that other politicians can't handle. But I think that speaks to the fact that her advisors don't know her that well. They aren't setting her up for success because she can't rise to the occasion of the media opportunities they're presenting to her. The irony is that Rogan is not a high intensity interviewer. Like, I can't imagine if I was in a room with Rogan, I'd feel intimidated or I'd feel like he's really trying to grind down whoever he's interviewing. It's just you can't deal with a rational assessment of what your platform is.

All right, Simon Ravenscroft says Rogan should say they have to be on the same show. Or was it who said it before the show that he should give them both the same date, but not tell them. And then they both show up at the same time. Andrew said that. All right. Peter Goock says, Tim, have you seen the news story about Tim Waltz? Jesse on fire has a crazy video on it. Not good of true true, horrible, just like Harris will do on Rogan. No idea. What's the story? Did he did he throw a football and hit someone in the face or something? No idea. Waffle says he says, well, the IRS is falsely claiming I owe them five thousand dollars and stole my tax return. Special thanks to Kamala for casting the tie breaking vote.

I told you guys, I know Waffles heeded that warning because you've been paying attention, but this is what I'm talking about. This is how they do it. They're not going to go after billionaires. Billionaires can fight back. They're going to go to people who can't afford it, and they're going to say, oh yeah, no refund for you. You're going to get a bill in the mail, and it's going to say you owe us $326. Do you want to fight it? And a lot of people are going to be like, I don't have time. I give up. And then people are going to have the money ripped from 87,000 new agents. This is going to be wild, man. Placid Saints says, Tim, I saw you on Pierce today. You're the patience of a monk with that one. She is the reason why no one votes for women and why men

and women are leaving the Democratic Party. That lady has lost her marbles. Unfortunately, it is an example of a bad woman in a position of influence. To what degree? I don't know because I don't know who she is. And I think she took offense to that because she kept saying my name. And I was like, why do you keep bringing me up? I never said anything to you. And she's like, my name is such and such. I don't even remember her name. She's like, my name is such and such. I don't even remember her name. She's like, my name is such and such and I have a job and you know who I am. And I was like, I have no idea who you are, lady. She did not like that. But you are correct. My point was men don't want to vote for women. She then goes off like a banshee about misogyny, insulting me and attacking me whenever I said anything to her. And I'm like, lady, please. Guys are watching this right now

and they're going, Tim's right. I will never vote for a woman. And it's because of her. But maybe that's her point. You know, maybe she's taken that she's taken that dive to do the right thing. You know, that's right. Like in Batman, when, you know, Batman pretended to be the one who killed Harvey Dent. You know what I'm saying? That's right. All right. Let's grab a couple more. What have we here? Z Zamp Zamp says, if you want to inspire male male voters, please someone recreate Trump as Goku going Super Saiyan 1 for the first time against Kamala, Frieza. The cackle is almost indistinguishable. That's actually a really good idea for millennial guys. Are you familiar with when Goku went Super Saiyan for the first time? Yeah, you're too young.

What about you, Phil? No. You're too old. Yep. But Serge knows. Serge knows. I was a little kid. I was like 9 or 11 watching that.

For those that don't know, it's an anime. You know what Dragon Ball Z is. Serge knows. I was a little kid. I was like 9 or 11 watching that. For those that don't know, it's an anime. You know what Dragon Ball Z is. Come on. Goku is fighting Frieza. Frieza, in the middle of the fight, murders Goku's best friend. And then Goku goes blind with rage. And you know what's really fascinating about Dragon Ball Z? Is that Goku, he's got black hair and brown eyes.

But when he gains superpowers, his hair turns blonde and his eyes turn blue. Just, you know, whatever. I don't know why Japan decided that was the thing that shows you were very powerful, but okay. And Goku then beats the ever-living crap out of Frieza. And Frieza gets sliced in half. And, you know, that's the story. Anyway, remember when that politician, I can't remember who it was, did, what did he do? Attack on Titan.

But he had the Titans as like Democrats. And so it was a Republican face slicing the necks of these gigantic, monstrous Democrats. And they were like, this is call for violence. It's not okay. And you can't do this. And then, you know, he took it down or something. I can't remember what happened. Yeah.

But the best meme ever was Attack on Hill. And it's Attack on Titan, but it's Hank Hill flying through the air, fighting gigantic Titan Bill Dautreve. Jacob Ali says, great men do not seek power. They have power thrust upon them. Lieutenant Commander Worf, season seven, episode 22. Based. Hey, the boomers gave us the next generation.

There you go. They did did and what an epic show all right mauricio 91 says why throw us under the bus on peers you don't know any good reason why black men would vote for trump misogyny are you kidding me we have the same reasons you do tim get f'd when did i say that i didn't say that you must have been listening to somebody else i said a lot of young black men are telling people they're going to vote for Trump. But does that mean they're actually going to turn out to vote for him? Young people don't turn out to vote. So why would this be any different? We've heard this in 2016 and 2020. And now today, Trump's winning the black vote. I remember this. And then it didn't happen. They're certainly shying away from Democrats,

but Trump's support for black voters in the polls is still 15 percent. So we will see. But I never said they have any good reason to vote for black men. That's not my quote. That's somebody else. All right. Doug Rutledge says, Phil is right. I hate being called Dougie. There you go. You know what's really fascinating, too, is like

no one's ever called me Timmy. Ever? My mom. That's it. That was it. I can't recall ever being me Timmy. Ever? My mom. That's it. That was it. I can't recall ever being called Timmy except my mom. And then when I was four, it stopped. So, you know. But it's weird because Tommy lasts a long time.

You know what I mean? Tommy does. Or Johnny's. Sometimes Johnny's last. Oh, yeah. Johnny goes all through until you die. You could be a Richie, a Johnny. You could be a... I don't know. You can'tie a johnny you could be a i don't know can

you be you can't be a billy you can be a billy until you're like 16 you know maybe bobby you can you you you can be a bobby is it really fascinating bobby would turn into rob robert but you can still be called bobby like when they say uh bobby kennedy jr people will still but it's not it's more rare. Tommy lasts for a little bit, but Timmy stops at like four years old. Isn't that funny how these... And diminutives work with families. Like there are things your family might call you that you wouldn't use in a professional setting. Is it a diminutive?

Timmy makes my name longer. If you're a... But it's like affectionate. If you're a wealthy or powerful baby boomer, you can use these names way past when you normally would as kind of a joke about it. Where like, I'm Billy. I'm Billy Thompson. Yeah. Senator of Mississippi.

Right. Because everyone knows you're rich and powerful anyway. Did they ever call you ruddy? Not really. Just rud? Just rudyard. All right, let's go. JW's Garage says, I fix carbs daily and make a fortune doing it.

Forgotten technology in high demand. Ka-ching. Yeah. Well, I looked it up. Carburetors have been out of use since the 80s. And I know that there's equipment that still uses them for sure. I think farm equipment and the tugs at the airport we used had carburetors. That's why it's funny.

It's like, I ain't afraid to fix a carburetor. I eat them for breakfast. That's a weird thing most people don't do it's like a niche thing certainly there's money to be made in doing it because it's a rarity but i think what's what if he said i worked on an oil rig you know but i doubt that guy worked on a log he was pretty big he's a big guy sean says tim relax the carburetor guy misspoke he meant to say carbonara i eat carbonara for breakfast i mean carbonara is pretty eat carbonara for breakfast. I mean, carbonara is pretty good.

You know, I'm a fan. Let's grab some more. Based African says, an ex I still discuss politics with confided that she believes if Trump is elected, far right ideology will become so ingrained in the government that elections and rights

will be suspended and the government will use foreign militaries to suppress uprisings because she lives in a paranoid, delusional state. This is where Democrats are. They live in what I would describe as a paranoid, delusional state of reality. Now, of course, there are crazy right wing conspiracy theorists, too. But this is the point I try to stress. The right leadership. It's like, who's the most prominent conservative guy in this country? Ben Shapiro? Yeah, he's, I'm sorry, Ben, but he's boring.

I don't mean that disrespectfully. I mean, you turn him on and he tells you the news, you will be adequately informed and you'll hear his opinion. I don't mean boring as an insult. I mean, he is not a guy screaming at the top of his lungs, banging on the walls. He's not threatening anybody. He is a suit wearing Jewish Orthodox commentator who is very calm and well-mannered and gives his argument. That's the leadership on the right. On the left, you have people going out in the street and saying,

get in their faces. You have people launching fundraisers for the far left saying Antifa doesn't exist. You're wrong. It's just an idea. Venezuelan gangs, only a handful of them are taking over this country. And then the right, the worst thing, Donald Trump says we should have the death penalty for people who, you know, kill people or something like this. And it's like, OK, well, you know, that went a little far, I guess. Maybe some people like the death penalty. It's codified in law. I'm not a fan of it. But Trump's not talking about extra judicial assassinations like Obama did. So nobody's perfect. But my point is ultimately this. It is a fringe on the right and a tendency on the left. And it is because there are people on the left who don't consume a healthy news diet. They swim in disinformation while accusing everyone else of doing it. And it's

because they don't do research. It's terrifying, actually. All right, we'll grab some more. Joseph No says, kept up with Candace Owens' research on Kamala. I have not. I know that there was a big controversy with Charlemagne because Janet Jackson says Kamala wasn't black or something like that, and then Charlemagne asked her about it. Andrew Savoy,, Savoie, how do you pronounce it? I don't know how you kept your composure on Piers Morgan today, but my guy, I have a new respect for you. Also, Hannah Clare is a superstar. She needs a raise. Otherwise, you're a misogynist. Well, you know, that may be, that may be. Look, I've done a lot of panels.

When I go on Fox, that never happens. I have never been on a Fox panel where someone's yelling at somebody else like that. I mean, it's happened, I guess. I've been on panel shows and then I say, well, you know, I think X, Y and Z, A, B and C. And then the guy says, sure, but with all due respect, Tim, I think we're going to see this, that or otherwise. And then I'd be like, OK, fair point. But, you know, I'm going to say I think that's less likely to occur. And they'll say, well, thank you both for coming.

And that's the end of it. With all due respect to Piers, this was wild. But I think that's what sells. He likes that stuff, though. Yeah, but Piers didn't do anything wrong. He was very calm, and he was agreeing with me. He was like, keep it calm. Why are you attacking him in this way? Why are you doing?

And I think that Piers is very professional. And so I have agreed to go on again if you would have me. I thought it was interesting. I feel like with those, you know, I was genuinely thinking, like, let's try and find where I agree with some of these guys and make those topics relevant. And this lady just started attacking me out of nowhere. I'm like, I don't even know you, lady. She doesn't like being called lady, I guess. Thank you so much. You guys are really kind. Napalm Z says, first time super chat. I am so glad you have Rudyard on. With the civil war predictions, will a Trump win delay or possibly solve the problem? Same question in reverse for

Kamala. I don't have a good answer. I think that there's going to be a war either way. I think that if Trump wins, that the right, this is a very brutal thing to say, but I think for a lot of the population, including the political class, they are more worried about the current order continuing than it crashing. So we shall see what happens. All right. The great Von Braun says, here's to Hannah Clare. Wife and I are in the hospital after having our second baby yesterday. So that was my wife's idea. This is hilarious. I love that this is becoming a thing.

Congratulations on second kid. I hope everyone's happy and healthy. Remember, you're 0.3 children away from replacement rate. There you go. Garin says, what if Alt-Hist show ideas how Civ VI relates to modern politics, how USSR Lysenko attack on biology removed 50 million through famine, and the cowardly biologists today lie to students on biology will lead to the same. Yeah, I can do all that.

So I was playing Civ 6 yesterday, actually. Is that the new one? I don't know. So I haven't played video games in years. I started playing them last month. I have a campaign I've taken over as the Romans, taken over all of Europe, half of Russia, most of America, South Africa, etc. It's fun. The Civilization games are directionally pretty good. They're pretty good at articulating history, especially for someone who's not a historian. They're doing as good a job as I could expect

them to. If I were going to get into a really schizo level of analysis, I'll say empires rise and fall and you have to deal with revolutions and disputes. And they miss a lot of the humanity and they have a very like wig notion of history. And the wig notion of history is that number goes up equal world gooder. And that stems from the industrial revolution of infinite progress. But if I were to sit in front of the game designers, I wouldn't tell them any of that because I have no idea how you'd translate any of that stuff into a game.

The second thing, Lysenkoism, that's interesting where for those that don't know, Lysenkoism was the theory of biology they had in Soviet Russia. And it was because Stalin was buddies with the guy who did it and it also had implications they wanted for Marxism, where Lysenko was basing it off a French thinker. I forget his name. Lamarck. It's Lamarckianism, where, for example, if you have wheat and then force the wheat to go through a lot of bad winters, the wheat will alter itself to the conditions. So let's say Lamarckianism, you shove a white person in Texas,

within five generations, the white person is going to be looking like they're Middle Eastern or looking like they are Mexican. That's not the case. Lamarckianism has been proven wrong, except for some test case, some like edge cases. And Stalin wanted that because Lamarckianism fit with the blank slate that human nature is naturally perfectible. And so Lamarckianism fit with the blank slate that human nature is naturally perfectible. And so Lamarckianism failed because they tried to implement all Soviet agriculture under that model. And it just didn't work. And then also it destroyed Soviet biology where the fields the Soviets were advanced in were physics where there's very, at least there are political ramifications to physics. They're not obvious to anyone. So the Soviets were really advanced in aeronautical stuff

and physics because there are no political ramifications. But anyone who stood against that line in biology was just purged from the Soviet Union. And for those who saw the last video I released, I actually think Western academia has done something similar in our lifetimes, that there are an aggregate of so many lies that have been pushed for the last lifetime since World War II that we will look back on in the future the same way we look back on Lysenkoism. I want to just say, too, have your kids play Civilization. I'm not kidding.

I mean, once they're old enough to start to understand, because there's a lot of important lessons to be learned, such as one day, you're seemingly ally. A neighboring country says, it shows a little avatar guy,

and he's smiling, and he says, we've come bearing gifts. And you're like, wow, thank you. And then the next turn, his military is attacking your capital, and you're like, wow, thank you. And then the next turn, his military is attacking your capital. And you're like, what? And it's an important life lesson about borders, culture, technology, history.

You learn a lot. And then ultimately you learn sometimes people are evil and will stab you in the back for no reason. But that's not the only thing. I played Civ 2 when I was a kid. And you learn a whole lot. And I especially love, I played Civ 4 for a bit. I think it's the one where Leonard Nimoy has all those great quotes. You discover science.

As a kid, you're learning all these things. Learning about the wonders of the world and all that stuff. It really is a fascinating game. It's very educational. My father had a rule that I could only play strategy games until age 15. What? Yeah, he said I wasn't allowed to play shooter games or RPG games until I was 15 because

he said I want you to play games that form your mind well when you're young. Well, that's good. All right, everybody, if you haven't already, smash the like button, subscribe, share the show with everyone you know. Head over to TimCast.com right now because this members-only uncensored show is going to get fun. Yeah, we're going to talk about Civil War and stuff like that. So again, TimCast.com, you click join us. You can follow me on X and Instagram at TimCast.

If you're listening on any audio podcast like Apple or otherwise, please leave us a good review. Rudyard, do you want to shout anything out? You guys should watch my channel. I've also got a second show, History 102, where I cover different eras of history. Right on.

What's your channel's name so other people can find it? Oh, What If Altist? What if A-L-Tist H-I-S-T I have social media like Instagram and Twitter Attached to it whatever And then there's the second channel History102 Right on

I am philtherremains on Twix I am philtherremainsofficial on Instagram The band is all that remains And you can check out our new video for Let You Go You can check out our new video for Let You Go. You can check out our new video for Divine. And the other one, which is No Tomorrow. They're all available on YouTube.

You can check them out on Spotify. And don't forget, The Left Lane is for Crime. Hannah Clare. I love when you're here and you're like, what is the name of that song? I'm such a rock star. I have so many songs out there. I mean, there are a lot of songs. But the reason is I don't want to mess up and say the name of a song that we haven't released yet. I'm such a rock star. I have so many songs out there. I mean, there are a lot of songs. But the reason is I don't want to mess

up and say the name of a song that we haven't released yet. I gotcha. Rudyard, it's been so fun having you here. All I can think of every time I say your name is Rudyard Kipling, who's great. I'm HannahClaireBrimlow. You can find me on Instagram at hannahclaire.b and on X at hannahclaireb. Thanks for everything you guys do.

Have a good night. We will see you all over at timcast.com in about one minute. Thanks for hanging out.