Will Cain Country - Expert Reveals How AI Is Exposing Fraud and Predicting Elections (ft. Jeremy Jones)

Episode Date: February 5, 2026

Jeremy Jones, Rhetor AI Co-founder, joins Will to explain why artificial intelligence is transforming politics, fraud detection, and elections. Jones argues traditional polling is no longer trustworthy, predicts major surprises in the midterms, and explains how AI is uncovering massive fraud in healthcare and government spending. Will and Jeremy also break down propaganda, sentiment shaping, and why public opinion may be far more stable than the media suggests. Plus, Will and The Crew give their picks for who will win Super Bowl LX and debate if they will be watching the official Bad Bunny Half Time show or Kid Rock's TPUSA alternative. Subscribe to ‘Will Cain Country’ on YouTube here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch Will Cain Country!⁠⁠⁠ Follow ‘Will Cain Country’ on X (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), Instagram (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), TikTok (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), and Facebook (⁠⁠⁠@willcainnews⁠⁠⁠) Follow Will on X: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@WillCain⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

AI, finding fraud and predicting political races with Jeremy Jones of Redder AI. It is Wilcane Country, normally streaming live every Monday through Thursday at 12 o'clock Eastern time at the Wilcane Country YouTube channel, also at Spotify and on Apple. Super Bowl, it is officially time for the Super Bowl. Today's Dan, tin foil pat, with us here today. We're going to be talking in just a moment. with Jeremy Jones from Redder AI about some races when it comes to the midterm elections that are not shaping up in his estimation and the way you're being told about polls. We should have asked, by the way, fellas, we should have asked him, well, who's going to win the Super Bowl?

Why did I think about that? Why did we not get a prediction for the Super Bowl? But you've always got me. I need to know. You've always got two days. You've always got tinfoil pat. Seahawks, Patriots. Improbable.

Nobody. What were the odds at the beginning of the season that this was going to be your Super Bowl? It had to be low. Super low. You made some money. You made some money. Sam Donald.

Patriots won four games last year. Sam Darnold? Who are you rooting for? Is anybody here rooting for the Patriots? Booh. I already predicted the Seahawks were going to win, so I want to be proven right. Seahawks all the way, baby.

Let's go. Oh, I'm a New York guy. I think I'm going Seahawks too. Yeah, I I mean, I have so many convoluted reasons on why I will not root for the Patriots. I don't hate the Patriots by any stretch of the imagination. I'm rooting for Sam Darnold.

I love, love, love the Sam Darnal story from an individual level for him and also for the football GM model as well. Like, I want it to be that these teams are getting these quarterbacks wrong, that second, third, and fourth chances do exist, that you don't have to be drafting in the top 10 to get yourself a franchise quarterback,

that you can reach onto the rubbish heap, the discarded toys, and find yourself a Sam Darnold. For all of those reasons, I'm rooting for Sam Donald. DeMarcus Lawrence, defensive end for the Seattle Seahawks. Long-time Dallas Cowboy, Tank Lawrence, great player, left the Cowboys this offseason, went to the, the Seahawks, I want Tank to win a Super Bowl. And then the most petty reason of all is I genuinely end up rooting against teams that are assaulting the legacy of the Dallas Cowboys.

So anybody that went, and the Patriots have already surpassed the Cowboys. So, but I just don't want to put it so far to reach that can never be caught. Well, hold on, in my mind, and I think that I'm accurate, the Cowboys are a top three to five franchise in the history of the NFL. And at one time, I would have said number one, but you can't do 30 years of what they've done and remain number one. And in that category with the Cowboys, in my mind, and this is going to make one of you mad, it's the Cowboys, it's the Cowboys, it's the Steelers, it's the Niners. And it's the Patriots. No. So that's four.

I knew, no, I don't. I thought you're going to try me. I know. I'm sorry. But, okay. Not putting the Packers in there is wild. But nobody does. I'm not alone on that, Dan.

I'm not alone. People don't put the Packers in that same category. I know you won all your world championships before the existence of the Super Bowl and before Black players were allowed to play in the NFL and all that. I don't think that's true. They won the first two. They won the first two. They have the Farr's Super Bowl, and then they have the Rogers Super Bowl.

They have four Super Bowl. That's like over the course of a long stretch of time. We're a story of organization. That's true. Okay. All right. Okay, fine. Hold on.

Make your case. Let's do this really quickly. So the Patriots now have, is it seven Super Bowl victories? Is that what they're at? They're at six. I think the Patriots. Tom Brady's at seven. No.

Yes. The Patriots are just at six? Okay. Yeah. Okay. The Cowboys are at five. The Niners, are the Niners at five as well? They should be at five.

And the Steelers are five. Are the Steelers at six? Are they not? No. What are they? Steelers should have. Steelers are five? No, the Steelers are six.

Because they have, what, the four in the 70s? Yes. The Packers have the most championships out of any team. Thank you very much. Stop, stop. So do the lions. Oh, the giant. Look at the New York Giants.

Oh, look at them go. Yeah, exactly. I'm sorry, you're mad about it, but it's true. The Cleveland Browns have some world championships. Nobody talks about that. Why not? So, okay. So, all right, Patriots at seven.

Steelers and Niners are at, six is that what you said no and the cowboys are at five give it somebody has the list right in front of them one of you guys come on give me it i'm just winging it and the packers are at four quit winging it dan you're our guy looking it up give us the list all right we got six wins from the new england patriots pittsburgh steelers we got five wins by the dallas cowboy san francisco 49ers four wins Green Bay Packers, New York Giants, Kansas City Chiefs, three wins, Denver Broncos, Raiders, commanders, two wins, Ravens, Colts, Dolphins, Eagles,

Rams, Bucks, one win, Bears, Saints, Jets, Seahawks, everybody else, zero wins. Okay, enough with that commander. Commander's in a win three. Yeah, the Redskins won those Super Bowls. Sorry about that. So, okay, I do think there's a line, and you saw where I drew the line, not conveniently.

the teams that have five plus to me are in one category. Those two teams that you said have four, the Packers and the Giants, are not quite in that same category. They're still, you know, right there, NFL 1B, Royals. But not the true Blue Bloods. They're blue bloods, but they're not as accomplished as Blue Bloods. Is that fair? Come on. They're owned by their fans.

They're not. billionaire team. They're not a one of these just bought teams. They're a team of the people. Right. Right. Small market. Also, by the way, the Cowboys have been to eight Super Bowls. Been to eight. So it's like the

quarterback debate. At some point you get credit for the losses, too. You've been to eight Super Bowls. That's also a feather in your cap. Like the Yankees. So got that going for me, which is nice. I think the Patriots have been to nine Super Bowls.

I think the Patriots have been to nine. But the point is, I can't root for the Patriots to continue to rack up the stats, the trophies. To put the Cowboys out of reach, should we ever, against all odds, return to glory. I can't, I can't root for that for the Patriots. So. How many years are we all in? By the way. They lost two with Brady with the team of Giants.

They're 85, 96 with blood cells. So that's 10. It's crazy. So this is number 11? This is number 11 for them? Yeah. I wonder if it's counting this one. Wow.

Patriots, incredible. That's why I have to root for the Seahawks. I'm sorry. That's what I have to do. I have to. End the dynasty. I also am predicting. I am predicting the Seahawks.

That is my official prediction. That defense is too good. You know, it could actually not be that close. It all depends on Drake May. The Seattle Seahawks defense is incredible. And if they run into the Drake May that throws for 100 yards, that Drake May, it won't be close. If he, as Patrick has sort of predicted, is the onset of Tom Brady. If his career arc is, Tom Brady, he doesn't have to be incredible.

He could be a bus driver quarterback. But that means he'll also step up in the big game. The system quarterback, one might say? I don't use that against anybody. I mean, Sam Darnold's been accused of that himself. No, he's a baller. And Tom Brady was at the beginning of his career. So, real quick, before we move on to our conversation today,

with Jeremy Jones or Redder AI, I don't need to ask you, Dan. You're going to be watching Bad Bunny. Patrick, are you going to watch Bad Bunny? Are you switching over to Turning Points Halftime show? Which, by the way, has Kid Rock and Lee Bryce, and I don't know who else. I might not even watch the game. I might just watch Bad Bunny. Yeah, I'm just watching Kid Rock.

I mean, like, I don't say that just because I'm trying to get a booked or anything like that for the show. But, like, I'm all in on this Turning Point halftime show. What do you got to do? Where do you watch it? YouTube. Do you switch over YouTube to see that? YouTube, TurningPoint.us.com. Yeah.

Jack Posobic said he's going to be just doing it on his feet on X. So it's going to be everywhere. Literally just go on the internet. You're going to see it everywhere. They asked me to play too, but I couldn't do it. So, you know. All right, there you go. I hope you enjoy the Super Bowl.

I can never remember. Super Bowl is one of those things. I can't remember what number we're on. Let me guess. Are we at Super Bowl? 61? 59? What are we on?

Are you joking? No, I really don't know. What is this? It's a nice round 60. Just 60. 6-0 Oh, why is Why joking?

Because I missed it by one Or I didn't know it was the round number No, because it's like it's a big number It's 60 Yeah I couldn't name the Super Bowl's the Cowboys won I don't know which ones they were They did it in Roman numerals back in the day

They still, I never knew I don't care about the number It's like no, it was in the 30s, wasn't it? Was it the 20s? Yeah, it was in the 20s It's been a while Okay, enough of that. Enjoy the Super Bowl.

Let's take a quick break, but we'll be right back on Will Cain Country. This is Ainsley Earhart. Thank you for joining me for the 52 episode podcast series, The Life of Jesus. A listening experience that will provide hope, comfort, and understanding of the greatest story ever told. Listen and follow now at Fox Newspodcasts.com, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Jeremy Jones is the co-founder of Redder AI,

which is an AI toolbox that is being deployed in politics on voter sentiment. They say that it is giving you a much more accurate picture than modern polling. And you'll hear him say he thinks it's the end of polling. I had this conversation a little bit earlier with Jeremy. He described Dan, by the way, as center right. I was going to tell him he's wrong. I think Dan's center left. But he's clearly watched the show.

Know some of the things that the boys and I have said in the past. And he talks as well about the role of AI in catching fraud. Here is Jeremy Jones. Jeremy Jones is the co-founder of Ritter AI, bringing the moneyball approach to politics in finding fraud. And Jeremy, Jeremy. How's it going? How are you? I'm good, man. AI, all right.

Just this week on Will King Country, Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator of CMS, talked about AI being an entirely new tool that is going to help us sort out all of this fraud. like we've seen in Minnesota. Tell me how AI can do that and do that quickly and do that accurately. Yeah, I think AI is kind of the buzzword and it's a catch-all for a lot of things. So I'll zoom back a little bit. I think people, the way that they think about AI is just their chatbot that they use, OpenAI, Gemini, whatever it is, right? But what AI actually is, it's not artificial or intelligent.

What it really is is a really, really, really, really good auto-complete, right? And to think about when you're building an AI system, what you, the human being actually is as a baker. And if you're trying to bake a cake, you know, I don't bake my wife bakes, but I know kind of the roundabout way of how to do it, is you need the ingredients and you need a recipe. And if you don't have missing, if you have missing ingredients and if you don't have the right recipe, you're essentially making trash, right? So the trash is AI slop.

What we do is give you the recipe and actually find the ingredients. What AI is really good at is baking really, really, really quickly at the scale of a thousand, 10,000, a million human beings. So what Dr. Oz is talking about when it comes to fraud is, if you can find a pattern, and there's kind of a certain recipe for every state, well, I'm sure we'll get talking about this later, but we are the founder or one of the advisors for Cal Doge out in California. And what we're helping the Cal Doge team do and Steve Hilton do is locate fraud in California, make it verifiable and let the people know where their dollars are going.

So what we do is we first embed ourselves in a team or in this case in California, figure out what the recipe is for that fraud, right? Like what the certain kind of flavor is in Minnesota and the Somali fraud that Nick Shirley found, the recipe was daycares, right? So like that was the recipe. Then what you look for is ingredients, right? So you look for what are the common ingredients across all of these instances? And if you have those kind of things, it becomes fairly trivial for you that then run a prompt to figure out where that is in a certain given demographic or a certain given state.

So you can see through AI the various ingredients in the recipe that might be repeating themselves in other arenas in other fields. But does it need a human to sort of initiate the initial suspicion or can AI look for aberrations in the application of Medicare and Medicaid? That's a beast. it's huge Medicare and Medicaid. There's so much money going and so many different potentialities for fraud. Can AI at this point look at all that distribution of money and go, that right there is an aberration. That's a red flag? Yeah, so the best way I usually describe it.

So we use what we do. We've got this thing that we do called forward deployed engineering. So we'd embed ourselves in any given thing. We don't have a solution out of the box. We build custom solutions for the teams we work with or the departments. we work with, what AI is really good at is bringing it 90%. So yes, AI can look at something like Medicaid and flag anomalies, but what it can't do is say, I flag this anomaly and I send it to DOJ for prosecution.

So what we do is we flag anomalies and then we give it to either a DOJ or a prosecutor, whoever else needs to look at that anomaly and then vet it. So we still have, we've got a team of people that vet all of the things that we do, that source it, that makes sure that AI is in hallucinating, that verifies it. But what it does is it cuts down to time to look at all of this paperwork by a thousand. So yes and, right? So yes and. AI, the scale of data doesn't really matter to AI, honestly.

And I understand Medicaid is gigantic and the US government's gigantic, but we at how we started, we took the whole entire US government, we put it into an LLM. So like it's fairly trivial for us to take California or Minnesota or Ohio. But what it will do is then flag all of those things for human being who can take from 90 to 100 and then start prosecuting those cases. And it seemed to me we've probably had technological tools to flag anomalies in the past, but the difference now is the speed and scale. Yes, exactly.

You can do it so much faster and you can do so much more. And it's also pattern recognition, right? So you had ways where, like Palantir, the whole way Palantir was built was from PayPal's algorithm to flag fraud. So they had to build this custom tool because when you took payment, since you put them online, miraculously, you had more fraud. So you had to figure out how do we prevent fraud. So they built this custom algorithm, then they realized that this thing was super powerful,

then they built Palantir. So what AI does is it remembers and it has context, so you then can apply and it gets better as it learns. So then you can apply and do it at scale. So we've had systems before that would flag an instance of fraud, but it would go one by two, by three, by four. Now you can run a million different data points, and the more data you have, the more intelligent it gets, and the quicker it flags it.

So would you suspect, Jeremy, that with these tools at our disposal now, like, not that fraud is a thing of a past, because fraudsters are always going to be trying to be ahead of whatever, any criminal was always trying to be head of law enforcement, but I would have to think that we would be on the verge of potentially dramatically reducing fraud. Yeah. What's the saying?

sunlight is the best disinfectant or light is the best disinfectant. That is true for fraud. And what we've noticed, and this is kind of crazy to think, like once we started digging in a, I live in a small town in Michigan, so like just setting foot in California and starting to touch, getting an understanding of what the fraud looks like, it's kind of crazy how rampant it is, and how prevalent it is, and how little they did to stop fraud.

Legitimately, they didn't have fail safes for pretty much any of their systems. And it was so trivial to abuse those systems. And the only thing was this like human, this American desire to not defraud their government, which, and I hope we touch on this later. But when you bring folks in from a low trust society and their relationship with the government is, like, what do you mean you're not defrauding your government? Like, what? If you start to bring people like that in who understand that, holy cow, I can just abuse the government and milk it and no one stops me. And then I can go tell my friends and I can go bring in more people to do that. That is kind of where we were.

So even if you just add minimal safeguards and you let people know that, hey, we're going to start prosecuting this or we're going to put a stop to it, I guarantee you fraud goes down 80, 90%. Okay. We don't have to wait until later. That's totally interesting. And I'm into that. No, like bringing people in from low trust societies, high corruption societies, the mechanism that controls their behavior isn't what you said might have been the American. the prevalent American ideology, like that's wrong to do. It wasn't the moral barrier that was holding them back.

It was the, this is so easy. Why wouldn't you do it? This is ridiculous. And we know from various cultures, like there is a mindset. Like, if they're that stupid, you're stupid for not doing it to them. Right. Exactly. There is that in a lot of cultures.

But what you're saying is simply by having this tool to catch people, you create the new barrier. It's not so easy. So maybe you shouldn't do it. They are trying to stop it. So maybe you shouldn't do it. Yeah, and obviously having clear immigration policies, making sure that you understand who you're bringing into the country, right? Just logic 101 for any country. I feel like these things are bipartisan.

Like we also do sentiment analysis to sentiment polling. And the SAVE Act, for instance, is a 90-10 issue. 90% of Americans agree with, hey, I use an ID for everything in life. and maybe I should use an ID to vote. Like, I think that makes a lot of sense. Right? So like just things like that, like we talk about, it doesn't really matter to me if it's a specific Somali thing

that is happening or a racial thing. We should probably have fail saves for our welfare state. If we have a welfare state, we should probably have fail safes to make sure governmental aid goes to people who need it, right? Just like voting. We should probably have fail saves. I don't care if voter fraud is happening or not, by the way, I think it is. But I don't care if it is.

conversation is maybe we should do simple things to make sure it doesn't happen. That to me feels logic, right? And that's kind of what we exist for. That's actually a good transition into what else you guys are doing at Rutter AI, which is about polling. Let's let's back into this conversation through this. I've been fascinated by this conversation, Jeremy, and that is that to the best that I can consume existing polls, it looks like the American public is in support of deportation as a concept. But then, that's what they'll tell a pollster, but then for a great percentage of those people, I don't know what percentage, they seem to then not like it in execution and an application. I could be wrong. We don't know completely. And that's the great big question. Will Republicans

be punished in the midterms because people don't like seeing the thing they've asked you to do? We've voted on these laws. We've democratically elected these laws. We tell a pollster, we like these laws enforced. But then when we actually see it, we're like, oh, no, no, no, I don't like that or some percentage of us. What do you see, like in the polling? That's a big part of what you guys are doing at Rudder. That's, yeah, so we do sentiment analysis for keywords and things like that, that we tell our clients, like, fraud and for the GOP is a really big talking point, and we need to bring it back into the mainstream conversation. And then obviously, the one hot button issue for everybody now in the progressive left is like our friends and neighbors

and deportations and those kind of things. And you're exactly right. Like I said, right, the SAVE Act is 90-10 issue, the majority of people understand that, and it's kind of downstream from this immigration conversation as well, we should probably understand who comes into our country. Having closed borders is probably a good thing, and making sure that criminals are not in our country is a good thing, right? And we're seeing the effects of deporting criminals. Crime is down 25, 30 percent in most places. I moved out of Chicago, but the reason we close our business is because crime was rampant,

largely due to the Venezuelans coming in and causing crime. But the problem is, like you said, is the person. of how it's being done. And because the progressive left is very good at propaganda and very good at shaping and using words to shape perception, that is what people say when they say, I don't like the way things are being done. It's a feeling. And I want your users to think back on BLM and all of these other issues since the 1990s.

It really, all it really is is shaping language to shape reality. So like you have people from the outside looking in logically, it's a tragedy. what happened to the two people that died. I'm a believer. I think every life matters. It hurts me to see people die. But when you have elected officials that go on TV that tell you to put your bodies on the line, a lot of these folks who are in signal chats to tell you just, I think a couple of days ago, there was an elected official. I forgot who it was, that said, hey, you need to be going and getting educated and taking these classes online and these Zoom calls that educate you on how to be a legal observer. Just the notion of being a legal observer,

that thing wasn't a statement. If I told you in 2020, like, oh, you got to go be a legal observer. You would have looked at me like I'm from the moon. Right. So when people say, I don't like how it's being done, really what they're talking about is the lens of propaganda that are being fed.

Because, like, Barack Obama, Tom, Tom Homan was a Barack Obama's ice chief. Barack Obama gave him a medal for deporting, I think what was it, a million folks, right? Like Chuck Schumer's on record. Bill Clinton's on record. Barack Obama, deporter and chief, people were marching on Washington because he was deporting too many people.

CNN ended a ride along, right? But the thing is, like, people still agree with the sentiment, but what they don't like is the way it's being done. And we, I, it's a very tough decision because, again, like, I think I understand why ICE agents wear masks because of the cartel. I understand they're putting their lives at risk, but we're giving these people, and I say these people, the progressive left and the propaganda arm, fodder, to shape people's perspectives. Let's take quick break, but continue this conversation with Jeremy Jones of Redder AI here on Wilcane Country. Welcome back to Will Kane Country.

We're still hanging out with Jeremy Jones of Redder AI. But in what you guys have been able, and to the extent that you have analyzed this through your polling tools, is that characterization, as I described it, accurate? Are people? We don't know right now. We have a ton of different polls out of every different strike. right now. But what does the, if the midterms were tomorrow, and we've seen some special elections that would suggest maybe this is true. We don't know for sure why people voted a certain way

they did. But if the elections were tomorrow, would people be punished because of the perception after ingesting this propaganda? The answer is yes. And so under fringes, where the propaganda is being skewed and where thinking is being skewed, there are largely liberal places anyway. And what you saw in a special election, it was mostly because of where the special elections were and the demographic breakdowns, not necessarily a large scale sentiment shift. So yes on the edges, but in the large races, specifically the senatorial races, the answer is no. I don't think our data tells us that people's opinion hasn't changed much. And as a matter of fact, it shifted drastically. We ran sentiment after Alex Preti died.

And the overwhelming, and I watched your show immediately after you gave a phenomenal explanation. I think people should go watch it. But one of your producers, you were having a conversation with one of your producers about this. And even he, my assumption is that his temperament is mostly center-right, right? Even he was shocked to the core the day after, watching the video of Alex Prattie.

But now the longer that you let it play out, it's exactly like the BLM issue, the longer the American populace watches these videos and watches these rioters now stopping regular citizens and checking and running license plates, having the signal chat come out and understanding that this is a large, scale propaganda machine, having the same people being bust across the country.

Like the American populace isn't dumb, and they're switching extremely hard on, okay, maybe this propaganda thing isn't working anymore, and maybe deportations are a good thing, and these are isolated cases, and maybe they're egging on officers and putting them in a position to make bad decisions, right? So that's what we're seeing now. Do you think, since we're six months out, Jeremy, so would it be your prediction, and we never know, we don't know what events will take place between? between now and the midterms, but would your guess, based upon your sentiment, polling, and so forth,

be that what we've seen play out right now won't be something that's driving voter turnout in November? I actually, what we're seeing, given the way that it's going, and obviously these things are evolving, right? Like we could have multiple more mass shooting, or deaths do the ICE enforcement and those kind of things. But our position is continue enforcement. Our position is the American people put you in a place to secure our elections.

that to get the criminals out and to make sure that our country is safe, continue to make sure that you use that mandate to execute on those things, and don't take your hand off of the button for the Democrats and hold their hands to the fire of what they're doing. Make sure what I would do is have, remember when we had this conversation around body cams and everybody was afraid of putting body cams on police because it would harm sentiment?

Yes. It actually boosted sentiment for police. videotape every enforcement action that ICE is making is specifically in the street. Then the second that you see, and this is something I want the American people to really understand, there's a reason why the number one imperative for these legal observers is to have a cell phone out. They want everything to be on tape and they want that to hit social media immediately. And then they go out and they tell you emotions over facts, ignore the facts, look at the emotion, how does it make you feel? If we have the same thing for all of our ICE agents, we would have,

understood that the day later from the incident happening that Alex Prattie was kicking the ice vehicle, spitting at ice officers, carrying a gun. Who knows how many times he carried a six hour to these places. And you know, like logically, I had a conversation with my wife about this. I'm 250 pounds. I'm six foot three. I'm a black man. I told my wife, what if I took my gun, went downtown, and started heckling police? What did it likely What are the chances of me returning home?

90%? 95% that I'm not returning home. Right? So like at some point we have to have a conversation about, like, yes, it's a tragedy he died, but at some point we have to have a conversation about the kinds of people that are becoming these legal observers and the onus on the elected politicians, and I think the American populace is now waking up to that.

So, roundabout way, continue enforcement. In six months, it'll be a blip, and backing off, will actually be giving the Democrats what they want. Let's talk about your polling tools a little bit because you've heard me express my skepticism about various polls. The industry has earned that skepticism over time. It's gotten several elections wrong and so forth. How is what you guys are doing better insight?

Two things. I think important to kind of level set on polling. If I'm a pollster and that's all I do, let's talk about incentives. Right. So we're watching a few races. One of the races we're watching this down. in Texas, the way we are viewing the race in Texas, particularly the Senate race, is very different than the rest of the pollsters.

We actually have Wesley Hunt either winning or being very, very close for a runoff with A.G. Paxton. I don't see a way where John Cornyn ends up winning that race or even getting to the runoff. If you talk to any traditional pollster, they have John Cornyn in one or two. Why? John Cornyn is the guy who has the most money in the race, right? So if my bacon is made from making money, what I will do and what I'm incentivized to do is say, oh, you are all close within three or four percent.

Oh, and by the way, the margin of error is 5 percent. But if I'm a public pollster and my bacon is being greased by the DNC, and Seltzer was famous for this in Iowa, my objective now is to use polling as propaganda. Like how do I, if it's a public-facing poll and a person isn't paying me, it's not internal polling, my objective now is to make the people believe that the outcome is already done, right? That Hillary Clinton's already won, that Kamala Harris is leading in the polls, and that she's going to win Iowa by a landslide, right? So like, by and large, incentives have tweaked how polling is done, and polling is just something as a byproduct of what

we do and what we offer our clients. So our goal is to make, make it easier for people of merit and service-oriented leaders to run for office. Traditionally, those clients have less money. And that's kind of what we do. And it tends to work out. What is it? What are you? So let's let's stick with that Texas Senate race. Because yes. And by the way, do we are you working with Wesley Hunt? So yeah, I don't know if there is. Full disclosure. Full disclosure. So maybe there's a conflict there or incentive there. But whatever. Let everybody understand that. And they can, they can compensate for with that knowledge in hand. You're clearly coming up with a very different conclusion than everybody else about the state of that race. Like the state of that race as told

by most polls and most people inside of politics is it is a Paxton-Cornan runoff. And by the way, most of them would say Paxton's going to win that primary. With Wesley Hunt playing a spoiler role or a far third place role, if you're coming up with something else, you're telling me you think Wesley Hunt is in the runoff and possibly leading. How are you getting? to that? So the way that we do, and as a primer, my job isn't to sell Wesley Hunt polls. My job is to help all of our clients win an election. So to be very clear, right? So if Wesley were losing, I would tell him he's losing. I would be on TV saying he's losing because he needs to get his behind in gear. Wesley is now touring the state of Texas. I think he's been to a different city in Texas over the past two weeks. He's a phenomenal leader. I think he is what a service-oriented leader should be. But all of that aside, how we do say, how we do sentiment polling and sentiment analysis, we offer our clients a holistic view of where their name is mentioned, when it's mentioned, right? Aggregate all of their mentions across social media, TV, radio, all of those things at a click of a button on the dashboard. So if you think about the totality view of what we do, it's 50,000, 60,000 different data points.

Then we leverage our AI solutions, right? We talked about the beginning of the show how data and the more data you have and the better the recipe, the more accurate information you get, just like in fraud. we do the same thing for sentiment. So we code every single mention, positive, negative, neutral, and then we go deeper and code every positive mention. Is it happy? Is it joyful? Is it this, that or the other?

And then for the negative mentions, are people angry? Are people disgusted? Right? Like what a coded language are they using? And then what we do is we filter out the bots. And then we prompt against that to give you a holistic view of what messaging is working, what messaging is not working, what is your opponent saying that's landing. And frankly, to us,

us, it doesn't matter where you rank in the poll because my job is to have you win. It's not for you to pay me to make you feel good. And that's generally what pollsters are now is I want to pay you to make me feel good. Let's take quick break, but continue this conversation with Jeremy Jones of Redder AI here on Wilcane Country. The score bet app here with trusted stats and real-time sports news. Yeah, hey, who should I take in the Boston game? Well, statistically speaking. Nah, no more statistically speaking. I want hot takes. I want knee-jerk reactions. That's not really what I do. Is that because you don't have any knees? Or? The score bet. Trusted sports content, seamless sports betting. Download today. 19 plus,

Ontario only. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or the gambling of someone close to you, please go to conicsonterio.ca. With MX Platinum, almost every purchase made with your card can be covered with points, including new tastes, new fits, and virtually everything in between. That's the powerful backing of Amex. Conditions apply. Welcome back to Will Kane Country. We're still hanging out with Jeremy Jones of Redder AI. Does your model risk being essentially, and I won't say this in the smartest way possible, is it risk being too online?

We always wonder how much of the electorate is quiet out there, not commenting, not participating, but consuming, letting it wash over them to some extent in some cases. that's where name ID comes in. Like, do people even know who you are when they decide to go vote? But how do you, and I don't know anymore. I don't know how much of the electorate is a participant in online culture, making those comments that you can index. Two things. I'll answer to question second, but I'll flip it around and say, yes, there's some skepticism that like, yeah, okay, you guys are doing stuff online. But what is the likelihood if I called a random person right now that they answer the phone?

What would you peg that at? Right. 20%, 30%. Right. So what you're telling me is you're comparing that against the way others poll. Right. Exactly. So a traditional pollster, the way that they work is, like, yes, they do some in-person polling, but it's very expensive.

So it's either via SMS or via phone call, right? So what are the chances that I have a spam blocker on my phone? if a random person I get robot calls 24-7 what are the likelihood of me answering a phone and secondly what is the likelihood of me telling a stranger authentic feelings about the way I view something that has become tribal like politics that to me feels almost less likely than the edge case that we are air quotes to online because keep in mind we're also listening to radio right we're also listening to to TV we're like We aggregate all of these things and we don't like, we don't know who is saying it, but we know what is being said, and then we're in the conversation. And that's kind of like a little bit more accurate. And then we get very good at understanding where to source things. Like for instance, X, despite all the conversation, thank God Elon bought X, by the way.

It's still the place for free speech and to have conversations. And despite people thinking it's mostly right-leaning, that is still the place where people are having political discourse, and it is still the place where you can get really tapped into what is happening, when is it happening, and where. Case in point, Nick Shirley, we had a conversation with Nick the other week. We're probably going to be doing some stuff with him. And guess how many people his video reached since it dropped? Oh, gosh. In the tens of millions? No. Since the video dropped, hold on to this, because you're in media. Over six billion people.

Six billion people. Yeah. Six billion people. A 23-year-old kid who is a dynamo, by the way. I've met him, talked to him for 20 minutes. He was fantastic. His mom is amazing. I wish my kids turned out to be that way. But six billion people of a kid who showed up with a microphone and a camera in Minnesota and hit record. Like, everything is online now. So polling, this is the year. Obviously, I'm very biased and I want this to be true. but legitimately, I think this is the year that polling genuinely dies. It's already been happening with Polly Market, right? Like you've already had this conversation on the fringes

with Polly Market being the new thing. There's a lot of problems with Polly Market, especially at like super local races and how thin the books are. But what we're doing, we genuinely believe is the future of polling. And we'll see, right? Like the midterms are this year. We'll see. We have Wesley Whitting, or at least making the runoff,

and we think he has a really strong chance. If that doesn't happen, I'll eat my words. But if it does, we're right. What is Polymarket, what does Polymarket currently say about that race, for example? We've got a bet going on Polymarket. Wesley is at five cents. Wesley is five cents compared. I think last time I checked, Paxton was winning.

But Cornyn was at about 38 cents. So 38%, like for people who don't know how Polymarket works, the cents are essentially a percentage, right? So you can buy a dollar for five cents. If Wesley wins right now, you can turn five cents into a dollar. So the odds are almost non-existent for Wesley. But the problem is the books are so thin. Right.

Right. Like nobody is taking those bets because nobody's interested in them yet. There aren't that many people who are paying attention to the Senate race that are actually able to place a bet on polymarket and excited to do so. And they're very easy. Do you think polymarket's more accurate, more reliable? Yeah, I think I know what you're about to say, manipulatable from big bets and that kind of thing.

Yes. Yes. Yes. What do you think at the, at the bigger, At the bigger scale, so a presidential race, the Super Bowl, whatever, do you think polymarkets much better at those events? Yeah. So let me back up before I answered a question to give people a framework to understand what I say, thin books. When I say thin books, literally what I'm saying is like there aren't that many people betting. And when you look at, like if I buy 10 million shares of the SEP 500, it won't move the needle.

because there's so many people buying and selling that my order flow will get absorbed. If I buy 10 million shares of a penny stock, more than likely the price is going to move significantly. Now, Polymarket, even at the top end, isn't S&P 500. It's still a penny stock. But if I'm buying a penny of a penny of a penny of a penny stock on, like if I put 50 grand down on Wesley, it'd probably remove his odds from five cents to 15 cents. Right. So like those things are very doable.

and until we get Polymarket to be omnipresent and really get a lot of volume, that's really the only way you get signal. There's professional traders, by the way, on Polymarket, and what they'll tell you is the only things that they bet on are the super, super small races. Or the super, super small instances like, will the weather be warmer tomorrow in Iowa? Or will corn grow? They'll avoid things like the Super Bowl or like the presidential election because there's just too many people. There's not much edge. Right. Okay, Redder, you guys, you've looked at a few other races, anticipation of the midterms that you think are also, like Wesley Hunt, your tools are telling you different, something different than what everyone's reporting in the polls. Yeah. So my hometown of Michigan, and I wish the GOP paid attention. John James actually has a chance to win governorship. We actually think the governorship is more important than a Senate race. We think if John James wins the governorship, Mike Rogers ends up winning that Senate seat.

We think, or at least I think, I'm very biased. I wasn't doing this when Alyssa Slaken was running against Mike Rogers, but we feel Mike Rogers should have and had a chance to beat her. He has a chance to win. So Michigan is another one of those places where you could have governorship and the Senate race. The race in, I don't know if you watched the debate in California yesterday. I stayed up late to watch the debate in California.

A friend of the show, I think a friend of yours, Steve Hilton, crushed it, actually crushed it. And even the viewers of the debate agreed. I think they ran like a little text in poll or call in poll, whatever it was. 76% of the viewers who called in thought Steve Hilton won to race. And this was in California, by the way. And he was the only one that looked like he should be there at all. I know Matt Mayhan is now the darling of the tech industry,

but Steve Hilton, I think, has a really strong chance, especially if they're able to consolidate the Republican vote between Cheb Bianco and Steve Hilton in some way. And then the other piece is Minnesota. I think Minnesota's up for grabs. It's one of those things specifically what we talked about around ice. The split in Minneapolis is super woke against anti-ice, but the second you move towards the suburbs, it's actually pro-border. It's pro-immigration.

It's pro getting these people out. Right? And Michelle Tofoya entering the Minnesota race, we haven't rented numbers yet because it's too new. But Adam Schwarzy, who is a Republican there, we had him with a strong chance of winning in Minnesota. So we're probably assumed that Michelle Tofoya is going to have a bigger bump because she's got name ID. So those are, those are a few races, but we're really watching the Texas race, the California governorship race, Michigan and Minnesota. Well, Jimmy, we'd love to keep

you coming back as we approach the midterms. We would love to keep seeing where you guys think the public sentiment is comparing that to the polymarket, comparing that to the polls over the next couple of months. This has been absolutely fascinating. So if you're free, we'd love to have you back several times. Anytime. I hear a great man that you interviewed in Iowa told me

that you have great ratings. Tremendous. Tremendous ratings. I would love to come back. I would love to come back and get those tremendous ratings. He's a great hype man. I appreciate the president of the United States.

Luckily, luckily I didn't have to follow him because, man, what a show to follow. Well, thank you. Jeremy Jones, Redder AI. We appreciate the time. Thank you, Jeremy. Thank you.

There you go. I hope you enjoyed that conversation with Jeremy Jones. Check out Redder AI and enjoy the Super Bowl. Follow us at Spotify, Apple, and on YouTube, and we will see you again next time. Listen to Ad Free with a Fox News Podcast Plus subscription on Apple Podcasts. And Amazon Prime members, you can listen to this show, ad free on the Amazon Music app.