E4: Politicizing the pandemic, Police reform, Twitter vs Facebook with David Sacks & David Friedberg

all right everybody welcome back to the all in podcast we're here with Jamal Paula Hypatia David Freiburg and David sacks our usual usual foursome as we chop up the business news and what's going on and just as a point of order the frequency of the show is well don't don't ask as we feel like it as we feel like it correct so do not ask me to advertise on the podcast because Tremont band advertising and do not ask me when the next one is the next one is when trauma the sides he wants to go on a rant but well how are you holding up best EC best he's doing pretty well yeah and the family

everything or have you come out of quarantine in any way so the first question I have for people is has your behavior change now as we go into I think what most people are calling phase two any change in what you're doing in the risk you're willing to take come off it's a really good question you know i i i've kind of ventured out a little bit but i just kind of put on a mask the only place i don't wear a mask is when i walk around my house just because it's you know i live in the suburbs and so there's just so much space between people that you don't really run into anybody but if I have to

go to Walgreens or CVS or whatever I always bring a mask and gloves so I've got I've ventured out a little bit but you know nothing nothing meaningful to be quite honest and Saks you're still out of the country in an undisclosed location how are you feeling about what risks you're willing to take I you know small groups of people are you going out to a restaurant are you seeing other people how do you look at the risk you're willing to take personally I've adjusted my risk profile I think quite a bit so I mean that the the learning over the past few months was just that relatively

that the fatality rate for say relatively healthy people under 50 without risk factors is you know fifty times lower then say you know someone under over 60 or someone who has risk factors and so I'm not being reckless but I'm willing to kind of rien social behavior among groups of friends and on the theory that you know all my friends have been locked down I was I was in total lockdown for two months sort of my friends and so you know I have several questions the first is I mean how will do you look like 90 roughly how old are you exactly so how does how did the risk factors apply

to you second you have friends no there's three on this call Zach C Pugh I love you I miss ya no I mean you raise a good point I mean my physical age might be 90 but my lungs are only 48 years old so my my hopefully my my lungs are you know qualifying that under 50 category so you know I've been playing golf with friends you know I've I've kind of widened the the circle of people I'm willing to let into my quarantine basically so by a dozen by a hundred by about I've actually let in at not all at once but at different times probably about twenty people got it so you feel

comfortable and those people you do ask them have you quarantined have you been wearing masks have you been tested or are you just like I kind of I mean I I generally know that people I mean now this may change over the next few months but everyone's been kind of under shelter in place and so if you were gonna start to socializing or with your friends this would be the safest time to do it because everybody has been sort of locked down to some degree and you know most places have been closed and so you know if your friends having gotten it they're probably pretty safe all right

swinging over to you Dave Friedberg tell me what you think of Sachs's position obviously Tremont's still in quarantine you know venturing off to the store once in a while sacks opening up to you know 20 people or whatever in small groups playing golf outdoors but I'm assuming he's not having like an indoor party for 50 obviously how would you look at the risk he's taking and what risk are you taking Friedberg personally in your life I'm not too dissimilar I've got about eight buddies coming over to the pool this afternoon we're gonna do kind of like a Father's Day hang

session but we're gonna be outside and I've done a lot of hiking without masks and going outside without maths I'm not really too concerned about outdoor behavior there was a good analysis done that showed increasing cases where they actually found the origin of where transmission occurred ninety seven percent occurred indoors so generally speaking like outdoor activity to me is like pretty reasonable to do so I'm pretty free with like doing stuff outside meeting friends outside hanging out by the pool and I've got a bunch of people come by and hang out and then

indoor stuff I try and avoid so if I'm gonna go into a supermarket I'll wear or grocery store I'll wear a mask and I'll be in there as short a time period as I need to be and I'm certainly not going into restaurants and stuff like that but you would sit outdoors at a restaurant I would assume if the tables were six feet apart would you go to a restaurant and sit in the recipe yeah I'm not rushing to do that just yet there's just something a little bit weird about the way some of those are configured but generally yes like outdoor seems fine you know but like the way they set it up

it's almost like you're exposing yourself to a bunch of people around you because they're pretty confined spaces if they're setting up these tables at and that but yeah sunlight and wind effectively will you know break apart the protein that that is the virus and and you will not have this kind of infectious viral particle and so that's a pretty you know well understood thing at this point and you know but it's not spoken about as much by public health officials because they don't want to kind of mitigate the concern and they don't want people to start taking off

maps and you know taking on very risky behavior but yeah generally speaking I think kind of like outdoor behavior is pretty pretty safe and non non transmissible I the risky stuff I'm doing is you know we had a you know just having like folks come back to the house and that's where I kind of still try and draw the line which is having people in the house and you don't know where they've been and so that's a little bit concerning inside the house the spittle particles with Kovan 19 in of them if they did would be lingering that is what I'm sorry to be graphic but that is the concern

correct Freiburg is that when you're outdoors the spittle would blow away and the dirt is right I mean it really doesn't happen so the liquid that holds the protein because the protein needs to be in a liquid to kind of maintain its integrity when that evaporates and it'll evaporate from wind or from Sun and that protein will degrade it becomes kind of a non-infectious particle at that point and so when you're inside and you don't have those mechanisms that particle can just float around in the air and that's how it gets spread and that's why in the tracing work that was done

it shows like 97% of cases happen in an indoor environment just like this and I don't believe in the 6-foot thing I think it's [ __ ] like if you're 6 foot away from someone in a room people are coughing and that room gets filled with those particles over a one hour period it doesn't matter if you're [ __ ] six feet away or 20 feet away that stuff's in the air so this whole notion about like hey distance yourself in a restaurant indoor space it's like no that's actually not going to necessarily solve a problem maybe if someone immediately sneezed you'll avoid it but

I mean certainly since active advocacy for mass he free burgers are you is that an aura ring your own yeah have you tried it yeah I I actually just bought it a few weeks ago and I've been using it to monitor my sleep but the there was an article that said that you know I think that all the NBA players are going to be given these aura rings as well because it can apparently detect coronavirus three days ahead of other people other other ways because it can see a change in your basal sort of body temperature yes so UCSF ran this beta with them and they developed this algorithm that they

think it's pretty predictive so we'll see if it works in production but yeah that's the theory well there's also this connected thermometer that if you use it I forgot the name of it it sends all the data to a central repository and they've been able to predict it as well and this just when we look at how the government I think it's called rekt attempt wrecked attempt it has to go in your rectum yeah just whatever is going out of your rectum it goes right to who the government now it there and but this is an interesting thing when you think about low-cost

ways to deal with this the amount of money we pour it into the system shamov is so great that if we just sent every single person in America and aura ring or one of these thermometers and said just take your Thurmont your temperature all the day we would know where the outbreaks were and that would be a lot less expensive than a lot of the stimulus we're doing to try to cure what's going on do you agree that we should maybe include that in some sort of approach look I think that I think the basic issue is that something really odd has happened in the United States and we

were talking about this in our group chat which is that we have managed to find a way to politicize absolutely everything and you know some things for example like universal basic income or you know what is our national policy towards China those are political issues but things of public health when they get sort of distorted and viewed through a political lens or just idiotic you know we view masks as a political statement we view we would view these aura rings as you know people being afraid that the government was going to track them so we'll find every good will find a

lot of excuses in order to blow up any good idea at this point because we can politicize anything and we do it better than any other country in the world you know it's an interesting point you make there and I'm gonna I'm gonna go to you in a second Sachs if you pull up my computer for a second Nick one thing I cannot understand when I watch the media or I watch this discussion and we haven't seen doctor foul Chi in about 60 days I don't know where they buried him but he's been put in a bunker somewhere but the number of deaths in the United States continues to go

down massively now I know New York was a big outbreak and that contributes to it but at the same time if you look and you compare deaths to new cases you know the new cases has increased in some regions and testing has gone way up so in trying to interpret this data I don't understand why there's not somebody saying listen here's the newse debts are going way down testing is going way up and here's what we should take from that sax I think you and I are might be slightly different sides of the aisle when it comes to to politics how do you look at this in terms of

leadership at a federal level and then the media and how you know to jamaat's point we politicize this yeah well I agree that that things get overly politicized and mass is a is a really good example it's just a really common sense easy solution you know I wrote a blog that we covered on this pod two and a half months ago saying that I thought math should be public mass wearing should be policy it should be the law little did I know that I was taking a left-wing position yeah did you lose any friends over that right still talking to you I mean I know you guys have me on the show

as the the token right winger but actually I just appear at CNN just asked me to be on the show today to explain why mass should be policy so I I just thought that was a common-sense thing you know I'm normally very receptive to libertarian arguments but you know like like we talked about the boundaries of libertarianism are you know you only have the freedom to wave your arms until your fist hits my nose you know and something similar is true about in when your infectious particles hit my nose you know there there are reasonable boundaries to freedom there in the interests of

other people's health and and you know that that blog a lot of public pronouncements about kovat if not aged very well over the last couple of months I think that blog actually is aged pretty well by comparison and because you just look at all the countries that have been successful at fighting kovat I mean Japan has 135 million people it's an old population and they've had under a thousand deaths South Korea 51 million people under 300 deaths you take a Western European nation like Czech Republic they had a huge kovat outbreak spike just like the rest of Europe they went

all-in on mass wearing and they've completely controlled the viruses knocked out and so it's really crazy to me that we just can't get on the same page as a country about something as obvious and easy as mass wearing and it's because we the the the the left wants to get Trump out of office so badly and they're so triggered by him and they hate him so much whether that's valid or not we'll leave aside that they want to and then he wants to say no mask I don't understand his motivation what do you what do you think Trump is thinking and who's advising him that he should be anti mask

I I think somehow it's for the right has become an act of defiance and I understand that to some degree because I do think that the lockdowns went on too long they with I think with 20/20 hindsight we would say the lockdowns weren't necessary if we had just gone all-in on a mass policy that's what they did in Japan right and so you you know the the problem the problem with kind of the the politicians in charge is that you know well backing up a second I think the right policy is to end lockdowns but where mass and the problem with the politicians is half of them didn't want

to end lockdowns and the other half didn't want to wear masks and that's kind of the the weird way in which has become this political football Trump was trying to do this as an act of defiance what was the left trying to accomplish do you think what would be your cynical or charitable approach to what their reaction to this and locking down so severely well I just I I think that what was the purpose of lockdowns I think it was the I think the initial reaction was it was based on what happened in Italy right and so in Italy we had kind of had this worst-case scenario where

the hospital system got overwhelmed you know tremendous fatality rate from the virus and then we started to see the same thing happening in New York and and I think you know blocking down briefly in New York to get a handle on the situation I think was justified I don't think again with 20/20 hindsight that we needed to do it anywhere else in the country if we had instead you know just worn masks do you think the left though perpetrated a perpetual lockdown this is the most cynical view that I've heard and I don't think you hear this often and that's part of why we do this

pockets is to sort of explore these you know kind of takes that you hear on the inside but not maybe on CNN the cynical interpretation was they wanted to keep locked down to crash the economy to make Trump look bad to get him out of the office do you think there's anything valid to that argument I you know I I don't know I yeah I mean I don't it's certainly possible I think that it's possible though that the left just kind of under weights you know the economic damage of lockdowns you know I heard a lot of arguments about from from the left that if you wanted to end lockdowns then

you care more about money than lives you can't put a price on a life which is literally what we do all the time like insurance health care we put up price on life free birth but but I was never in favor of doing nothing I mean I you know I was tweeting weeks ago that we should end lock downs but we're a mass and so my argument would be look at Japan you do more for lives and the economy by having a mass policy instead of lockdowns Freiberg what's your take on sacks estate no I don't disagree I mean I you know I'm not I'm not a great expert on kind of the politics and you know I can

kind of comment on policy I think in terms of what I think is reasonable and not I certainly you know thought that the lock downs were unreasonable in the extent but then the problem was they weren't followed so they were all for waste so the worst of all the worst of all outcomes yeah but there wasn't all huge I liked until they actually went into effect there wasn't a huge amount of debate about theirs it was just like oh [ __ ] we better all go into lockdown what happens this is almost like the human conscious and unconscious mind like you know the conscious mind rationalizes what the

unconscious already decided to do so everyone freaked out everyone had a great deal of fear we shut everything down and then the left and the right had their own rationalization after the fact you know what that meant was it good was it bad did we overreact and we under react should we have done more and so I feel like the narrative told a little bit too late here where we all kind of like have these commentaries about left and right Paul it's politics after the fact and you know I don't think it's really meaningful to be honest it's just almost like let's what's the windy what

happened story with our own point of view based on our cried for whatever we sit in so trimethyl weird how do we get out of this now because the debts are going to hangover out we're at we're up the the genies out of the bottle look the reality is there is not a single country government that can tolerate future lockdowns because I think the populations will revolt and so we're going to have to deal with cases as they crop up and we're gonna have to deal with infection rates popping up and you know we'll have to deal with these bursty economic landscape today Apple just announced

you're closing a bunch of stores and a few in a few states though I'm sure they'll reopen them in a few weeks but we're gonna be in this sort of start and stop mode now for the foreseeable future but it's just not possible to ask people now to go back into any form of quarantine or shelter-in-place I just don't think they'll do it right and people people only do lockdowns until there's some activity that they they want to engage in that they think is essential right and so you saw with the protests if you believe that the civil rights protests are essential you

believe that you're out of lockdown and you know and if you want to go to a trump rally you believe that's essential and you're out of lockdown and so you know so everybody you know you have the case in Texas of the woman who wanted to open her air cut salon and so you know you were never gonna get good compliance with a lockdown plan in addition to the damage and destruction it caused it was never very effective because people weren't willing to do it and I think the big public policy mistake here was the politicians squandering their credibility on

lock down so we're never very feasible instead of just going all in on mass and it would have been a lot cheaper I've yet by the way the other thing is we need to push mask-wearing back into a public health debate and you know Newsom yesterday gavin newsom the governor of california basically said masks are not mandatory in California the thing is you have to add fines if you don't wear them where you know people can be cited and fined and then the other thing and David you said this earlier is you have to be criminally culpable at some level if you go out of your way to not

wear a mask and infect somebody and there is a a bunch of you know case law on how this can be true and so I think that you know we need to we need to solve these things because you need to have good hygiene around mask wearing and what the consequences are if you choose to not wear one well you know chop it's interesting you bring that up there was a there have been cases of people purposely infecting people with the HIV virus and going to jail for it and being liable for it so there is I think and I'm different different coughing in somebody's face versus

having sex with them when you know you're infected what is the difference well that wouldn't have you saw this viral video of the the Karen which is a so many Karen's these days so many Karen's and Aunt Karen just like got upset that somebody was calling around for not wearing a mask in a cafe and she literally coughed on the person I know did you see that video how is yeah person not in jail I mean it's I think that was in New York right and I think it was New York and the woman didn't know she was being filmed but oh my lord I mean the great thing about the internet right

now is like if anybody basically transgresses they are identified in about a nanosecond and I mean I saw that because on sound the Saturday morning she coughed on this person who was complaining about her not wearing a mask and within 15 minutes they had her LinkedIn they had contacted Weill Medical Center where she worked and then while put out a press release basically saying we had fired her you know for being a dummy well before the mask thing and so the whole thing now just gets so adjudicated and resolved so quickly it's it's it's incredible we basically moved to judge dredd

now it's like the the social media is the judge the jury and the cops in this entire equation the one that I loved actually that that really actually frankly I look forward to was the the the cyclists in Maryland I mean you know you cannot go after kids touching another person's child and and women and like attacking them for putting up you know blacklivesmatter posters like and then to attack these but then again it was the sub community on reddit and it was amazing it was the actual like Maryland subreddit who knows what's going on in the Maryland subreddit on reddit what

could they be talking about but they identified this guy and he was fired he was arrested and it all happened with him you know probably 36 hours but you got you guys know in that story there was another guy who was identified first and he's my lease officer and people went after him and he basically had his life ruined within those first 24 hours and he will God yeah yeah he went the guy the way they died was dystrophy a data right like he had they found a guy on Slavia who had promised whatever a guy was using stevia the app that does for the bike people and they

monetize that app through subscriptions correct don't make fun of my dyslexia your mob bully me on my own podcast you say monetize on CNBC in front of millions of people it's a label you've tried to teach you how to pronounce that word for 15 years I know but I say it on purpose now and I lean into it now Moni is slightly pornographic later okay go back to your stevia story what is it wait right so so so what happened is this guy got in trouble and this is my point about the problem with the groupthink hivemind approach to these issues is you can end up not when you don't follow

a predefined due process and you let the mob kind of rule over these moments bad [ __ ] can happen too and so what happened what happened to the cop the cop II like everyone started chasing him down and like you know his whole life got ruined every was like death threats and [ __ ] with him and all that sort of stuff how calling his employer calling people who no invited but they found his phone number they found to address a dacha turned upside down yeah and but basically like the fact that they found out that it was someone else doesn't resolve the fact that there are now

hundreds of people after this guy and they don't pay attention that it wasn't him and you know due process has a role in a civilized society where you can actually create structure and resolve these things in a proper way as opposed to letting mob mentality kind of rule I mean otherwise you know this stuff can get it pretty ugly pretty fast as we saw as this being just a really you know pretty lightweight example but I'm not sure I'm a huge advocate of this like chase the guy down and then punish him at once and cancel this cancel culture is a little bit ugly right now you

don't have all the facts in this stuff in a lot of these cases yeah there is definitely it's great that you can find criminals so quickly and I'm curious what people think and obviously you just don't want to miss target somebody so there's if you do find somebody's targeted like give the information to the authorities but you may not want to DOX them immediately and and try to ruin their lives before you actually know what's going on a lot of companies now Microsoft IBM and others Amazon I think are saying we don't want to we're going to take a pause on facial recognition

I'm curious what your each of your thoughts are on law enforcement and we'll get into the law enforcement discussion and race relations here in this country and what we went through we look we we have been we have been we've been arming our police force mistakenly like our military and we've been doing it for you know decades now and it makes no sense there was this crazy tweet I saw today maybe we can find a OC tweeted out where she found this announcement from some like long tail Police Department somewhere who basically got a free armored truck carrier and you know they're

they're they're driving it around town or whatever pulling it out of the garage it looks like downtown Baghdad and you're like I mean they're in like Fargo North Dakota wherever they are I mean like it's just so it makes no sense I don't think I don't think any of us thought that we wanted to apportion our tax dollars to build a second shadow army I think we all want an arm Navy and Marines and an Air Force we want you know aircraft carriers and f-16s and tanks and machine guns and all that stuff but we want them with our military and then we want cops I think to be extremely well

trained I mean half the time you know cops are you know you ask them to be mental health counselors other times you're asking them to be you know CPR givers other times you're asking them to be criminal apprehend errs the job is too complicated they clearly can't do it they're poorly trained and then you arm them on top of all of that and you have this shitshow that we have today yeah it's not like there's an AED waiting somewhere for them to drive over where they need metal plating on the bottom of the vehicle that's not what they're dealing with every day at a minimum let's

like look I I'm a huge fan of ending qualified immunity I think that doesn't make any sense I think we have to stop arming our police like their military don't train them like the military trained them like a different kind of service and we may need to go back to first principles to figure out how to actually train them properly to spot abuse to deal with mental health and just to be you know a little bit more patient and understanding and empathetic versus trigger-happy can ask you can ask you a question on that so a lot of the actions that police take when it comes

to lethal action is defended by the notion that my life was under threat as a cop and that sources from the fact that we have a Second Amendment in this country where a lot of people are you know you know gun carriers in Orlando to have arms so our police force has had to respond with the fact that there are a lot of guns in this country with defensive principles and defensive mechanisms to defend themselves against the loss of life due to a gun and that makes the United States really unique in terms of the the circumstance versus if you look at the United Kingdom where they don't

have a second Amendment right to bear arms the police aren't armed and the police behavior is significantly different you can look at this in any country where there isn't a right to bear arms do we not have a fundamental problem in this country that stems from the fact that the police feel or can justify that they're always under threat of loss of life due to arms being out in the Contra I think is a fabulous question the Contra example I would say is if look at Switzerland where the per capita gun ownership is really high Canada where per capita gun ownership

is really high what I would tell you is there's a different kind of psychological training that police people go through before they're put on the streets and that is fundamentally different here the job as is defined to them here is different than it is in Canada or Switzerland where you know gun ownership levels are quite robust and I think it all comes down to incentives and the reality is is that there is a to your point David this amplification of this idea that everybody is armed which i think is fundamentally mostly not true in the day to day course of like living

one's life but I think police people tend to be very amplified around that threat and as a result the unions have basically written contracts that protect their use of force the law is written in a way that protects their use of force and so all of it comes from to your point the defensive posture of fear but if you actually tried to train these people differently I think you'd have a different outcome because what I can tell you is the police in Canada do behave differently they don't reach for their gun every second it's an interest I think there's a very interesting example

and I know we don't want to like just take one anecdotal incident and then you know make a big sweeping generalization with it but if you look at the gentleman in Atlanta who was shot in the back twice Rasheed Brooks Rashard Rashard Brooks Rashard Brooks this example to me is so a luxury of the problem they spent 40 minutes talking with this individual who was absolutely not a threat they had frisked him they knew he was not armed he was intoxicated he's in a drive-through of all the ways you could have dealt with the situation and I come from a family of police officers and I

can tell you a lot of stories about cops letting people go obviously white people with warnings in this situation letting him sleep it off taking his keys letting him run away you know who it is you have his driver's license you have his car you have skis let him run away under what circumstances would you feel justified shooting a person when there were so many other options and I it comes exactly I believe Chamath from two things you pointed out one they're in a very defensive position into the training they're trained to use lethal force and if you're in a situation where

you feel threatened you just shoot that's it and if you shoot you shoot to the center of the body to kill the person and in their training they're not trained to think how do i disarm the situation defuse the situation and what are the other options this person is obviously not a threat and you knew the Taser was fired twice I'm not saying the person should have resisted arrest I'm not saying the person shouldn't have aimed that the Taser at the person but they should be trained to protect life and defuse situations at all costs Jason like think about the incentives they should

have been trained maybe to just walk into the Wendy's by this guy coffee and then drive him to the motel that he said that he was staying at yes or they should or they should have been trained to just write a ticket and say listen here's a you know here's a citation for being drunk because you did technically kind of drive and I'm gonna leave it alone they could have done many things that they chose not to do because the incentive was to you know project power in that situation versus project any kind of empathy and compassion right and and the selection of people who go into

the police department and I come from a family of police officers and firefighters brother uncle cousin grandfather up and down the line Irish cops and firefighters big tradition of my family and I can tell you that there is a contingent of people who go into the police who are power-tripping or maybe didn't get wherever else they wanted to be in life and the job of seeing people in dealing with the bad stuff that you pointed out you know people in domestic domestic violence situations people who are mentally ill homeless addicted addiction problems all of that then trains these

peoples to see the worst in humanity and then they just look at their job as just this dystopian horrible experience and they are in that defense of whereas we need to train people and I made this tweet where we should have a new class of police officer that is more like a Jedi Knight you know they get paid twice as much they have master's degree in social work of psychology and when that call comes in for an emotionally disturbed person a person who's intoxicated on drugs a domestic violence situation you don't want to send the average beat cop to that you want to send

the Jedi no but Jason make it even easier like when you go in and again a 9-1-1 call and it's you know there could be it's it's it's somebody who's in sort of like mental distress or you're gonna do a mental health check why don't you send a really well-trained social worker absolutely and the reason is why don't we have a whole you know a whole force of social workers that we pay $100,000 a year absolutely and and that's what these police officer making and there is an argument to not have them armed there's an argument for them to be armed but maybe they're so enlightened

and trained so well I think the training in the United States is in the low hundreds of hours in other countries it's thousands of hours I mean if a person has a gun I think police should not get their gun until they've completed maybe two or three thousand hours on the job in other words they get to their second or third year so the first year when you're a Probie why even have a gun why not just have them doing things without a gun and then when you get that gun maybe you need to have the equivalent of a master's degree you know maybe you need to have a level of training

and we need to go to first principles like you're saying trim off and rethink this whole thing in any startup or any problem-solving you would look at the show me the thousand calls how did they break down what were the outcomes and if you look at the outcomes of dealing with mentally ill people or people who are addiction or domestic disputes the outcomes are things that police are not trained for that's got to be a very high percentage of these situations let alone the no-knock warrant which makes absolutely no sense I mean I think I think there's there's just a lot

of look there's a lot of change coming I think that there's a lot of legislation afoot at every sort of level of government and I think the good news is that it's going to be hard for people to sit on their hands on I don't think it's going to be universally across the country but I do think that you know people will then again self select and want to live in places where you know sort of like the laws match their ideals and this is going to be an area of tremendous reform and change you know what's interesting about all of this is like if you actually go back to the Republican ideology

it's interesting to me why Republicans aren't the first ones to try to embrace rewriting you know the union contracts and actually decreasing unionized power because that's sort of like has generally been 1/10 whole theme of Republican ideology but then as it gets applied to cops I think they kind of just abdicate responsibility so there's a lot of reasons where you could have bipartisan agreement on a bunch of these things but again I think we're we're we kind of like get caught up and we refuse to see the forest from the trees and want to fix these things but I suspect

that a lot of these changes will happen just because they're so bloody obvious and depending on your ideology you can frame the same reason for completely different motives and get to the same answer yeah nobody nobody wants this Sachs what do you think about the union issue as our token right winger I think yeah I think I think the police unions have too much power all the public employee unions do I think you know just like the teachers unions have thwarted school choice and education reform I think we're seeing the police unions toward a lot of sensible reforms around the use

of force you know I our our friend bill girl he's been tweeting a lot of great research that around police departments that are unionized there's a lot more complaints against them there's a lot more examples of the use of force and unwarranted use of force and so clearly there's a connection here between police unions and the forwarding of common-sense reforms and I saw someone someone tweeted this idea that you know the reason I know is taking on the police unions is because the Republicans see the word police and Democrats see the word union and they're both fans of those

things and so who's who's gonna take them on yeah I mean and teachers unions is the same thing and the political system the political power of the unions is so entrenched that in order to get in office for in most cases you're going to need to have the support of those unions and if you don't they're going to tell people to explicitly not to vote for you yeah I mean well well look I mean you look at the cities that have had the biggest problems here I mean starting with Minneapolis and these are Democrat controlled cities these are not you know Republican controlled cities and

the politicians are very much you know in cahoots with the big Union the unions there including the police and the teachers unions of all that and so you know both parties need to to be open to reform to your point David there's a there's a story that came out last or last couple of days about the DA in Atlanta who pressed charges against the two officers but the narrative was about how the DA is being investigated for getting a hundred and forty K in kickbacks from a non-profit tied to something and then he was claiming that his main opponent who's right who could could

because these you know district attorneys are politically elected officials right where she had basically done a side deal with the police to not to not go after you know use of force in return for their endorsement and you know what a what a horribly messy like complicated growth situation irrespective of whoever turns out to be right there so to your point they've become so entrenched and it's just so low level that then you know what should be obvious justice basically just gets thrown away for what's expedient and convenient yeah well you know this is another

example where like like with the mass I felt like there were you know I wasn't violating conservative principles I thought there really was a conservative principle I think with you know with with this example of the overuse of force by police you go back to what Lord Acton said which is power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely if there's no one standing up to the police unions politically they have absolute power and that's going to lead to corruption so I do think like Republicans should be looking into this now I think part of the reason

and why Republicans want to defend the police's because we've also had these examples of looting and rioting and lawlessness you know after the the civil rights protests and I think that again we're kind of dividing up and into sides and there's too much justification of bad behavior on both sides because of what the other side is doing you know and I heard people on the Left justifying the the looting and rioting on the grounds that you know it was a legitimate expression of you know opposition is a legitimate protest as a legitimate expression of opposition to to the police violence

and I think that that is wrong and I think it's wrong for people on the right to defend this police the successive use of force by police on the grounds that somehow it's justified because we need to control the lawlessness and the rioting and you know I think both are wrong and and we lack a federal leadership to not make this overly political but when Trump then tear gases with the military protesters to go to a photo opportunity you know it's sending the message that he want and he wants to be the law and order president now you're just charging things up instead of

just going on TV and just saying something to bring people back to the concept that we're all Americans we're all in this together and we rise and fall together it's such an easy statement listen the protesters have valid concerns we need to work on this issue and yes if you see people doing any vandalism you have we have to stop them please make sure that doesn't happen because it it works against the very valid criticism and protests that are going on that need to go on and in the fact that the president can't say that is crazy well what do you guys think about what he

has been saying and how Twitter and Facebook have basically taken different sides of Freiberg go ahead where Trump's been saying yeah should food should Twitter be censoring him / putting warnings on his posts when he's like crazy I think so yeah look I mean it's such a slippery slope and there's too much room for interpretation I'm just saying the obvious but you know if you're a platform you're a platform you you let the things get built on top of you sure you can have some some rules around what can be built but as soon as you start you know saying what is true and what is not true

and you become the arbiter of truth you're no longer an agnostic platform and I think that you know that is a big dangerous risk to take because as you guys know something maybe and I think we saw this with the what's that Twitter accounts euro hedge was the pinnacle hedge they got an and then they came back because it turns out what they said wasn't necessarily as untrue with Twitter at first thought that they were saying was untrue so you know it was a great example of how you know a point of interpretation can very quickly kind of reverse course and you can look extremely biased

in making that decision at that time when the YouTube took Susan Wojcicki took the what Jackie took the position at YouTube that we're going to allow people to talk about coronavirus if what they're saying is in sync with the World Health Organization yeah and by the way the World Health Organization I've had an issue with since well before Co vyd just from another life they I won't get into it but they've said some stuff publicly that was just flat-out [ __ ] wrong scientifically and invalid and it was politicized and we we kind of got to the root of the political driver behind

it so I've long held kind of disbelief in the World Health Organization as a trusted source of scientific fact and to Sax's previous point you want to be able to check power and if the World Health Organization is this incredibly powerful organization who got it wrong with masks and didn't even you know like David Sachs is getting it right some venture capitalist in the Bay Area gets it right about mask in the World Health Organization gets it wrong well he's in Mexico but yeah undisclosed location but okay Sachs should they should they be putting labels and warnings

on politicians when they say things that are consensus wrong yeah I mean call me old-fashioned but I'm very much in favor of free speech and I'm against censorship and you know fact-checking your politicians you don't like is is a is basically bias it's soft censorship I mean they're being very selective in who they decide to fact-check and you know there's no good way to do it right I mean there is no truth API that they can just plug in to fact-check people the way that you deal with with bad speech is more speech I think it's a line from Justice Brandeis that is the way historically

that we have in this country that we've dealt with speech by people we don't like which is you have more speech and and I I don't think censorship or warnings is the right way to go mouth what do you think having worked at Facebook okay I think it exposes a couple things one is that the Twitter product is is still relatively brittle I mean like at least Facebook has a whole suite of emoticons to say something is a crock of [ __ ] you know and it makes you feel bad or you know makes you feel angry or thumbs down or whatever and so Twitter's reactionary feedback mechanism to its algorithms

is very brittle and so if you were gonna try to algorithmically tune down the distribution of you know a trump tweet you know you could see where you could balance thumbs up or hearts in this case with other ways of signaling that this is either wrong or hate-filled or you know instigating and and I think like a little bit more self policing is probably the only scalable solution all of that said here's what I will say I think basically that Facebook is is becoming Middle America and Twitter is becoming sort of the coasts and you know Facebook is basically a product of Middle

America plus kind of like countries outside the United States and fit you know Twitter's about you know rich coastal kind of people and you can see that the way that the content ABB's inflows and you know the kind of content problems like just for an example you know what is what is Twitter's latest content problem it was that Donald Trump tweeted a video from CNN that was doctored you know and it and it only showed a clip of a you know a black toddler running away from a white toddler and the caption was you know the chyron said something about racism it turned out to not

be wrong blah blah blah what is Facebook's issue two days ago it was that you know the Boogaloo movement which is you know a bunch of people who believe in the militia and an impending Civil War principally use Facebook and Facebook groups to organize and they found out that they were distributing and you know driving you know viewers and usage and content so it just kind of tells you like and if you break down the issues and you know there's a there's a couple of people who tweet out the most popular tweets on Twitter versus the most popular content on Facebook what you see is

the left and right distribution and so I think that the audiences are segregating themselves into into into using products that basically feed them what they want to hear well let me ask you a question about the leadership we you work directly with Zuckerberg for many years and we all know jack from Twitter from various projects what is Zuckerberg politics is he a secret trump supporter is just Peter Thiel who's on the board and your good friends would Peter Taylor and worked with Peter Thiel Sachs I'm curious what you think goes on inside the brain of Mark Zuckerberg in terms of

making these decisions is he scared that Facebook has become dependent on the right and is that true moth that it is a right thing and is he right or left what is his politics I don't think that's the right framing I think that if you're running a big Network like this you have to remember the you you know you're one of the five or six most valuable companies in the world you yourself have you know 50 60 70 billion dollars basically the world is your oyster and what you've seen over the last five or six years is that there is an increasing regulatory headwind and if you basically play the

game theory out you know these companies are gonna get regulated and they're gonna get over tax and they're gonna get kind of slowed down at a minimum and broken up at the maximum and so if you're running one of these companies I think the only thing you can do is hold on and so if you're gonna hold on there's no point in making any of these changes because it minimized the amount of cash you can make in the amount of you know support you'll have so you might as well pick a side SF effectively by doing nothing and waiting and I and I and I think that's that's largely what all these

guys have decided to do they've essentially said we're not gonna sort of take a side here well no Twitter has taken a side Twitter because they're small enough they can survive they're not going to get broken up but if you're one of the top four or five look at the position they've taken the position they've taken is we have no position that's Facebook's position we have no position we're not gonna police adds no hold on it's also Google's it's also Microsoft it's also apples and it's also Amazon's and in fairness to Facebook all big five tech companies have said our position is

no position and the reason is because that's the only thing they can do to keep that market cap and to hold on to the economic vibrancy of their businesses for longer sex why did Twitter and Jack actually take a position because this cannot happen if jack is not a hundred percent supportive of it he is the driver of it and the person who okay's it and then what do you think Zuckerberg bought didn't want to answer this but I want you to try to answer it what is Zuckerberg relationship with Peter TL and his thinking on a political basis in your mind without you know

giving up your relationship with Peter about what is his politics and and what is their relationship well I I don't know exactly what sucks politics are and or not even exactly I have no idea what his politics are not remotely and I do remember the time when Peter supported Trump during the election and the rest of the board wanted to run him off the board so clearly it's not like I highly doubt Facebook as a bastion of right-wing thinking but why would Zuckerberg keep him on the board then in defiance of everybody else who hates him maybe he simply believes that supporting the

Republican candidate and a presidential election is not grounds for removal from a board maybe he simply is not that intolerant I think I mean I'm gonna actually go out on a limb here and defend Zuckerberg a little bit which is my impression of what Zuckerberg is trying to do is simply maintain Facebook as a speech platform and you know if you're gonna be a speech platform you're going to be caught in the crosshairs of all these very controversial debates and you know people are gonna publish things that other people hate in fact even that the majority hates but isn't

that the type of speech that the ACLU historically defended you know it feels to me like there's been a rise mainly on the left in terms of intolerance for speech they don't like that they consider to be 100 it sufficiently what yeah you saw that with the New York Times newsroom I think you tweeted a tweet storm from an opinion writer there is around the the Tom cotton editorial which you know it's not like I agreed with it but they kind of had a they basically fire the opinion page editor because they realized they published and by the way sorry just to build on your point the title

which wasn't even written by Tom cotton was I would say an order of magnitude worse than the article if you read the whole article right but the title was really offensive wasn't even written by them who's written I think by the editor that got fired but the article itself was kind of bad but not nearly as bad as the title would she do this because Freiberg twenty years ago when we were all as Gen Xers coming up we were taught to defend freedom of speech this is a core tenant of a vibrant democracy and that you need to be able to read unpopular opinions in fact the KKK

needs to be able to march down Main Street and we need to protect that ugly speech in order for everybody else to have it and here we have a you know an editorial which obviously none of us agree with is is is this an existential threat to America that we are now going to say freedom of speech is not a core tenant of the of the American experiment I'm just looking for the term that was used but what's the other New York Times opinion writer I forgot her name static maybe you'll help me but she talks about like a comfort culture or so basically we used to pride ourselves on

a culture that enabled freedom of speech and and and that was that was cherished and heralded and what is cherished and heralded now is a culture that protects people from hearing offensive and scary things that they don't want to hear and that shift you know those of us who are Gen X which I think I am out born in 1980 into the Millennial gems II and beyond kind of generation has occurred and it is fundamentally changing the the nature of how we find truth and how we find you know coalesce around decisions as a society and we're excluding the things that are offensive

and it's a little bit scary to think about from my point of view that you know we can't explore all options we can't hear all dissenting points of view this is certainly a very deep argument about how our society and our democracy operates but it is happening and so the point was like we are we are starting to shift towards valuing comfort over over freedom of expression and and that's that's just kind of the big the big change that's occurring and look we do live in a democracy so the votes are going to be what ultimately decides what happens here votes in terms of who's using

Facebook versus Twitter and votes in terms of who's voting for what presidential candidate and what governor and what mayor and so we'll see you know it's it's it's it's it's a it's a sea change in how this democracy operate yeah I think it's a sea change going back very far because the the the whole principle of the Enlightenment going back hundreds of years was stated by Voltaire which is that I may disagree with what you have to say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it who today is willing to do that I mean that was the the idea that led to political liberalisation in

the West it's really a unique feature of Western democracies and liberalism you go to anywhere else in the world I guarantee you people aren't defending to the death your right to say things they disagree with I don't think they're you know I don't think she's you're paying a recruit and is defending your right to hear things that they don't want you to so you know this is a very foundational part of of American and you know Western political liberalism and it's being challenged now and I think you know we should have more self confidence in our ideas to worry so much

about Donald Trump's tweets which are ephemeral be forgotten very soon that we're willing to throw out freedom of speech well yeah I mean this is the thing I don't understand about labeling his tweets is you know I mean it's anybody not think that this guy is hopped up on adderall or a complete [ __ ] like or any of those things like we all know he's an idiot who just tweets 50 times a day and he's too scared you know that he's not gonna win his you know reelection and that he's a real he's a little a reality store so who do you mean by when you say we we all cuz

it's a different way that I think you're saying that I think other people would be saying yeah but we represent right I mean that's I think the generational divide here is I don't know if it's generational I think there's a lot of dimensions across which these differences of perspective occur and I've said this for amongst our group for a long time but there's a huge difference between a rural population and urban population in the United States in terms of what their priorities are and I think that difference in priorities is unconscious and that's where things really

resonate that Trump says and that really moved the needle for a lot of folks the priority of civil rights is not as it might be an urban center is not a priority in a rural center and in a rural population there's a different priority Trump no matter what how he says it the things he's saying are different than what I'm tearing from the urban population which is where the media comes from and so on and so forth and so Trump resonates with me I don't care if he sounds a little bit wacky I need wacky cuz it needs to be different then than standard and it's just there's a lot of

divides here and a lot of dimensions across yeah I think I think that we absolutely should not throw the baby out with the bathwater we should never attack this very basic principle of free speech because we will never forgive ourselves if we do but then this is why I think we come back to we should be a little bit more resilient to build products and services that allow a little bit more texture in the discussion so that you actually can have free speech floor more in a more transparent way so David to your point you know how do you drown out you know hate speech

it's with more speech well these products don't necessarily even enable that and so I do think that we have this you know sort of an issue where the products and services that billions of people use to consume their information and construct a worldview today they neither will allow things to be flagged nor will they increment the feature surface area so that you can actually have so then that's why I think people then get into this place where everybody feels cornered and nobody likes what's happening and so I think that's kind of what we're in I think that if we had a little

bit more ingenuity and thinking by the folks at you know Twitter and Facebook it would go a long long way yeah I do think there's something I mean the conundrum of Twitter is simultaneously it's the main way I get my news information but I also see it as a huge source of groupthink and kind of mob mentality and so you you know the more time you spend on Twitter I mean I see a lot people saying the more unhappy they are and so you do wonder whether it's making you more informed or whether it's just making you buy into some sort of mass psychosis well it could be you could

becoming more informed and you could be going into a psychosis which we have a lot of friends who are high-profile who like their behavior on Twitter is a separate thing than who they actually are right like they just lose their [ __ ] on Twitter and you know they the the is really a very strange place to be sure can we talk by the way could we just talk about this Bolton book I mean what the [ __ ] I mean he he did ask you jimping to help him win the election and he bartered buy soybeans to help me win the election I mean this is insane I think I think we need to we need to first of

all you always got a look at the source here so I don't know how somebody commentator who's as far right as you could go well who was picked by Trump himself well he was a very weird choice for Trump because one of the main reasons why Trump won the Republican nomination as he promised no more bushes meaning an end to these crazy vo neocon wars of intervention and this guy bolton like he's right out of that playbook yeah yeah he's the like Hawk of hawks there's not a war he doesn't want to get us into he wanted to get us into our war with Iran they never made any

sense for Trump to hire them in the first place so do you know why he hired him I stated in the book I've heard I've heard the explanation that he liked I think he said something like when when he sends Bolton into a room he likes it he like he thinks it strengthens this negotiating position because the other side thinks that they were about us is about to invade or something when born and it's also Trump was like I love hearing you talk eh just like FoxNews like that's the quote is so he literally picks people base I mean and he picked Ludlow right for his you know he picks

them based on being TV personalities I just think this Bolton guy is like you know this is crazy war hawk who also is this kind of like a weasel and I don't know how he creates a 500 page book out of spending 17 months in the White House I guess he's writing down every I'm surprised it's not five thousand yes that should be like tokens Lord of the Rings trilogy I'm gonna put this other if he can produce the note that Pompeo gave him that said Trump is so full of [ __ ] that thing at auction I'm telling you now what do you each bid for it five hundred thousand dollars at

least five hundred thousand if that note actually exists and he has it oh it's not I mean it's it's but I just think to me first of all it's a little ludicrous that this guy he is a bit of a weasel because like where were you during the impeachment a he made an economic calculation that his book was more important than the future of the country so first of all you know kind of go [ __ ] go [ __ ] yourself to that but the the other thing though is that you know be beyond his sort of like character flaws it's just the story after story after story it's just kind of from the bizarre to

be absurd like Finland's a part of Russia England doesn't have nuclear weapons please buy so you you are part of me you are part of the nuclear powers UK really the United Kingdom has nukes Wow what if India gets um it but every every one of these insider tell-all books always makes the you know always makes the president look bad I mean it's not it's not a hard task was there anything though that was surprising to anyone the XI Jingping enough blockbuster vision thinking did catch me off guard that he was that brazen and kind of sad it's alright you I mean like like the fact that it

was said but like the motivation the attention no to your point Mike my expectations are so low it's it's like teaching a kid to poop in the toilet for the first time you know as long as it doesn't poop on the floor even if he does it in his diaper you know everything looks like success as long as there is just not raw feces on my hardwood if he if he sat on the potty its success its success even if the pants weren't pulled down if he poops his pants everybody tell me about tell me about I just want to switch topics tell me about vaccines because it seems to me that there's like a growing

Court of people and I'm not gonna put moderna in this camp but like maybe they did that were very opportunistically out there generating a ton of PR but what if you had to pick a time and a time frame and then a manufacturing time frame can you just tell me what was the over-under so we commit we can bet aligned on it so there's gonna I think there's gonna be a staged release of vaccines that'll probably believe it or not starting q4 of this year and there's been production ramped up going on in parallel to testing so you know to get these vaccines produced whether you're talking

about the MRNA vaccine or you're talking about the viral vaccine like they did in China which they actually do have in production there's a bunch of different challenges with scaling up and ramping production and then you know what's called downstream processing and filtering and then packaging and all this stuff anyway it's a it's a big [ __ ] exercise so what's gone on is there's been a parallel effort to actually scale up production of these things before we've actually completed the testing them to make sure that they're safe and efficacious and as a

result and some of this came out of that first or second stimulus bill some of it came from private funding and then other governments are just straight up paying for it and so there are a number of facilities that are actually ramping production right now if they don't worry if the vaccines ultimately don't pass muster just gonna be a write-off of a couple billion dollars and so theoretically we could have doses that are available for distribution to healthcare workers and frontline people in queue for this year's is what I would kind of set the over-under at but do

you know do these vaccines are like flu vaccines which is like fifty sixty percent effective at best um yeah I don't really know the answer to that I would say that these things are probably pretty effective I would say the flu vaccine is just a high rate of mutation and also a low rate of utilization and a high rate of infection so we're gonna have a lower rate of infection probably a more moderate rate of mutation as a result and so we should be more in control if we get something that works with the current strains and the way that this this SARS Coby to

the most of the vaccines are Deltora the seven I think major targets around the spike protein and in different epitopes across the spike protein and so you know your if you see a great degree of mutation across that protein it's likely going to be less infected infective and less effective as of that as a virus and so it'll go away and so I think that we've got a really good shot here what what are the odds that somebody politicizes the vaccine and America doesn't get it doesn't get it Oh place is a 100% yeah yeah I mean look we politicize [ __ ] Meisel 30% of people of kids

now aren't getting vaccinated for measles which is crazy another's measles outbreaks happening in the US which is just you know mind-boggling so that's just happening in Marin where you are yeah that's it easy the highest percentage of graduate degrees in the country yeah no but I mean it's it's inevitable 'ti that they get SARS but David like how does how does the distribution of these vaccines work meaning like let's just let's just say that it's like Sanofi for example because I saw that the French government made a large investment and the Germans did as well to

essentially like onshore a bunch of their you know companies who had promising vaccine candidates and so if you assume that there's a distribution of these vaccines let's just say the most efficacious ones in China are they just gonna dole this out to whoever's willing to buy it or they're gonna decide on a political basis how to basically give these and then when they come to the United States how do we know that it comes to Texas before it comes to Wyoming versus California versus New York so I think the ones that are getting federal support which all of them are pretty much at this

point are you know going to be federally mandated in terms of distribution and it's probably some commercial agreement that none of us have seen in terms of like what that looks like so chocolate into the swing states where he's behind is what you're saying well I think this I think it'll probably be delegated down to Health and Human Services what are the chances that there's a trump logo on the side of the your Trump vaccine there's a Trump vaccine to save your life okay is a good point for us to kind of wrap around the horn choo moth and I think a lot of people were

convinced that Trump was gonna sail into office now everything is showing you Fox News poll CNBC polls SurveyMonkey polls that Trump is very far behind especially in the swing states what are the chances Trump wins the election sacks I think he's well I think kovetz really hurt him because the sort of feather in his cap the thing it really I going for him was the economy that's been hurt but it's coming back you know the situation could look very different six months from now right now it looks pretty bleak because I do think that his reaction to the the crisis was seen as a very

inflammatory but I think six months from now could be arriving a story five months so so you don't think he's gonna win right now but you're today if the election were today he would lose but you know the economy we're seeing a v-shaped recovery which i think is surprising all of us and if that holds up and we get past the civil unrest that we've had and you know peace offspring's so inflammatory on those issues i think that you know the situation could look very different in five months you got to remember the other thing which is Biden at some point is going to have to enter it to some

presidential debates and you know doesn't know if he's gonna be there what you're saying cognitively yeah I mean that's to talk about but you actually think there's a cognitive issue yes or no probably yeah it's uncomfortable to say for some reason yeah but it's I mean at a minimum look I there's a problem with the way he speaks I don't know if there's a which is indicative of a problem with the way he thinks but you know like when if they're on stage for two hours in the debate I think we're gonna find out really quick and I and I think those debates are pretty unavoidable

I don't think Bynes can go to figure out a way to get out of it so you know I think a lot of people think that he can just be propped up by a staff and they can to some extent but I think at some point you know we're gonna have to take a look at your Biden shabbath Trump wins Trump loses right now it's sort of 75 25 he loses okay I think that's gonna get closer to 55 45 as the date comes close I think it actually comes down to two issues number one is who does Biden pick as a running mate and can you lock up the the swing states with that running mate and number two which

i think is probably going to play an enormous role if if the community organizing that saw the black lives matter movement get to this next level is avoiding and preventing voter suppression you know LeBron I think is about to start an enormous campaign with a lot of very well-heeled well-known celebrities to get out the vote but if there's a concerted effort to prevent voter suppression and get young people and people of color to the polls it's a Biden landslide but now we've gone from a trump landslide just six months ago in all of our minds to a Biden landslide Freiburg where

are you at I still think Chrome's gonna win I'd say 70% chance Trump wins and I'll tell you why I think there's still there's not going to be structural improvement between now and November for the majority of people that voted for Trump in the last election there are going to be a large number of people in blue-collar and rural areas that remain challenged with their life and feel like they're missing out and they're missing and and this may even be true in inner-city districts but but the big kind of flip vote in the rural and blue-collar areas is gonna say I still need

change I need things fixed and Trump is the agent of change Biden he has always been the agent of change and I'll tell you the other things that he's also a master of he's laying blame and so Trump is incredible at pointing a finger at some third party and saying that's the enemy I'm the guy who's gonna go defeat him for a year and I think that's what won in the election last time and I think it could win it might be elected again this time no matter what [ __ ] happens between now and November he will find a way to make the story about how some third party

or some process or some deep state it's still responsible for that outcome that's keeping you down mr. blue-collar factory worker and I will be the person to vanquish that problem Biden is the old state he's the old guard he's the guy from before and we haven't changed anything in the last four years where people feel happy and secure about their lives I think to Sax's point if the economy was even stronger it may hurt Trump's chances sure a lot of folks might say great Trump's responsible let's give them a thumbs up but the more people are feeling pain the more

they're looking for an agent of change and I think scrumpy against Biden is still gonna be that agent it makes me the deciding either tie or swing vote I believe Biden wins I believe Trump is absolutely lost his ability to win this because he made two critical errors two saxes very astute point he just complete blunder on wearing masks and leadership during kovat and complete blunder in terms of dealing with the social unrest which he could have acted as an reconciliation agent and he's his own worst enemy and couldn't do those two very simple things I think Biden

wins big if he takes the following strategy which I will call the Avenger strategy which is it's not just about him he gets an incredible running mate to Tremont's point but not only that he pre announces his cabinet Avenger style and they start hosting hala Cuomo in New York daily briefings where they talk about what the country needs to do with a brain trust in a round table with five or six people pre-selected so you're not voting for Biden who might have cognitive issues and Sachs is correct he could fumble under Trump's greatest strength which is demolishing people in

debates which we ourselves all watched we watched Hillary get absolutely beat up in those debates and that was our I remember those nights when we were watching about your house cometh and we our eyes opened right up like holy cow Hillary's in trouble here he's just really good at this type of maniac boxing that he does with little mark Rubio and everybody else here nightly but if he picks the right VP candidate and I want to know as we close here who is the VP candidate that you think he should pick Amy Klobuchar are just bowed out and said a woman is not enough you need to have

a black woman so Chamath who is the ideal running mate Sachs who scares you the most since you know the GOP is gonna lose this time around who's the scariest for you and Freiberg who do you think you should pick give it some thought or you do not have a consensus choice I'll leave my statement to the end okay sack C poop you know like this and pick somebody you want him to pick cause it helps him lose well III don't know the the backbencher Democrat politicians well enough to say exactly I don't have a pick I would just say I would really like for him to pick a great crisis manager an

operator somebody who's been there somebody who's been tested in a crisis because there's a very high chance that this VP pick will become the president given Biden's age and everything going on in the world and we've just seen crisis after crisis this year I think there's gonna be more shoes to drop and this person that we don't even know yet could very easily be the president itíd states in the next two years so I just hope you pick someone who is good at handling a crisis okay so that would mean Oprah perhaps God you just pick my five is that really her picture oh yeah

yeah Oprah Winfrey I mean she would be she would be incredible oh my god what a wild every state oh she's incredible Oprah Winfrey for the win I mean if you're gonna pick somebody Biden Winfrey it's got a red got so many dunks a slam dunk I'm sorry better than Michelle Obama a.m. dunk better than Michelle Obama slam dunk I'm gonna email blinken and Evan Ryan right now Oprah Winfrey okay Freiberg you have a better candidate who's your choice provider III don't have I don't have a choice I mean I'm not gonna make a choice here but I I think the challenge he's gonna face is finding

a black woman who can appeal to the blue-collar and rural vote in these areas where he needs to kind of win some win some folks over and so he's going to end up in these urban districts like the Atlanta mayor or like Kamala Harris and they're they're not gonna they're not gonna bring that vote so he isn't a little bit of a pickle here because the Amy Klobuchar hour helped him bridge the rural divide but you know he's got a he's got a I do I named this there's gonna be a bit of a search here the idea of going with Oprah because it just becomes she is such a reconciler now it

doesn't fit the execution in a crisis to Sax's desire and I had actually just build a bigger business Trump I mean what do you but that is what is about to get to is I think she's so successful and she's such a great leader and so charismatic she would bring in better operators than Trump and pence ever could I mean look at the shitshow of people who came in and out of the cabinet it was one goofball an incompetent [ __ ] after another sorry to get a little frisky here at the end but I feel like we're at the poker game Trump's cabinet was in an embarrassment almost universally correct

sacks well look I here's the problem with Oprah or if you want you know any other Hollywood celebrity a George Clooney or what have you they're just they're not used to getting beat up the way that politicians in our country get beat up you know they're used to having people catering to them they're used to having the star trailer and the star treatment and you know they tend to have a glass jaw and politics Pacifica's never been put in an environment where there's constantly assaulted Trump I mean was a celebrity but he was used to he kind of grew up in that whole New York

tabloid environment and was used to punching and Counting embraced it in fact he was his own fake PR person he was ruling the post yeah it's you know said old saying about you know wrestling with a pig you know everyone gets dirty but the pig likes it I mean Trump is kind of like the pig who likes it you know mostly celebrities don't like having to get beat up you know they're used to being very popular and and that's why they tend to be I think tough picks politically is they don't they tend to have a glass jaw all right on that like free Biden winfrey love

you let's play poker outside we'll see you all next time on the all end podcast bye-bye