00:00:00
His brand is firing. His brand is
00:00:01
getting rid of incompetence. And now he
00:00:03
has he keeps them. And you're like, "Oh
00:00:05
my god, you're keeping the
00:00:06
incompetence."
00:00:12
Hi everyone, this is Pivot from New York
00:00:14
Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast
00:00:16
Network. I'm Cara Swisser. Scott is off,
00:00:18
so I brought in a brilliant co-host
00:00:20
again, as are everyone who's not Scott.
00:00:24
uh Kristen Sulttus Anderson, pollster
00:00:26
and co-founder of Echelon Insights and
00:00:29
contributing opinion writer for the New
00:00:31
York Times and someone I really like a
00:00:32
lot who's super smart. Nice to see you.
00:00:34
>> Well, thanks for having me, Cara.
00:00:36
>> Yeah. So, um welcome. What's going on?
00:00:39
What's going on? The world of polling is
00:00:40
insane right now. Correct.
00:00:43
>> It's it is as insane as it can be
00:00:45
considering that there is not an
00:00:47
election that is imminent. uh you know
00:00:49
like the world gets polling world gets
00:00:51
crazy in the immediate leadup to an
00:00:53
election because somebody's got a new
00:00:55
survey coming out every day in some
00:00:57
interesting swing state when it is
00:00:59
election season but right now it's a
00:01:01
little bit of the doldrums for that and
00:01:02
so what is instead kind of crazy is all
00:01:06
of the changes around how is AI going to
00:01:07
change our industry and those sorts of
00:01:09
things.
00:01:09
>> We're going to get to that. We're going
00:01:10
to talk about the predictions industry.
00:01:12
We're going to play a little bit of
00:01:12
Scott who loves it. I don't love it
00:01:14
quite so much and I know you hasn't
00:01:15
thought. So, it's really important to be
00:01:17
talking about it because what we're
00:01:18
interested in is accurate information
00:01:20
and it's very hard to get it. Anyway, uh
00:01:23
there's so much going on. Let's get
00:01:24
right to the news because you've been
00:01:25
doing tons of stuff in the times and
00:01:27
elsewhere and we've talked a little bit
00:01:28
about but we of course have to start
00:01:30
with Donald Trump has once again issued
00:01:32
an ultimatum to Iran. I think it's the
00:01:34
27th one posting on True Social on
00:01:37
Easter Sunday. Quote, and let me just
00:01:38
read this correctly. Open the [ __ ]
00:01:40
straight you crazy bastards or you'll be
00:01:42
living in hell. which sounds like a line
00:01:45
from I don't even think movies would
00:01:47
write those lines anymore. Um, if Iran
00:01:49
doesn't comply, Trump is threatening to
00:01:51
target the country's power plants and
00:01:53
bridges. Iran says it will retaliate
00:01:55
crushingly and extensively if civilian
00:01:58
infrastructure targets are hit. So,
00:02:00
they're just coming back with the same
00:02:02
dialogue. This all comes after a
00:02:04
successful rescue of two US airmen whose
00:02:06
jet was shot down uh over Iran on
00:02:09
Friday. It's not great, but the jets
00:02:10
were shot down. We're taping this before
00:02:12
Trump's press conference on Iran and
00:02:14
these military rescues. So Kristen, most
00:02:17
polls show the majority of Americans are
00:02:18
opposed to this war, right? Pretty
00:02:20
significantly. You recently did some
00:02:21
polling with Trump's MAGA base. Talk a
00:02:24
little bit about what's happening here
00:02:25
uh in the polling and the thinking
00:02:28
around it.
00:02:29
>> Yeah. So normally historically when the
00:02:31
US gets into conflict uh overseas
00:02:34
there's normally a little bit of a rally
00:02:36
around the flag effect um because
00:02:38
normally we are getting involved in
00:02:40
response to some kind of provocation um
00:02:43
whether it was after 9/11 etc. Um in
00:02:46
this case there was not really
00:02:48
groundwork laid to make the case to the
00:02:51
American people for why we needed to do
00:02:53
this. And so, you know, in my polling
00:02:55
when you say, "Would it be legitimate to
00:02:58
engage in military activity against the
00:03:00
Iranian government if they were
00:03:02
developing a nuclear weapon, like
00:03:04
twothirds of Americans say yes to to a
00:03:06
bunch of those different kinds of
00:03:07
things, but it's clear that that case
00:03:10
wasn't really made well to the public
00:03:11
because then when you say now, do you
00:03:13
support or oppose what we're doing in
00:03:14
Iran?" Most don't don't support it. Um,
00:03:17
or they have some real serious
00:03:19
questions. In fact, it is the MAGA base
00:03:22
that is the most supportive of what
00:03:24
we're doing. Um, there's so much
00:03:27
interesting discourse around how Donald
00:03:30
Trump reshaped the Republican party and
00:03:32
there's this view that there is the old
00:03:35
Republican party that like longs for the
00:03:37
day of Ronald Reagan and says, you know,
00:03:40
we love when the United States projects
00:03:42
its power overseas and that Donald Trump
00:03:44
has, you know, reashioned the Republican
00:03:46
party in his own image away from that.
00:03:48
No more forever wars. America first and
00:03:50
all of that, but actually when you ask
00:03:53
voters who identify themselves as like
00:03:55
Trump supporters first before being
00:03:57
Republican supporters, they are the most
00:03:59
likely to sort of say if Donald Trump
00:04:01
says it's a good idea, I'm kind of
00:04:03
willing to give him the benefit of the
00:04:04
doubt on this. Even though they backed
00:04:06
him for America first and no foreign
00:04:08
wars. Not everybody. Obviously, Marjorie
00:04:10
Taylor Green put out a pretty big long
00:04:13
well a lot of things that she put out
00:04:14
about his health and his mental state
00:04:16
and stuff like that, but um why is that?
00:04:19
Why is the shift? Is just whatever he
00:04:21
says goes or they don't really care what
00:04:24
the words are or the policies.
00:04:27
>> There are some people who are part of
00:04:29
Donald Trump's coalition who are pretty,
00:04:33
you know, they don't want the US to be
00:04:34
involved in military activity overseas.
00:04:36
They're very outspoken
00:04:38
>> and they're quite outspoken about it,
00:04:39
but those are different from MAGA
00:04:41
voters. And I think there's a it's like
00:04:43
very easy to kind of conflate like the
00:04:44
MAGA movement equals everybody who voted
00:04:46
for Donald Trump and like that's not
00:04:48
true. Um there are a lot of people who
00:04:51
in fact in some of the polling that I've
00:04:53
seen it is the type of voter who is not
00:04:56
a Republican and is pretty isolationist
00:04:59
is among the most likely to have like
00:05:00
come joined the Republican coalition
00:05:02
recently. So Donald Trump does have a
00:05:04
potential political problem with some
00:05:07
people who really liked him and feel
00:05:09
betrayed by what he's doing. But the
00:05:11
core MAGA faithful and the Republican
00:05:14
party as reconstituted by Donald Trump
00:05:16
at the moment is reserving judgment and
00:05:19
saying, you know what, I think he's
00:05:20
probably on the right track. Let's see
00:05:22
how this plays out. And how many people
00:05:24
is that? What is the amount? Because
00:05:25
majority of he's lost in the numbers are
00:05:27
pretty staggering when you look at any
00:05:29
poll. almost every one of them including
00:05:31
Fox polls, all kinds of polls.
00:05:33
>> Yeah. So, the I sort of estimate that
00:05:35
the MAGA movement is about a quarter to
00:05:39
a third depending on I mean it's a it's
00:05:42
a pretty fluid section of the Republican
00:05:44
party, but it's not half the country.
00:05:46
And I think the big political risk
00:05:49
Donald Trump faces is like it didn't
00:05:51
have to be something where he was losing
00:05:53
a majority of Americans. He could have,
00:05:55
I think, communicated at least somewhat
00:05:56
effectively about, hey, this is a
00:05:59
government that's been declaring death
00:06:00
to America for decades, and here are
00:06:02
these specific things that they are
00:06:03
doing that put us at risk. Here's why
00:06:05
I'm going to do this. Here's what I'm
00:06:06
going to take out. And I don't think it
00:06:08
had to be a situation where he was
00:06:11
losing half the public right from the
00:06:13
get-go. Um but because of that lack of
00:06:15
clarity in communication that has not
00:06:18
really been followed by a ton of clarity
00:06:20
in communication like the numbers are
00:06:22
getting worse not better right okay so
00:06:24
what talk about that for a second the
00:06:26
clarity and communication because a lot
00:06:27
of it is marketing you're talking about
00:06:29
marketing like we're going to market
00:06:31
this more to you why why was it not
00:06:33
there and what impact how how because
00:06:36
most people do give pes the benefit of
00:06:39
the doubt something was up although he
00:06:41
had previously bombed them and said he
00:06:42
obliterated them so why the need to
00:06:44
obliterate them again. I mean, I I even
00:06:46
had Tom Tillis saying that, like, oh, we
00:06:49
obliterated, then we obliterated, and
00:06:50
now I guess we're obliterating. He was
00:06:52
sort of articulating that lack of
00:06:55
clarity. Yeah. Well, I I don't know that
00:06:57
I would just say that it is marketing
00:06:59
because I think for something like this,
00:07:00
I mean, it to me the bar does feel
00:07:03
higher than trying to sell somebody soda
00:07:05
or potato chips or sneakers. I know
00:07:08
that's not what you're saying, but I I
00:07:10
think that the
00:07:12
>> it's not just can you put out a snazzy
00:07:14
video that makes it look like we're
00:07:16
winning at a video game and you win
00:07:18
because that's that's obviously part of
00:07:19
the strategy and and yet the numbers are
00:07:21
are what they are. That I think it is
00:07:24
just that the the American people simply
00:07:26
want to know why is this in our
00:07:28
interest? And if you can give a
00:07:31
reasonably good answer to why something
00:07:32
is in our interest, we tend as a people
00:07:35
to sort of give the commander-in-chief,
00:07:37
maybe not today with Donald Trump as
00:07:39
such a polarizing figure, but we tend to
00:07:40
say, "Okay, if you think that this is in
00:07:43
our best interest, like I'll give you a
00:07:45
couple weeks to see how this plays out."
00:07:47
And especially if the costs are not
00:07:49
significantly high, people will give a
00:07:53
little bit more of that runway. one, you
00:07:55
know, I mean, thank goodness that they
00:07:56
have gotten these pilots back because
00:07:58
that's that's the kind of thing where
00:08:00
it's it is I can't wait to hear the like
00:08:02
thrilling story of how this was done,
00:08:04
but a combination of if military losses
00:08:07
begin to pile up in a very significant
00:08:09
way or the domestic impacts of the
00:08:11
straight of Hormuz, gas prices, all of
00:08:14
that, you know, you can run out of that
00:08:15
goodwill much more quickly. But right
00:08:18
now, he didn't start with the the
00:08:20
reservoir of goodwill that as a
00:08:22
president you would want. Some of that's
00:08:24
because he's Donald Trump and there's
00:08:26
just some people who aren't going to
00:08:27
like anything he does. But he also
00:08:29
starts with people who will like
00:08:30
anything he does. Uh who do sort of give
00:08:33
him that benefit of the doubt even if
00:08:35
they would not give a president Marco
00:08:37
Rubio or President JD Vance that same
00:08:39
leeway. And it does not seem like he has
00:08:42
taken this moment. And his numbers have
00:08:45
not gone up at all. They're going down.
00:08:47
They're going down with everybody.
00:08:49
Correct. So let's talk about that
00:08:50
because the the numbers really are
00:08:52
decline. They keep declining, which is
00:08:54
really usually doesn't happen,
00:08:56
especially for the midterms. President
00:08:57
Trump's approval rating is just at 35%
00:09:00
for his handling of the presidency
00:09:01
overall and 31% for his handling of the
00:09:04
economy, according to recent CNN
00:09:05
polling. However, the news isn't great
00:09:07
on either side. About a quarter of the
00:09:09
country holds negative views of both
00:09:10
parties. That's something not a fresh
00:09:12
thing. Talk about when you look at this
00:09:15
information as it is. You know, one of
00:09:18
the things about Donald Trump is he's
00:09:19
unprecedented. He's unprecedented in the
00:09:21
decline and he's still standing kind of
00:09:23
stuff. He keeps taking the punches here
00:09:25
from a polling and and and you can feel
00:09:28
it. I have a lot of MAGA not MAGA Trump
00:09:30
adjacent relatives and they really don't
00:09:32
like him like suddenly. Um and they
00:09:35
never would express that before. There's
00:09:38
I think two things that are that are
00:09:40
ominous for Republicans. The first is
00:09:43
with everything that's going on in
00:09:45
foreign policy, um, foreign policy is
00:09:48
not most voters number one issue, but it
00:09:51
is the background music. It is the thing
00:09:54
that tells you what the
00:09:56
commander-in-chief's values are. It says
00:09:58
a lot about what his temperament is. is
00:10:00
I mean we already this is what he's
00:10:02
interested in like not daycare not
00:10:04
>> this is well covered territory with
00:10:06
Donald Trump in some ways but it just
00:10:08
sort of focuses the mind a little on
00:10:09
like what is it that this person is all
00:10:11
about you you frankly saw something like
00:10:14
this with Biden when you saw his job
00:10:15
approval as we withdrew from Afghanistan
00:10:19
and as that went terribly that was the
00:10:21
moment when his job approval went
00:10:23
underwater and never recovered. It's not
00:10:25
because most voters said what we do in
00:10:28
Afghanistan is my number one issue, but
00:10:30
it just it like communicates something
00:10:32
about the level of competence and
00:10:34
priority setting and decision-m within
00:10:36
the Oval Office that like carries over
00:10:38
and bleeds over into how people think on
00:10:40
a whole variety of issues. Um, that's
00:10:42
risk number one. Risk number two on the
00:10:44
economy. Um, I I don't want to take
00:10:47
credit for this, but this was the my
00:10:49
friends at the Central Air podcast were
00:10:51
talking about this that essentially
00:10:52
Donald Trump had really good numbers in
00:10:55
his first term on the economy. Even
00:10:58
among voters who didn't like him
00:10:59
overall, thought he was crude, thought
00:11:01
he was crass, thought he was a jerk, all
00:11:02
of that. They still thought, not all of
00:11:04
them, but a small subset thought, "Yeah,
00:11:06
but at least he's good on the economy."
00:11:08
And when COVID happened, he still got
00:11:11
kind of a pass. Like people sort of
00:11:13
understood
00:11:14
>> not his fault. Yeah, like he did not
00:11:16
create this virus. For all his faults,
00:11:18
he's this is this this was not on him.
00:11:20
Um
00:11:20
>> for all the bleach infected in
00:11:23
for this time around, there's really no
00:11:27
one else he can blame for the state of
00:11:30
the economy. And he has tried to say,
00:11:32
I'm just cleaning up Biden's mess. But
00:11:34
you kind of run out of runway on that
00:11:36
eventually where voters say like I'm t
00:11:38
like Biden is so irrelevant to me. I'm
00:11:40
tired of hearing about him. Just tell me
00:11:42
what you're doing. What are you going to
00:11:44
do? I I I don't I don't care what
00:11:46
happened in 2023, 2024. Um
00:11:50
the fact that his numbers on the economy
00:11:52
in that CNN poll had 31% job approval,
00:11:55
that is atrocious. That is a five alarm
00:11:59
fire level number because one, it's way
00:12:03
below like the norm for job approval
00:12:05
these days hovers around 40%. You start
00:12:07
getting into the 30s and that's scary
00:12:10
land. you get into the low30s and that
00:12:12
is like terminal. Um, and it for it to
00:12:15
be on the economy which you know there
00:12:17
have been other issues where he is job
00:12:19
approval has fluctuated big time and
00:12:21
people said oh I don't trust him on this
00:12:23
X Y or Z. The economy was always a
00:12:25
thing. Oh, he's the apprentice guy. Oh,
00:12:26
he's the business guy. And so for his
00:12:28
job approval to be that low on the
00:12:30
economy, if that does not turn around,
00:12:32
that suggests to me a very troubling
00:12:36
midterm for Republicans with that.
00:12:39
recently on how Gen Z voters are feeling
00:12:41
about the economy. What did you find
00:12:43
there?
00:12:44
>> Give us some.
00:12:44
>> So Gen Z voters have uh the worst view
00:12:48
of the economy and even in just the last
00:12:50
month it has plummeted precipitously. So
00:12:53
when I say, you know, on the foreign
00:12:55
policy stuff that Donald Trump mostly
00:12:57
has the MAGA movement, there is a divide
00:12:59
within the Republican party and it is
00:13:01
older voters versus Gen Z. And so it is
00:13:04
Gen Z Republicans in addition to Gen
00:13:06
Zers who are not Republicans who are
00:13:08
increasingly saying like this economy
00:13:10
isn't working for me. And whether it's a
00:13:13
combination of they are approaching
00:13:15
graduation and the job market's not what
00:13:16
they want, whether they feel like the
00:13:18
affordability crisis is keeping home
00:13:21
ownership and you know a whole variety
00:13:23
of sort of life aspirations out of reach
00:13:26
um or just a sense that there's not as
00:13:28
much opportunity um for them to build
00:13:30
the kind of career they want. I did some
00:13:32
focus groups for the New York Times uh
00:13:35
very recently where we talked to Gen Z
00:13:38
white collar job seekers and it was I
00:13:42
mean it was heart it was like
00:13:43
unsurprising but also just heartbreaking
00:13:45
to hear
00:13:47
these young people talk about what it is
00:13:49
like to try to get a job in a moment
00:13:51
when they for some of them they went to
00:13:54
college because they were told you need
00:13:56
this credential now they've got debt and
00:13:58
they still send out a 100 applications
00:14:00
and they get five people to call them
00:14:01
back of which three then proceed to
00:14:04
ghost them and the other one the other
00:14:06
two are AI. Yeah, exactly.
00:14:09
>> Um and so it was just it it felt it
00:14:12
there was a bleakness to it that was was
00:14:16
disputing because normally when I talk
00:14:17
to Gen Z folks like there's very much a
00:14:21
yeah everything's terrible but like our
00:14:23
generation is going to fix it. And it it
00:14:24
almost feels like right now, do people
00:14:28
feel like they have any sense of control
00:14:30
or ability to shape the future or is it
00:14:32
just like bigger, more powerful stuff at
00:14:33
play that they won't be able to put
00:14:35
their heads down?
00:14:36
>> And they blame Trump for this, correct?
00:14:38
Or
00:14:39
>> in our focus group, I in our focus
00:14:42
group, it was actually a more Demle
00:14:45
leaning group. I don't know chicken or
00:14:47
the egg. Is that because that's more of
00:14:48
who was looking for jobs or what have
00:14:50
you? Um, and we really didn't talk too
00:14:53
much about Trump himself. Um,
00:14:55
>> right. But it's a feeling and he's
00:14:56
standing at the top. Right. That's my
00:14:59
less that they say I can't get a job and
00:15:00
it's Donald Trump's fault and it's more
00:15:02
I can't get a job. It feels like society
00:15:04
has been moving in a bad direction for a
00:15:06
while and I don't know like who's
00:15:08
sending the lifeboats like who's coming
00:15:10
to rescue us? I don't know that
00:15:11
anybody's in the prime position. When
00:15:13
you think about that his outbursts, how
00:15:16
much do they matter anymore? like the
00:15:18
one this weekend. Of course, once again,
00:15:20
and I don't mean to say the word pearl
00:15:21
clutching, but everyone's like, "Oh, can
00:15:22
you believe he said it?" I'm like, "Yes,
00:15:24
he seems cognitively disabled to me. I
00:15:26
don't I'm not a doctor, but he's as
00:15:28
crazy as ever, and he's not. That's not
00:15:29
changed." Does that matter when he does
00:15:31
these sort of outbursts or are they just
00:15:34
noise now with him with voters?
00:15:36
>> Well, there's this weird disconnect
00:15:37
where if you ask voters what they think
00:15:40
about things like that, they tell you
00:15:42
they don't like them. And yet I if if
00:15:45
market signals are to be believed, more
00:15:48
politicians seem to be leaning into that
00:15:50
kind of behavior, a sort of like if you
00:15:52
can't beat them, join them type
00:15:53
approach. So like I would think if you
00:15:57
if you just take people at their word,
00:15:59
they want candidates who compromise and
00:16:01
candidates who behave in a manner that
00:16:03
is befitting the office and all of those
00:16:05
different things. and then who shows up
00:16:08
and votes in a primary like puts people
00:16:09
in who have un unbelievable flaws in in
00:16:13
any number of ways. So I think you're
00:16:16
right and I don't think it's pearl
00:16:17
clutching or or if it is like I'm I'm
00:16:19
I'm pearl clutching a little bit. Not
00:16:21
that I'm surprised but that I'm
00:16:23
disappointed
00:16:24
uh that we now have this
00:16:27
>> horseness where
00:16:29
>> like the president of the United States
00:16:31
is tweeting fbombs. I don't love that.
00:16:33
That's like maybe that's just me as a
00:16:36
small C conservative like I'm I'm not
00:16:38
interested. No thank you.
00:16:39
>> Um
00:16:40
>> but the reality is that voters say they
00:16:42
don't want it and then this is who gets
00:16:44
elected. And whether it's they're voting
00:16:46
for him in spite of it or because of it.
00:16:48
Like I think there's some people it's
00:16:50
because of it. They like that he doesn't
00:16:51
sound like somebody straight out of
00:16:54
central casting. Um,
00:16:55
>> yeah.
00:16:56
>> Yeah.
00:16:57
>> But I do wonder if there will be a
00:16:58
backlash at some point. If Americans
00:16:59
start to want straight out of Central
00:17:01
casting sound like the old man at the my
00:17:04
mom's uh senior living facility who you
00:17:06
really need you go around to get off the
00:17:08
elevator for. Um and and initially
00:17:10
you're like and then you're like shut
00:17:12
the [ __ ] up daddy grandpa. Anyway, um
00:17:16
it's a really interesting thing because
00:17:17
I think just like with Iran or anything
00:17:19
else it's a background noise that's
00:17:20
disconcerting right
00:17:23
a direct thing. It's not soothing. It's
00:17:26
not This is not America does not feel
00:17:28
like the spa music is on. Let's put it
00:17:31
that way. Especially with these young
00:17:32
voters that you're seeing it. If you had
00:17:34
to pick one polling thing that you went,
00:17:36
"Oh my goodness sakes, one upside or
00:17:39
downside. What is there something that
00:17:42
stuck out from you recently in your
00:17:44
polling?" Well, I think it is about Gen
00:17:46
Z and the economy and it is when we've
00:17:50
been asking people, do you think the
00:17:51
economy is um headed in the right
00:17:53
direction or the wrong direction? We've
00:17:55
been asking them this for years. People
00:17:57
generally have been saying it's been
00:17:58
headed in the wrong direction and you
00:18:00
can break it out by generation. And for
00:18:02
the most part, this has not been
00:18:03
something where like older voters think
00:18:05
everything is great and younger voters
00:18:07
think it's terrible. Like everybody's
00:18:08
kind of been aligned about where things
00:18:10
are at. But in just the last month in
00:18:13
our March data, the Gen Z respondents, I
00:18:16
mean, it fell off a cliff in terms of
00:18:18
their feelings about the economy. And
00:18:20
the reason why that sticks out is one,
00:18:21
it's a it's breaking of a big trend that
00:18:23
we'd had for a long time of kind of
00:18:25
everybody feels like the economy is not
00:18:27
doing great. Um, but just for to see
00:18:30
them get so much more depressed in just
00:18:32
a month was was really jarring. But
00:18:35
number two, think about the kind of
00:18:37
coalition that Republicans put together
00:18:39
that have enabled them to have sort of
00:18:41
better thanex expected elections. It's
00:18:44
in part because they they tried to
00:18:46
repair the damage that had been done
00:18:48
with younger voters. And if you are
00:18:51
presiding over an economy where Jenz is
00:18:53
feeling like this, like that's it. The
00:18:56
only thing you have going for you is the
00:18:58
fact that Jenz finds Democrats to be
00:18:59
uninspiring at the moment. Um, that's
00:19:01
not a great thing to hang your hat on.
00:19:03
So to me it's it is that Jenzi economic
00:19:06
number more so than anything specific
00:19:08
about foreign
00:19:09
>> it's an opportunity for Democrats
00:19:10
presumably correct is an opportunity
00:19:12
>> it is it is an opportunity for Democrats
00:19:14
but I think the thing that Democrats are
00:19:16
getting wrong is like that they they
00:19:18
know that affordability is the thing on
00:19:20
everybody's minds and so they know to
00:19:22
like mouth the words yes we care about
00:19:24
cost of living and that may be enough if
00:19:27
things are bad enough you can just say
00:19:29
I'm not the other guy and that that
00:19:30
could be adequate but I still think
00:19:32
think that voters also in the surveys
00:19:35
that I see harbor some skepticism about
00:19:37
what Democrats would do if given the
00:19:39
reigns again. Like, okay, we don't love
00:19:41
what Trump's doing, but we still don't
00:19:43
love the way Biden handled this either.
00:19:45
So, what's your plan? Is your plan to
00:19:47
open up the spigot of money and
00:19:48
subsidize everything to pretend like it
00:19:50
goes away, but that drives inflation?
00:19:51
Like, we don't want that either.
00:19:52
>> Run the deficit.
00:19:54
>> Yeah. I don't I don't think that
00:19:58
fresh ideas that actually solve people's
00:20:00
problems. Incredible. Well, that's what
00:20:02
they're supposed to do. Okay, Kristen,
00:20:04
let's go on a quick break. When we come
00:20:05
back, we'll talk about a potential
00:20:07
cabinet shakeup and who might be the
00:20:09
next to go. Support for this show comes
00:20:12
from Vanta. If you're a business owner,
00:20:14
you might have noticed that risk and
00:20:15
regulation are on the rise. Customers
00:20:17
now want proof of security before they
00:20:19
commit, and earning that trust is
00:20:20
critical to closing deals. But the
00:20:22
process can be expensive, complex, and
00:20:24
time inensive. Vanta says that's the
00:20:26
challenge they're here to solve. Vanta
00:20:28
automates your compliance process to
00:20:30
bring compliance, risk, and customer
00:20:31
trust together in one AI powered
00:20:33
platform. So whether you're prepping for
00:20:35
a sock 2 or running an enterprise GRC
00:20:38
program, Vant keeps you secure and keeps
00:20:40
your deals moving. Vant automates the
00:20:42
process of achieving and maintaining
00:20:44
compliance with over 35 security and
00:20:46
privacy frameworks. This helps companies
00:20:48
get compliant fast and remain compliant,
00:20:50
opening doors to major growth
00:20:52
opportunities and freeing up valuable
00:20:54
time. Vantis says companies like Ramp
00:20:56
and Writers spend 82% less time on
00:20:58
audits with Vanta. That's not just
00:21:00
faster compliance, it's more time to
00:21:02
scale. So, if you're tired of sifting
00:21:04
through old audits and spreadsheets, you
00:21:06
can get a system that's always working
00:21:07
in the background, keeping you
00:21:09
compliant, reducing risk, and helping
00:21:10
your business scale fast and with
00:21:12
confidence, you can get started at
00:21:14
vanta.com/pivot.
00:21:16
That's van.com/pivot.
00:21:19
vanta.com/pivot.
00:21:23
This episode is sponsored by Better
00:21:24
Health. Tax day is just around the
00:21:26
corner. I don't need to tell you that.
00:21:28
You might already feel anxious about it
00:21:30
and about finances in general, but that
00:21:32
is a very common feeling. A recent study
00:21:34
showed 88% of Americans were feeling
00:21:36
some form of financial stress at the
00:21:38
start of 2026. Money worries go beyond
00:21:40
our bank accounts and they affect
00:21:42
everyone at some point in life. It can
00:21:44
take a serious toll on mental health.
00:21:46
From anxiety and depression to sleep
00:21:47
disruption and relationship stress, even
00:21:50
if you can't immediately change your
00:21:51
finances, one thing you can start doing
00:21:53
today is improving your mental state
00:21:54
around them. That's where a therapist
00:21:56
can help. BetterHelp matches you with a
00:21:59
licensed therapist who fits your needs
00:22:00
and preferences. They've served over 6
00:22:03
million people globally with over 12
00:22:05
years of experience. And even though
00:22:07
they typically get it right the first
00:22:08
time, if you aren't happy with your
00:22:10
match, you can switch therapists
00:22:11
whenever you want. When life feels
00:22:13
overwhelming, therapy can help. Sign up
00:22:16
and get 10% off at betterhelp.com/pivot.
00:22:19
That's betterhp.com/pivot.
00:22:23
Christine, we're back. Pam Bondi and
00:22:25
Christy No may have just been the
00:22:26
beginning. A Trump cabinet shakeup is
00:22:28
reportedly in the works, though the
00:22:29
president is denying it, which means
00:22:31
it's happening. The White House official
00:22:33
told Reuters to expect a targeted churn
00:22:35
rather than a big uh dramatic reset,
00:22:38
which this feels like a corporation.
00:22:40
Some of the names potentially on the
00:22:42
chopping block. Director of National
00:22:43
Intelligence Telsey Gabbard, FBI
00:22:45
Director Cash Patel, Commerce Secretary
00:22:47
Howard Lutnik, uh, Labor Secretary Lori
00:22:50
uh, Derimer. As for Bondi's replacement,
00:22:53
her deputy and Trump's former attorney
00:22:55
Todd Blanch is currently serving as
00:22:56
acting AG and he's already trying to
00:22:58
distance the DOJ from the Epstein files,
00:23:01
telling Fox last week that all the files
00:23:02
have been released. talk a little bit
00:23:05
about what's happening here in terms of
00:23:07
um this and does this create more of a a
00:23:10
voter dissatisfaction or is it I mean
00:23:13
this happens in every administration
00:23:15
where there's a shakeup kind of thing.
00:23:16
It's not a and the last Trump
00:23:18
administration was was like a manic
00:23:21
episode of of the apprentice of course
00:23:24
and people went in and out quite a lot.
00:23:26
This is this is these people have had
00:23:27
some staying power and they're 100% less
00:23:30
competent. So talk a little bit about
00:23:31
that. I think a shakeup can be a very
00:23:34
good thing, especially if like let's
00:23:36
take Christy. This is a great example of
00:23:39
an issue immigration was an issue where
00:23:42
Republicans and Donald Trump had a
00:23:44
massive advantage that they haven't
00:23:46
always had, but there was a real
00:23:48
willingness to like America had moved to
00:23:50
the right on these issues and said do
00:23:52
what you got to do to get the border
00:23:53
secure.
00:23:55
and the way in which this was handled
00:23:58
culminating in I mean embarrassment is
00:24:00
is probably too light a way to frame it
00:24:02
but the events of the last couple of
00:24:04
months in terms of of ICE specifically
00:24:08
>> um
00:24:09
>> just this week with with a service
00:24:10
member's wife being grabbed off a base
00:24:13
>> I I just feel like for Donald Trump you
00:24:16
you can't your political coalition can't
00:24:19
survive if you don't have people coming
00:24:21
to you going well at least he knows what
00:24:23
to do about the border at least he knows
00:24:24
how to handle this issue It's kind of a
00:24:26
core piece of glue that holds different
00:24:28
pieces of his coalition together. And if
00:24:30
you lose that, what do you have? So by
00:24:33
being able to sort of say, okay, I'm
00:24:35
cutting this person. This person has
00:24:37
been an embarrassment to me and look, my
00:24:39
numbers on this issue have fallen.
00:24:41
It is good that he is at least not
00:24:44
taking the position of like I'm just
00:24:46
going to I'm going to circle the wagons
00:24:49
and we're going to say that everything's
00:24:50
fine and it's just the liberal media
00:24:52
that's being mean. So I think to some
00:24:54
level these shakeups are what Donald
00:24:57
Trump's voters expect from him,
00:25:00
especially those folks who are not
00:25:03
diehard Republicans, but instead
00:25:05
gravitated to him for some combination
00:25:07
of the economy and immigration and vibes
00:25:11
that like being able to show yes, I want
00:25:14
new people running the show. I have been
00:25:16
unsatisfied with what they've been
00:25:17
doing.
00:25:18
>> Well, his brand started with that.
00:25:19
You're fine.
00:25:20
>> Exactly. Exactly. So, I don't know what
00:25:22
that means about who would be next. I
00:25:24
mean, I think about some of the names
00:25:25
that were on your list, and some of them
00:25:27
have done more that has publicly brought
00:25:32
strife to the White House than others.
00:25:34
And I think that's probably the thing
00:25:35
that is animating this more. Like, I
00:25:38
don't know to what extent his decision
00:25:39
to to bid farewell to Christine Gnome.
00:25:42
Was it about how ICE was handling the
00:25:44
issue of immigration or was it how she
00:25:46
handled hearings and some of these
00:25:48
embarrassing stories about like you know
00:25:51
the the planes and god knows what else?
00:25:54
>> Um yeah
00:25:55
>> but so that that's sort of how I
00:25:56
>> honestly husband's the coolest thing
00:25:58
about her but go ahead.
00:26:00
All of which is to say I think if you
00:26:02
want to know like where the change would
00:26:04
come next I think the most important
00:26:06
criteria is likely who who is reflecting
00:26:09
well on this White House not who has you
00:26:12
know something that's like got the
00:26:14
beltway in a stir but it's not really
00:26:16
reflecting badly on him
00:26:18
>> right so it has to be who who does break
00:26:21
through of these cabinet members with
00:26:22
the voters the ones that you're polling
00:26:24
>> so I honestly think that if you asked
00:26:26
voters which member of the cabinet is
00:26:30
the most supportive of tariffs. I do not
00:26:32
think very many would be able to name
00:26:34
Howard Lutnik. Um so that again I'm I am
00:26:38
not a Trump Kremlinologist but to me it
00:26:41
does not seem as though there's anything
00:26:43
on the outside that would be driving
00:26:44
that in quite the same way as say cash
00:26:47
Patel at the FBI drinking with the
00:26:50
hockey team or you know any number of
00:26:52
cases that the FBI has been handling and
00:26:55
questions about the effectiveness of of
00:26:57
that. Um, so again, don't know which way
00:26:59
he would go first, but to me that seems
00:27:01
to be the most important variable or
00:27:04
most obvious.
00:27:05
>> Are you looking like an idiot publicly
00:27:06
to a wide range of people? In other
00:27:08
words, like a lot of people as opposed
00:27:10
to say the labor secretary who's just
00:27:12
seems naughty uh in a really bad way
00:27:15
kind of thing because we've had naughty
00:27:16
cabinet members for ever from what I can
00:27:20
glean and stuff. But it but it doesn't
00:27:21
break through with voters. more like
00:27:23
Cash Patel drink down in the beer is a
00:27:25
real bad visual for example.
00:27:27
>> Well, and you know how Donald Trump
00:27:29
feels about visuals like that. That's
00:27:31
really really really important. The
00:27:32
public image, do you look the part? Um
00:27:35
and if you begin to fail on those
00:27:37
dimensions, that's often when it's it's
00:27:40
time for he's looking for somebody
00:27:41
different.
00:27:42
>> So is that is that a good thing? As you
00:27:44
say, a shakeup isn't a bad thing, right?
00:27:45
It shows you're you know you know look
00:27:47
busy, Jesus is coming kind of thing like
00:27:49
that kind of thing.
00:27:50
>> Well, yeah. I think es especially
00:27:53
because of what you said about his brand
00:27:55
as the apprentice guy. I think the idea
00:27:59
that you I mean remember like think
00:28:00
about what he did with Doge when he
00:28:02
first came into office. He just went
00:28:03
through and slashed and burned. So we're
00:28:05
going to fire a whole bunch of people. I
00:28:06
mean that is
00:28:07
>> his brand
00:28:08
>> which which it should not just be
00:28:10
isolated to lower runs if you're really
00:28:13
going to live through uh you know live
00:28:15
up to it and and press through with it.
00:28:17
Um, it it it almost uniquely is a
00:28:22
probably a good thing for Trump in a way
00:28:24
that it might not even be for other
00:28:25
administrations,
00:28:26
>> right? No, his brand is firing. His
00:28:27
brand is getting rid of incompetence and
00:28:29
now he has he keeps them and you're
00:28:31
like, "Oh my god, you're keeping the
00:28:32
incompetence that I would agree having
00:28:34
watched all those shows."
00:28:36
>> And then the last question is for all of
00:28:38
this, whether it's court appointments or
00:28:39
cabinet appointments, what do you think
00:28:41
the United States Senate is likely to
00:28:43
look like after November? And how likely
00:28:46
is it that you think you will be able to
00:28:47
get someone confirmed through a Senate
00:28:49
that potentially has more Democrats in
00:28:51
it than it does today? I mean, those are
00:28:53
things that I think are probably also
00:28:55
weighing on the minds of the Susie Wilds
00:28:57
of the world who are are keeping track
00:28:58
of that.
00:28:59
>> Yeah, the incompetence might have to
00:29:01
stay. So, one of the things that's
00:29:02
interesting uh also happening is the
00:29:04
federal government is suing multiple
00:29:06
states over attempts to ban betting on
00:29:08
Kouchy and other platforms. Now, let's
00:29:10
be clear. Donald Trump's children are
00:29:12
part of this um or on the boards or
00:29:15
advisers to both Poly Market and Kelshi.
00:29:17
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission
00:29:19
is arguing that it has the sole
00:29:20
authority that that's what they're using
00:29:22
to regulate these predictions markets.
00:29:24
Meanwhile, Poly Market is apologizing
00:29:26
after users were allowed to bet on the
00:29:28
fate of the US pilots whose jet was
00:29:30
downed in Iran. Pretty losome, saying it
00:29:32
did not meet their integrity standards.
00:29:34
Incredible. Both Poly Market and Calier
00:29:36
are now rolling out campaigns to attract
00:29:38
female users framing prediction markets
00:29:40
as another way to be a hashgirl boss
00:29:42
which by the way girl boss is over kids
00:29:44
boys. We've been talking a lot about
00:29:46
these markets here on Pivot and you and
00:29:48
I have talked about it and so I want to
00:29:49
play something Scott said a few weeks
00:29:51
ago and get your thoughts. Let's listen.
00:29:52
>> The speculative markets, speculation
00:29:54
markets or prediction markets have
00:29:55
essentially put pollsters and to a
00:29:58
certain extent investment banking
00:29:59
analysts out of work because guess what?
00:30:01
They're much
00:30:01
>> kind of I I would push back on that. I
00:30:03
just met with a bunch of pollsters on
00:30:04
this topic, but go ahead.
00:30:05
>> In my opinion, they're done. They if you
00:30:07
look at if you look at if you look at
00:30:08
the prediction markets record versus
00:30:10
pollsters in the last election, the
00:30:13
prediction markets kicked their ass.
00:30:15
>> All right, Pollster, what's your
00:30:17
response? I I was trying to defend you
00:30:19
there. Um, talk about about what's
00:30:22
happening with them and your thoughts on
00:30:23
it and what you like and don't like
00:30:24
about them and and um just so you know,
00:30:27
uh there's another possible nail in the
00:30:29
coffin for polling. There's now
00:30:30
something called silicon sampling that
00:30:32
uses AI models to simulate simulate
00:30:34
survey responses, not real people. Um,
00:30:37
talk a little bit what's happening here
00:30:38
in the polling market.
00:30:40
>> Sure. So, I have a lot of thoughts on
00:30:41
both of these. First, to Scott's point,
00:30:43
I I do not think that prediction markets
00:30:45
are going to put polling out of
00:30:46
business. One, because 99% of what
00:30:50
pollsters do is not polling that tries
00:30:53
to track who is going to win an
00:30:55
election. Like I know that's the most
00:30:57
public thing that people see from our
00:30:58
industry, but 99% of it is message
00:31:02
testing, strategy, model building, the
00:31:05
sorts of things for which being within
00:31:08
margin of error, meaning your result is
00:31:11
within three points in either direction.
00:31:12
Like that's that's okay. That's sort of
00:31:14
understood.
00:31:14
>> Give me an example. Just make it up.
00:31:16
Just like you pull what?
00:31:18
>> So I I can tell you about the polling
00:31:20
we've done on I've done some polling on
00:31:21
prediction markets. um where you know
00:31:24
I'm asking to what extent are people
00:31:27
using them? What are they using them
00:31:28
for? And those are the kinds of things
00:31:31
that are valuable for somebody who might
00:31:33
be trying to decide do I invest in one
00:31:35
of these companies like if I'm going to
00:31:37
regulate them, what sort of regulatory
00:31:39
approach should I take? Uh it's the sort
00:31:42
of thing where like I'll give you an
00:31:43
example. In our poll, we found about
00:31:45
onethird of people either bet on
00:31:48
prediction markets, that's not a
00:31:49
majority of them, or like use the data
00:31:52
like they either they tune into it just
00:31:54
for entertainment purposes or what have
00:31:55
you. So, if my poll shows 36% of people
00:31:58
fall into that category, the real
00:32:01
number, assuming that I've done my
00:32:02
survey right, the real number could be a
00:32:04
few points off in either direction, and
00:32:06
that's not the end of the world. It
00:32:07
still means my analysis is still useful
00:32:10
directionally. It's telling us something
00:32:12
interesting about thing where things are
00:32:13
going. I think this focus so exclusively
00:32:17
on polling as a like crystal ball to
00:32:20
tell me if an election is going to get
00:32:21
won won by candidate A or candidate B
00:32:24
just sort of misunderstands our
00:32:25
industry. But the second thing is what
00:32:27
is causing these prediction markets to
00:32:30
give the predictions they are. So, think
00:32:32
about there was a a a man um I think he
00:32:34
was based in France who placed a huge
00:32:37
bet in the last election that Donald
00:32:38
Trump was going to win and afterwards,
00:32:41
you know, he he makes this like six
00:32:43
figure sum off of his bet and that's all
00:32:45
great. And they ask him, you know, how'd
00:32:47
you do it? And he said, "Oh, I
00:32:48
commissioned a poll." Um the polls are
00:32:50
still an input to what these prediction
00:32:54
markets are doing. In a world without
00:32:55
polls, your prediction market is running
00:32:58
on vibes and fundraising numbers, which
00:33:01
are fine, but polls are an extremely
00:33:03
they are a loadbearing pillar in what
00:33:06
people think about what's going to
00:33:07
happen in an election.
00:33:09
>> So So predictions would be a trailing
00:33:11
indicator or what how do you look at
00:33:12
that?
00:33:13
>> Yes. So I I think that in general, well,
00:33:15
I I think when it comes to election
00:33:17
results, they don't have to be a
00:33:19
trailing indicator, but I think that
00:33:21
polls are an input. There are they are
00:33:24
not the only input. So other things can
00:33:26
change, right? My poll can say that so
00:33:28
and so is going to win the primary in
00:33:29
Texas, but all of a sudden some new news
00:33:32
story could break that shows that Ken
00:33:34
Paxton or John Cornin did something, you
00:33:36
know, that could upend the race. Who
00:33:39
knows?
00:33:39
>> It's usually Paxton
00:33:40
>> and then the prediction market would be
00:33:42
the leading indicator ahead of when the
00:33:44
poll is going to capture that. Um, but
00:33:46
you still need the poll involved. And
00:33:49
that's also what I think about this
00:33:50
whole synthetic respondents, AI
00:33:53
respondents. You know, nowadays you're
00:33:54
seeing more people.
00:33:56
>> Yeah. And and there were some attempts
00:33:58
to do this in the 2024 election that I
00:34:00
think were actually less accurate than
00:34:02
>> Explain what people what it is. You use
00:34:04
AI model. Explain for people who don't
00:34:06
understand.
00:34:06
>> Yeah. So, if you've ever used one of
00:34:07
these models, whether it's your chat GPT
00:34:10
or your Claude, and you can like train
00:34:13
Claude or Chat GPT or whoever to kind of
00:34:16
learn a certain persona, imagine that
00:34:18
you've then trained a thousand different
00:34:21
personas that kind of look like a real
00:34:25
voter. Okay, I've trained one persona to
00:34:27
be a 40-year-old woman living in
00:34:29
Orlando, Florida, and she's a moderate
00:34:31
Republican. And now I've got another bot
00:34:33
that is trained to be a conservative
00:34:35
Democrat, and he lives in rural
00:34:38
Pennsylvania. And and then basically,
00:34:40
you just ask those thousand AI
00:34:43
personalities to tell you, are you
00:34:45
voting for a Republican or a Democrat?
00:34:47
And then you take those results and you
00:34:49
say, "Hey, look, I did a poll. I did a
00:34:50
poll of a thousand AI people who
00:34:54
represent real voters,
00:34:56
>> right?
00:34:57
>> Um,
00:34:58
>> and I just think presenting that as a
00:35:00
poll is disingenuous. I think you can
00:35:02
present it as a modeled estimate. Like I
00:35:05
think there's lots of things you can
00:35:06
present it as.
00:35:07
>> Do you use model that like use AI? How
00:35:10
do you use it in
00:35:11
>> post? So we the way we use AI, you can
00:35:13
use AI to help you know with programming
00:35:17
tasks. It's enormously helpful. You can
00:35:19
use AI to help you analyze data when it
00:35:22
comes back. Like the old school way of
00:35:24
analyzing polling data is you do a
00:35:26
survey and you get back cross tabs that
00:35:28
is this like 500page PDF with a ton of
00:35:31
numbers on each page and you as the
00:35:33
pollster are sifting through looking for
00:35:34
stuff that's that's meaningful. The fact
00:35:37
that you can feed that in and have AI
00:35:39
tell you, hey, here are the top 10 most
00:35:41
interesting things in that poll. Eight
00:35:43
out of 10 are going to be pretty good.
00:35:45
one out of the 10 will be right but not
00:35:47
really that important and then one will
00:35:49
be like completely wrong and so you
00:35:51
still have to as the pollster exercise
00:35:53
your judgment go through go through your
00:35:55
own data uh and know but like there are
00:35:58
useful applications of AI in polling but
00:36:00
ultimately if you think about those
00:36:02
synthetic personas what's training that
00:36:06
synthetic 40-year-old suburban mom who
00:36:09
lives in Orlando on how she ought to
00:36:12
respond a poll it's probably a poll that
00:36:15
was done to so all of this whether it's
00:36:17
prediction markets or these synthetic AI
00:36:21
samples all of them at their root have
00:36:25
real polling as an input and it's like a
00:36:28
game of telephone and they're just like
00:36:29
the next piece in the line and you can
00:36:32
add other useful inputs that might give
00:36:34
them some advantages but they're still
00:36:36
not a replacement for polling they are
00:36:39
just a different application of polling
00:36:41
>> so what when you say that when the
00:36:43
federal government is saying commodity I
00:36:44
think futures trading should be
00:36:46
regulating them. They're not regulating
00:36:48
them. Is it fair? Is it sort of like It
00:36:50
reminds me a little bit of your like
00:36:52
commerce people, retail people who are
00:36:55
offline having to fight with online.
00:36:57
They had distinct advantages here. They
00:36:59
can they can do whatever these people to
00:37:01
grow large. What do you imagine? How who
00:37:04
should be states are rushing in because
00:37:06
they have long long regulated gambling.
00:37:09
Every state does has its different
00:37:10
gambling laws and that's not something
00:37:12
the federal government ever did. So is
00:37:15
it like gambling from your perspective
00:37:16
or how should they be regulated when you
00:37:18
think about it given presumably you're
00:37:20
not that regulated but you you have a
00:37:22
set of standards that you're working
00:37:24
around. I I think the big challenge is
00:37:26
how do you balance the value that a
00:37:29
prediction market can provide to society
00:37:32
beyond it's just entertainment, right?
00:37:35
like what is the what is the value
00:37:37
beyond entertainment of I'm betting on
00:37:38
who's going to win the Super Bowl like
00:37:40
and so we have to decide do we think
00:37:41
that's an acceptable form of
00:37:42
entertainment but the the the promise of
00:37:45
prediction markets is theoretically that
00:37:47
you can also surface new information
00:37:51
about things that have not yet happened
00:37:53
that might be valuable for the public to
00:37:55
know the question is then like when does
00:37:58
that cross into insider trading like for
00:38:00
me I feel I've never bet on a prediction
00:38:05
market because I would feel
00:38:06
uncomfortable about like I come out of
00:38:08
the field with a survey. I then know
00:38:10
what's happening in the Texas primary
00:38:12
and therefore I can know hm I think
00:38:15
candidate X Y or Z is probably up and if
00:38:17
I really trust my data why don't I put a
00:38:19
couple thousand bucks on on this bet and
00:38:21
I just don't feel right about that. I it
00:38:24
something about it feels like insider
00:38:26
trading and I think that's where
00:38:28
it's and I don't know what the
00:38:30
>> you're just having more insight, right?
00:38:32
That's kind of an interesting example.
00:38:33
You have some in is that insider or is
00:38:35
that was your own data?
00:38:37
>> I I don't I think you're right that
00:38:39
that's not insider trading in the way
00:38:40
that but it is like it is non-public
00:38:42
information that I would be using to
00:38:45
benefit. It's not the same as being an
00:38:48
insider at a company where there are
00:38:50
very specialized strict rules around
00:38:52
that. But I think it's that that
00:38:54
muddying of the waters, right? And so
00:38:56
you've been seeing this too with some of
00:38:58
these markets that have had bets around
00:39:01
things like will the United States do
00:39:03
military operation X and all of the
00:39:05
sudden right before it happens, you see
00:39:08
somebody bets like $300,000 sitting next
00:39:11
to Trump in the White House and they
00:39:12
just heard it, right?
00:39:13
>> And like and so I do think that that
00:39:15
that's that raises some real questions.
00:39:17
If we're going to have rules around
00:39:18
insider trading, when does that start to
00:39:20
bleed over into what is or is not
00:39:22
allowable conduct in terms of prediction
00:39:25
markets?
00:39:26
>> Have they hurt themselves? You know, but
00:39:27
sometimes it's not insider. Like, it
00:39:30
sounds crazy, but when Warner Brothers
00:39:31
was $7 and that all the bidding started,
00:39:34
I'm like, these rich people will pay
00:39:36
anything. And so, I bought 10 shares cuz
00:39:38
I was like, and it was only 10 cuz I was
00:39:40
like, I think they're dumb, stupid
00:39:41
money, so they're going to overpay. And
00:39:44
I just and I took myself out for a nice
00:39:46
dinner because I was right. And that was
00:39:48
information I had, but anyone could have
00:39:50
figured it out. Dumb, stupid money, for
00:39:52
example. And thank you for the dinner,
00:39:54
Allison's. I appreciate it. When you
00:39:56
have these things doing this, when
00:39:57
they're putting in this sort of they
00:40:00
kind of fud muddy the line. There's also
00:40:02
these betting on heinous things, right,
00:40:05
which makes it feel like gambling. And
00:40:07
then attracting female users is a
00:40:10
problem. They've got a bad reputation
00:40:12
from the get-go, including attracting
00:40:14
the attention of regulators, right? Like
00:40:16
in terms of their bad behaviors. Yeah.
00:40:18
So, when when I look at the polling I've
00:40:20
done on this, and again, in disclosure,
00:40:22
I did polling uh for um an organiz It's
00:40:25
all it's all publicly available, but
00:40:26
sort of an entity that like I think
00:40:28
invests in uh some of these prediction
00:40:31
markets. And in general, just a lot of
00:40:34
people don't know that much about them.
00:40:35
like they're pretty split on whether
00:40:37
it's good or bad, but everybody's got an
00:40:40
attit an an attitude about it. Everybody
00:40:41
has like an opinion of some sort. But
00:40:44
when we ask about prediction markets,
00:40:45
like half of Americans have no idea how
00:40:48
they feel about it. Um, most have not
00:40:50
heard anything in the news about a
00:40:52
prediction market in the last 12 months.
00:40:54
So, there is a real risk and real
00:40:56
opportunity for that industry. And it's
00:40:58
why they're trying to get out ahead of
00:40:59
it and say, "Hey, right now, like in my
00:41:01
data, it showed it too. if it's if you
00:41:03
are male, if you are under the age of
00:41:05
50, if you are higher educated, higher
00:41:07
income, like you are the most likely to
00:41:08
know about prediction markets and be
00:41:10
interested in them and think they're a
00:41:11
good thing. Um, and so they're trying to
00:41:14
say, okay, we've got to tell our story
00:41:17
or someone else is going to tell our
00:41:18
story. And that's why you're seeing
00:41:20
efforts to try to expand beyond.
00:41:23
>> So they've got an opportunity despite
00:41:24
all the bad the bad press. But it seems
00:41:26
like the bad press keeps piling on this
00:41:29
US pilots jet thing. I thought, "Oh my
00:41:31
god, I think
00:41:32
>> this is the for, you know, for any for a
00:41:35
platform that has control over what
00:41:38
markets can be made and and not made,
00:41:40
you know, having that judgment of what
00:41:43
where's the upside? is is the upside in
00:41:46
ma max maximizing the sorts of things
00:41:48
people can bet on and not restricting it
00:41:50
too tightly knowing that we're going to
00:41:52
have a couple of these that are like
00:41:55
cringe cringeworthy versus more tightly
00:41:57
regulating it sort of playing it safer
00:42:00
>> you have higher upside in terms of your
00:42:02
favorability but
00:42:04
>> you then as a platform are in that role
00:42:07
that you will recall the social media
00:42:08
companies did not want to be in when it
00:42:10
came to like deciding where's the
00:42:11
boundaries of political speech How do
00:42:14
you decide what constitutes a market
00:42:17
that is out of bounds? Like you don't
00:42:19
want to be business
00:42:20
>> did better by looking safer, right? Like
00:42:23
right now from the polling, do you think
00:42:25
that doing what anything goes is a
00:42:27
particularly good way to do it?
00:42:30
>> No. And I I think there there is a
00:42:31
significant difference between people's
00:42:34
comfort level with prediction markets as
00:42:36
a sort of adjacent to the sorts of
00:42:41
betting and chance things that they
00:42:44
know. But it's it's slightly better than
00:42:46
just chance because you can use your own
00:42:48
judgment to say, "Okay, I think X, Y,
00:42:49
and Z is going to happen." You can use
00:42:51
your own smarts toward it accordingly. I
00:42:53
think that's why it could have a
00:42:55
slightly better it it could wind up with
00:42:58
people liking it more than they like
00:43:00
something like sports betting where
00:43:01
you're just like I hope this team wins.
00:43:02
I like them. Um but there are real
00:43:05
downsides if you have people creating
00:43:07
these horrible or unsavory markets where
00:43:09
it feels like you've just turned
00:43:10
something very serious
00:43:13
into [ __ ] fighting.
00:43:15
>> That's what it feels like for like in a
00:43:16
[ __ ] fighting mode. Like I don't mind a
00:43:19
little bit of a boxing match, but I
00:43:21
don't really want to watch animals rip
00:43:23
each other apart, right? Either like
00:43:25
some people do, but it sort of feels it
00:43:27
has that sort of stink to it. Um, let me
00:43:30
last question. You know, Scott is
00:43:32
absolutely saying your your business is
00:43:33
finished. Um, you're out of work because
00:43:36
of them. How give one more answer to
00:43:38
Scott Galley, please. the political
00:43:40
polling industry is going to be fine
00:43:43
because when we are in moments of deep
00:43:46
uncertainty,
00:43:48
that is the moment when people,
00:43:50
companies, trade associations, you name
00:43:53
it, people are the most hungry to know
00:43:55
what the heck is everybody thinking,
00:43:58
where is this all headed? And with the
00:44:00
understanding that polling is not the
00:44:01
only or perfect way to get a read on
00:44:04
that, but is a as I described it like a
00:44:06
loadbearing pillar. It's a really
00:44:08
important input. I mean, when the world
00:44:11
is in a moment of turmoil or dramatic
00:44:15
change, that is when people want this
00:44:17
data more than ever. And where something
00:44:20
that is
00:44:21
>> trained on polling data, but kind of off
00:44:24
and not quite there
00:44:26
>> is not going to be
00:44:29
as as much as real polling is imperfect,
00:44:31
it's still the real thing.
00:44:32
>> Yeah. I always am like I always Scott,
00:44:34
I'm always like, "What's in there? Who's
00:44:35
doing it? Who's doing the bedding? I
00:44:37
don't know who they are, right? Like it
00:44:38
could be a bunch of It probably is a
00:44:40
bunch of white bro millennials. That's
00:44:42
who and I don't that's their opinion,
00:44:44
not everybody's opinion. That's my
00:44:46
thing. And especially if there's not a
00:44:47
lot of women in there, there's not a lot
00:44:49
of different economic groups. You don't
00:44:52
get a really particularly good sample.
00:44:54
That's my feeling. When when we get
00:44:55
closer to the election, the safest and
00:44:57
healthiest way to consume polling data
00:45:00
is just take it and throw it in the
00:45:01
average. Don't panic about anyone
00:45:04
individual poll. Everything's going to
00:45:06
be all right. No, thank you.
00:45:08
>> Well, I don't know about the last part.
00:45:09
>> I don't know about the last part.
00:45:10
Anyway, uh you you crazy bastards. You
00:45:14
know, like I say, every accusation is a
00:45:16
confession. Uh anyway, uh let's go on a
00:45:19
quick break. When we come back, Open AI
00:45:21
gets into podcasts.
00:45:23
>> Support for the show comes from Upwork.
00:45:26
Hiring can be a double-edged sword. On
00:45:28
one hand, there's the promise of growing
00:45:30
your team so everyone can share the load
00:45:31
and get more work done. On the other
00:45:33
hand, it can be such a headache. Here's
00:45:35
an idea. Upwork. You don't have to do it
00:45:38
all yourself. Upwork can make it easier
00:45:39
to bring the right freelancers right
00:45:41
when you need them. You can browse
00:45:42
profiles, review past work, and get help
00:45:44
scoping the role so you can hire with
00:45:46
confidence and get started quickly.
00:45:47
Seriously, you can connect with the
00:45:49
right freelancer in just a few hours.
00:45:52
Especially when you sign up with
00:45:53
Business Plus. Their AI powered short
00:45:55
listing pairs you with the top 1% of
00:45:57
talent in under 6 hours. No endless
00:45:59
searching required. Upwork also cuts
00:46:01
down operational hassle by handling
00:46:03
things like contracts and payments in
00:46:05
one place, so you can spend more time
00:46:07
running your business. Visit upwork.com
00:46:09
right now and post your job for free.
00:46:11
That's upwork.com to connect with top
00:46:13
talent ready to help grow your business.
00:46:15
That's upw.com.
00:46:18
upwork.com.
00:46:23
Christian, we're back with more news.
00:46:24
You just sort of talked about this, the
00:46:26
idea of where you get your narrative and
00:46:28
information from. It has to be good and
00:46:30
wide. So, OpenA has acquired the tech
00:46:32
news podcast TBPN. The online talk show
00:46:35
focuses by the minute analysis of tech
00:46:37
news and interviews with top tech
00:46:38
leaders. TPBN averages 70,000 viewers
00:46:41
per episode across everything. And let
00:46:43
me just say they are tiny compared to
00:46:46
Pivot and other things. Tiny, tiny,
00:46:48
tiny. That said, it's become popular
00:46:50
among a certain group of Silicon Valley
00:46:51
power players who go on it because they
00:46:53
want to be licked up and down all day.
00:46:55
Um, oh, I'm sorry, boys. Is that Did I
00:46:57
say that too wrong? Okay. Sometimes
00:46:58
you're spiky and fun, but really it's
00:47:01
pretty much a up to me PR. Um, OpenAI
00:47:04
says the show will stay editorially
00:47:05
independent, which we do not believe.
00:47:07
Um, talk about this idea of buying
00:47:09
narratives when you when you're thinking
00:47:10
about it because, you know, a lot of
00:47:12
people want to, you know, you do polling
00:47:14
so you have better narratives and craft
00:47:16
messages. That's one of the things you
00:47:18
do for people is tell them how to craft
00:47:20
their messages. talk a little bit about
00:47:22
this effort and you know that's in the
00:47:24
backdrop of um of many company many tech
00:47:27
companies trying to buy into uh into uh
00:47:30
various things like Paramount etc. So
00:47:34
what this reminds me of is there's
00:47:36
actually a a piece out in today's which
00:47:38
I guess the day we're taping this uh New
00:47:40
York Times David Pluff who I think is
00:47:43
very like still one of the smartest
00:47:45
minds on the Democratic
00:47:46
>> love this piece please. Uh it was it was
00:47:48
yeah this piece is essentially saying
00:47:50
that everything is content creation now
00:47:53
that if you are running for office,
00:47:55
>> if you are engaged in politics, the most
00:47:58
important thing you need to be doing is
00:48:00
creating content. That if you are
00:48:02
relying on anybody else to get your
00:48:04
message out but you, you are foolish. um
00:48:06
and that you need to essentially have a
00:48:09
studio within your campaign headquarters
00:48:11
where you are just non-stop producing
00:48:13
content because everything now is is
00:48:15
that uh I think that's really smart. Um
00:48:18
you know I think about that in terms of
00:48:20
like look at the media properties in the
00:48:22
political space that are really like
00:48:24
thriving and doing exciting stuff now
00:48:26
the like the pucks and the punch bowls
00:48:28
and all of that. I mean they're very
00:48:29
focused on like we are constantly
00:48:30
creating content. We're finding a
00:48:32
million new channels to do it. Sometimes
00:48:34
it's in person events, sometimes it's
00:48:35
digital, but it it is a like always on
00:48:38
kind of approach. And I think companies
00:48:41
realizing this uh is probably smart.
00:48:45
Although there's a there's a a flip side
00:48:48
to this, which is,
00:48:49
>> you know, we've we've been going through
00:48:51
a moment in the last few years where it
00:48:52
feels like, you know, everybody
00:48:54
everybody's got a new podcast, Cara. You
00:48:56
know, everybody's like, "Ah, I'm going
00:48:57
to create content. If you build it, they
00:48:59
will come." And that's not true at all.
00:49:01
Lots of people can build podcasts that
00:49:03
or you know create content that sort of
00:49:06
goes out into the ether to die. Yeah.
00:49:08
And especially if it doesn't feel
00:49:10
authentic, if it feels driven by a
00:49:12
corporate narrative, it it starts to
00:49:14
lose some of what might make content
00:49:18
>> great otherwise. So like I imagine there
00:49:19
are a bunch of candidates who could take
00:49:21
pluff at at his word and start doing
00:49:22
what he says and would produce terrible
00:49:24
content.
00:49:25
>> Yes. Good and genuine. Yeah, you're
00:49:27
right 100%. Yeah. So he that was a
00:49:29
really interesting piece and I really I
00:49:30
like David and it was absolutely true.
00:49:32
Although it's kind of like no [ __ ]
00:49:34
Sherlock. I was like what? You're
00:49:35
kidding. The content's important.
00:49:37
>> No, but see you you and I think like oh
00:49:39
yeah no kidding. But it it is truly this
00:49:42
idea that politics is now about being
00:49:45
always on media messaging non-stop. That
00:49:48
is actually something that is
00:49:50
>> not which is important to a lot of
00:49:52
people. Trump has proven that for many
00:49:54
years. Obviously, now it's getting the
00:49:56
the show's getting a little old in the
00:49:58
tooth right now and kind of crazy, but
00:50:00
that's all right. It's a little like
00:50:01
network at the very end. Um, when Howard
00:50:04
had some problems. Um, but you know, you
00:50:06
see AOC did it from the get-go, was very
00:50:09
genuine to herself and she's obviously
00:50:11
talking her own book, but it's very
00:50:13
effective. Same thing with Mom Donnie
00:50:14
who's been very good and he's continuing
00:50:16
to govern that way. If you notice all
00:50:18
his really interesting and they're good,
00:50:21
they're good. They're fun and they're
00:50:22
they're creative. Um you don't have to
00:50:24
agree with them to not say, "Wow, look
00:50:26
at that. That's really well done." Um
00:50:28
especially during snowstorm, he did a
00:50:30
couple of good ones that were just sort
00:50:31
of it wasn't political. It was just
00:50:32
here's how we're doing it and they were
00:50:34
funny and quirky. His whole thing, there
00:50:36
was one he did the smile where he has
00:50:38
that weird smile and they made his whole
00:50:40
staff made fun of his smile and I
00:50:42
thought that was it was based on the
00:50:43
movie Smile which was a horror movie
00:50:45
which was funny. It's just he's very on
00:50:47
top of things and so are a lot of by the
00:50:49
way Republicans. Some Republicans do a
00:50:52
good job at it. Not not as many, but
00:50:53
Trump certainly absolutely for many
00:50:56
years has done a really good job. I
00:50:58
think the problem with these things is
00:51:00
people don't realize tech has tried this
00:51:02
a dozen times. Many years ago, Yahoo
00:51:04
tried to do a news product and that
00:51:06
didn't work because they weren't doing
00:51:07
any original reporting or anything else.
00:51:09
They were just mouththing stuff. Um, uh,
00:51:12
Andre Hordes famously had a blog and
00:51:15
called me and said they were going to
00:51:16
beat me at my own game. And I'm like,
00:51:17
good [ __ ] luck. First of all, media
00:51:19
is hard and it doesn't make money.
00:51:20
Sorry. Like you're you're entering a
00:51:22
really like like what are you doing? And
00:51:24
it well didn't work. They've tried a
00:51:26
number of times that that particular
00:51:28
group and you know it's always sort of
00:51:30
failed. AOL did it a little bit like
00:51:32
around the edges tried to you know to
00:51:35
create some and it just doesn't happen.
00:51:37
So I think one of the things is I get
00:51:39
that you feel more comfortable in these
00:51:42
settings where people are a little bit
00:51:44
like your giant brain is so smart. Tell
00:51:47
me how that works. And I think that has
00:51:48
value by the way you know it's startup
00:51:51
people are always interested in how did
00:51:53
I do that right how did you do that and
00:51:55
they don't want any push back they just
00:51:57
want to hear your techniques whatever
00:51:59
even if it's PR but eventually it's not
00:52:01
truthful right of like the real
00:52:03
struggles companies have and when you
00:52:05
have a little friction with a reporter
00:52:07
it does create really interesting
00:52:08
conversations and the only person I
00:52:11
would look to would be Apple Steve Jobs
00:52:13
he kept coming back to be interviewed by
00:52:14
me even though I know I irritated him
00:52:17
right? Because it was an interesting
00:52:18
conversation and it would help him. It
00:52:20
clarified things. Um, we were fair with
00:52:24
him at the same time. I don't think we
00:52:25
ever pulled any ridiculous, stupid,
00:52:27
snarky moves. Um, but in a lot of ways,
00:52:30
I feel responsible for this kind of
00:52:32
nonsense because they just don't want to
00:52:34
talk to anyone they consider difficult
00:52:36
and would prefer to be. And I don't
00:52:37
think that is the best outcome
00:52:39
editorially. I just don't I just don't
00:52:41
think it becomes I think there'll be a
00:52:43
backlash and they'll start talking to
00:52:45
actual reporters that are fair. That's
00:52:47
my feeling, but I don't know. Maybe I'm
00:52:50
open. I don't really want to talk to
00:52:51
them anymore anyway. So, it doesn't
00:52:53
matter in some level, but I don't know.
00:52:56
We'll see. It's a small amount of money
00:52:57
to pay for possible good PR in a new
00:53:00
fresh way.
00:53:01
>> Is it a small amount of money? I feel
00:53:02
like the reporting was that it was not a
00:53:04
small amount of money. Yeah, but for
00:53:05
them it's a small amount of money and
00:53:07
they've said that essentially on the
00:53:08
show is like that was a lot of money.
00:53:10
We're taking it and running and that
00:53:12
will be the end of it I suspect. But
00:53:14
it's glad it's glad they have people
00:53:15
telling them they're great. That's
00:53:16
really good because they need that
00:53:17
because you know money doesn't seem to
00:53:19
make them happy.
00:53:20
>> Um in any case, we'll see. Do you see a
00:53:22
lot of Are you impressed by a lot of
00:53:24
political um outfits? Give me give me
00:53:27
things that you think are have done it
00:53:28
well in the political space.
00:53:30
>> I will cross party.
00:53:32
>> Well, yeah. So, I'll I'll cross party
00:53:34
lines and say that I I think that AOC is
00:53:38
somebody who an example that I always
00:53:41
give um of something that she did that
00:53:43
has just like lodged in my brain and I
00:53:46
wish every politician would understand
00:53:47
that this is the way the world works is
00:53:50
she appeared on um a skincare
00:53:53
influencers platform. This was like two
00:53:56
or three years ago. This wasn't this
00:53:57
isn't terribly recent, but she went on
00:53:59
to talk about uh sunscreen regulation.
00:54:02
Like right now, if you try to buy
00:54:04
sunscreen in the US, there are
00:54:05
sunscreens that are better elsewhere in
00:54:07
the world, but you cannot get them here.
00:54:08
They're not FDA approved. Um they're not
00:54:10
dangerous. Everything's fine with them.
00:54:12
They just for whatever reason, you can't
00:54:13
get them here. And so she went on this
00:54:15
skincare influencer show to talk a
00:54:17
little bit about that specific issue.
00:54:18
And like, isn't it crazy that you can't
00:54:20
get these good sunscreens here? which is
00:54:22
not an issue that is obviously right
00:54:24
left coded or if anything it's almost
00:54:26
more rightcoded. It's like hey the
00:54:28
government is regulating away your right
00:54:30
to have this really good sunscreen. Um
00:54:32
but she went somewhere where people who
00:54:34
are not necessarily going to tune in and
00:54:36
watch her on MSNBC or MS now whatever
00:54:40
we're calling it. Um you know that
00:54:41
that's not the audience she's going
00:54:43
after. She's going after people who
00:54:44
might be much more loosely attached to
00:54:46
the political process, but she's getting
00:54:48
herself in front of them on an issue
00:54:50
that they care about with some
00:54:51
credibility and that opens the door then
00:54:54
to say, "Hey, come follow me." Like, you
00:54:56
may not follow members of Congress
00:54:58
because that may seem lame and horrible,
00:54:59
but I am not as lame and horrible as the
00:55:01
rest of them, so please follow me. And
00:55:03
you build that audience. And I think
00:55:05
most politicians if you were like go on
00:55:08
a skincare influ I mean they're you
00:55:11
wouldn't want that for most of them but
00:55:12
just whatever the equivalent of that is
00:55:15
like you want to talk about emissions
00:55:16
regulations like go on a car podcast I
00:55:20
just I think that most people in
00:55:22
Washington are not thinking in that gear
00:55:26
and that is where the future is going to
00:55:28
be won. It's not
00:55:29
>> and also corporations too participating.
00:55:31
I think Wendy's does a good job. I think
00:55:33
King Arthur Baking, you can you can name
00:55:34
a dozen of them. Sometimes they can spin
00:55:37
out of control, but often it's a really
00:55:39
interesting
00:55:40
>> uh way to sort of genuinely explain
00:55:43
yourself to people in a as long as it's
00:55:45
not cringe, right? In some fashion over
00:55:48
advertising.
00:55:49
>> I 100% I I mean, if you're not out
00:55:51
there, if you're not telling your story,
00:55:53
someone else is. So, it's important to
00:55:55
go out there. It's important to be in
00:55:57
places where it's not just it's
00:56:01
important to be in I think nonobvious
00:56:03
places, but I also like the tension is
00:56:06
then you don't want to do stuff that's
00:56:07
forced and feels cringeworthy. Um but
00:56:09
just letting letting the other side own
00:56:12
the airspace or letting your opponents
00:56:14
own the airspace is is not really as
00:56:16
much of a viable option. Yeah. very
00:56:18
quickly. Um, obviously banks and
00:56:19
advisers working on the SpaceX IPO
00:56:21
dealer being required to buy
00:56:22
subscriptions to Grock Musk's terrible
00:56:25
AI chatbot. Um, they they're going to do
00:56:27
it anyway because they'll do anything it
00:56:29
takes. They'll take sure we'll buy your
00:56:30
shitty product for if you'll give us the
00:56:32
banks. Um, he's also asked them to
00:56:34
advertise on X was less insistent on
00:56:36
that request. Obviously, they're going
00:56:38
to all do it. Uh, that I'm not surprised
00:56:40
by. But I'm just curious, have you done
00:56:41
any polling on Elon now post, you know,
00:56:43
he's now going to be very wealthy again.
00:56:45
once again more wealthy than he was
00:56:47
before. How where is his polling? Have
00:56:49
you done much on on where he sits
00:56:52
because he's about to enter the
00:56:53
political spectrum again quite
00:56:55
significantly it looks like. I mean, I
00:56:57
still think that he has residual
00:56:59
favorability from Republicans who I
00:57:02
think have by and large forgotten his
00:57:05
well I was going to say the very big
00:57:07
public falling out that he had with
00:57:09
Trump that got very ugly very uh
00:57:13
quickly. Um that that all but seems to
00:57:16
have been kind of memory hold at this
00:57:18
point. Um but but there is still that
00:57:21
lingering negativity from Democrats. It
00:57:24
may not be as acute. I mean, I I have
00:57:25
not heard reports of like protests
00:57:27
outside Tesla dealerships in the way
00:57:29
that you had about a year ago. So, it
00:57:30
feels like the temperature has turned
00:57:32
down, but it is not as though anybody
00:57:34
has like converted back to liking him or
00:57:37
not liking him. Wherever you were a year
00:57:39
ago, you're probably still in about the
00:57:40
same place. So, when when you're a
00:57:43
Republican getting money from him, it's
00:57:45
worth it. Correct. Now, or is it a bad
00:57:47
thing? Because he lost in Wisconsin. He
00:57:49
lost a lot of his presence tends to
00:57:53
be a problem for some people. I think he
00:57:56
is not as much of a potent lightning rod
00:57:59
as he was a year ago when we were in the
00:58:02
midst of Doge being in the news every
00:58:06
single day, some new agency getting shut
00:58:08
down or somebody getting fired or or
00:58:10
something happening that was causing
00:58:12
>> causing some stir. you know, him showing
00:58:14
up in the White House, him in the White
00:58:16
House with one of his kids, you know,
00:58:17
like those we're that's not happening
00:58:18
anymore. And so I think him having less
00:58:21
him be he is less of a lightning rod
00:58:23
today than he was a year ago. So I I
00:58:26
think that would probably lessen any,
00:58:28
you know, downside to having him, but he
00:58:32
shouldn't act up again. Correct. Create
00:58:34
a
00:58:35
>> as last time I was on your show, I said
00:58:37
like less chainsaw, more Mars. And I
00:58:39
stick to it. I think to the extent that
00:58:41
he has spent the last year doing less
00:58:42
chainsaw and more Mars, I don't think
00:58:44
that it's necessarily won back anybody
00:58:46
from the left,
00:58:47
>> but I do think that the temperature has
00:58:48
been turned down around him to where
00:58:50
he's a little less
00:58:51
>> more Mars. That's what you got to do.
00:58:53
Build your [ __ ] rockets, I've said
00:58:55
that over and I think you were
00:58:56
absolutely right back then. All right,
00:58:58
Kristen, one more quick break. We'll be
00:58:59
back for wins and fails.
00:59:02
Support for the show comes from Delete
00:59:04
Me. Delete Me makes it easy, quick, and
00:59:06
safe to remove your personal data online
00:59:08
at a time when surveillance and data
00:59:10
breaches are common enough to make
00:59:11
everyone vulnerable. You don't have to
00:59:13
be a public figure to be at risk of
00:59:14
having your personal information stolen
00:59:16
by bad actors. The terrifying reality is
00:59:18
that we're all susceptible and the
00:59:20
impact of identity theft can be
00:59:22
devastating. Delete Me can help you
00:59:24
protect your personal privacy or the
00:59:25
privacy of your business from doxing
00:59:27
attacks before sensitive information can
00:59:29
be exploited. I have used Delete Me for
00:59:31
a while. I think it's really important
00:59:33
to be aware of what's out there about
00:59:35
you is really surprising. Even someone
00:59:37
like me who spends a lot of time
00:59:38
protecting their privacy. How much
00:59:40
information is out there, how much of it
00:59:41
is bad, and how much is being compiled
00:59:43
together. You really have to fight hard
00:59:45
to keep your privacy. And Delete Me is
00:59:47
an excellent tool. Last year, the New
00:59:49
York Times wire cutter named Delete Meir
00:59:50
their top pick for data removal
00:59:52
services. Not a surprise. So, what are
00:59:54
you waiting for? Take control of your
00:59:55
data and keep your private life private
00:59:57
by signing up for Delete Me now at a
00:59:59
special discount for our listeners. Get
01:00:00
20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go
01:00:02
to joindeleteme.com/pivot
01:00:05
and use the promo code pivot at
01:00:06
checkout. The only way to get 20% off is
01:00:08
to go to joindeme.com/pivot
01:00:10
and enter the code pivot at checkout.
01:00:12
That's joined me.com/pivot
01:00:15
code pivot. Okay, Kristen, let's hear
01:00:18
some wins and fails. You go first. All
01:00:20
right. Well, we're going to talk space.
01:00:21
Um, and this is a mine is a win and a
01:00:23
fail combined. A win is that as you and
01:00:26
I are recording probably right about uh
01:00:28
now, Americans are flying around the
01:00:31
backside of the moon. That feels like
01:00:32
the biggest possible win. The fact that
01:00:35
these that the rocket took off and it
01:00:37
was fine and it wound up working is
01:00:38
unbelievable. But the fail is the
01:00:41
toilets do not seem to be staying in
01:00:44
operation on this. This is a subject of
01:00:47
great interest to my daughters. Uh they
01:00:49
are they are like really really really
01:00:52
trying to keep up on the what is the
01:00:53
status of
01:00:54
>> the toilets on this uh Artemis. I think
01:00:57
Orion might actually be the name of like
01:00:59
the part that they are in. But uh so
01:01:02
it's both a win and a fail.
01:01:03
>> I think NASA has shined itself up a
01:01:05
little bit. It's always it's been sucked
01:01:06
away by Bezos and Musk, but I think NASA
01:01:09
feels kind of cool. I think their social
01:01:10
media is excellent. I think Victor
01:01:13
Victor the pilot is such a hunk like
01:01:15
like all of them are are and and all the
01:01:18
the whole team are amazing. I think
01:01:20
>> they have a great inspirational message.
01:01:23
I mean just every time you hear them
01:01:24
talk and it doesn't feel like hyper
01:01:26
media trained either. Again to what we
01:01:27
were talking about earlier with like it
01:01:29
just feels like you found genuinely
01:01:30
incredible people and are sending them
01:01:32
to do an incredible thing on behalf of
01:01:34
humanity.
01:01:34
>> Yeah, I agree. I think they they just
01:01:36
are doing flawless speaking of social
01:01:38
media. Flawless social media. I I
01:01:40
haven't seen one thing that I' The
01:01:41
pictures are beautiful. The the the
01:01:44
enthusiasm again, it doesn't feel cooked
01:01:46
in some fashion. The fail is the
01:01:48
continued sort of um
01:01:52
I know you, like you said, I'm not
01:01:54
clutching my pearls, but come on. I
01:01:55
think people are sick of this and I
01:01:57
think there's going to be a significant
01:01:58
backlash to politicians that look, I
01:02:01
think there's a real opportunity for
01:02:03
people to be funny and nice and, you
01:02:05
know, sort of more open-minded rather
01:02:08
than dunking dunking dunking. I I just
01:02:09
have this I think what Trump is doing is
01:02:12
is a step too far. And he I can't even
01:02:14
believe I'm saying that cuz I I'm never
01:02:16
that person who goes, "Oh, you're
01:02:18
kidding. Can you believe what he said?"
01:02:19
I always believe what he says cuz I
01:02:21
think he's like that. Um but I do think
01:02:23
people are tiring of it. And I think
01:02:25
even though they're sloughing it off,
01:02:27
they're not sloughing it there. You
01:02:28
know, gh that's him. I think there's
01:02:30
more. It's like I'm tired of hearing
01:02:32
this now. And I think there's a real
01:02:33
opportunity for politicians to make
01:02:36
people feel better. like I know in
01:02:38
political life in general and not but
01:02:40
and also not um do it in a stupid way
01:02:44
where you just pretend it's not
01:02:45
happening like that kind of thing. So I
01:02:47
do think that's been a real fail and I
01:02:49
do think it's pro it's a bigger problem
01:02:51
than people think. That's one. My win is
01:02:53
the Netflix documentary Dynasty the
01:02:55
Murdoch. Um it's about the Murdoch
01:02:57
Empire. I found out stuff about Ruben
01:03:00
Murdoch that was fascinating. I thought
01:03:01
it was incredibly Liz Garbas directed
01:03:03
it. I thought it was a terrific
01:03:05
documentary. I learned a lot about this
01:03:07
very I thought it was very fair to the
01:03:09
family at the same time. Um sad to
01:03:13
watch, you know, this kind of fall apart
01:03:15
and I'm endlessly fascinated by Rupert
01:03:17
Murdoch, but and you know, he's getting
01:03:19
he's getting on in years and everything,
01:03:21
but I do think it was a really
01:03:22
interesting documentary. Um and not just
01:03:25
cuz I'm it although I think I'm
01:03:26
spectacular in it. No, I'm kidding. No,
01:03:28
the people who are mostly who've done
01:03:30
all the reporting at the times um did an
01:03:32
amazing job and so I recommend it. I
01:03:34
recommend watching it. It's he's he's a
01:03:37
unique political figure as you know, but
01:03:39
I learned a lot from the documentary. I
01:03:41
Have you seen it?
01:03:42
>> I have not.
01:03:43
>> I will say the last movie that I watched
01:03:45
that referenced Rubert Murdoch was I
01:03:47
rewatched The Devil Wears Prada from
01:03:49
2006 in preparation for, you know, the
01:03:53
the rebirth, the two too devil, too
01:03:55
furious that's coming up. Uh, and he he
01:03:58
is mentioned there's a there's a scene
01:04:00
where uh it's it's when Meyer Street's
01:04:03
character Miranda Priestley is sort of
01:04:06
her her husband is divorcing her and she
01:04:09
says like Rupert Murdoch should cut me a
01:04:11
check for all the papers that I've sold
01:04:13
for him like assuming that like she
01:04:15
fuels you know all these gossip gossip
01:04:17
rag headlines and so any I haven't seen
01:04:19
the movie you were talking about but I
01:04:20
did see Devil War's product.
01:04:21
>> Yeah, it's it's a sing it's a series a
01:04:24
couple of episodes. It's really good.
01:04:25
Uh, I I shouldn't say this, but I'm I'm
01:04:27
in the Devil's Produ
01:04:30
just briefly.
01:04:32
>> Shh.
01:04:33
>> Oh, tell.
01:04:35
>> Yeah, it's like I'm sure it's blinking.
01:04:37
You'll see it, but uh they did a lot of
01:04:39
uh it was reported already and it the
01:04:41
reports were true.
01:04:42
>> I'm I don't know if they've cut me, but
01:04:44
I I'm there. I get to play myself a lot,
01:04:46
Kristen, besides uh in uh on billboards
01:04:49
in Times Square. Uh but I actually, for
01:04:51
some reason, I'm the go-to person now.
01:04:53
If they have AI in the plot, they bring
01:04:55
in carousel. It's like Wolf Blitzer.
01:04:57
>> So, there is I have I have one funny
01:04:59
story about this. Um, you know that
01:05:00
movie Edge of Tomorrow or it used to be
01:05:02
called like or like Lived, Die I Repeat
01:05:03
is what they rebranded. I'm obsessed
01:05:05
with this movie.
01:05:06
>> Blunt and Tom Cruz. Fantastic movie.
01:05:08
>> At the beginning there's a scene where
01:05:09
it's Jake Tapper interviewing and it's a
01:05:12
panel where it's like Olivier Knox from
01:05:15
>> I think he was at the post at that time.
01:05:17
Um, Kiki Mlan, Democratic strategist,
01:05:20
and then Tom Cruz is in the middle. But
01:05:22
like that scene never happened. They
01:05:24
edited him in and they edited Tom Cruz
01:05:26
on top of Ross Stout.
01:05:28
>> Ah, perfect. I like it. I'm there for
01:05:31
it.
01:05:32
>> So, cuz I was I was watching the movie
01:05:34
and I was like, was like, who is the
01:05:36
Republican that was on set that day that
01:05:38
got edited out to be Tom Cruz? Was it
01:05:40
me? I don't think so.
01:05:42
>> Oh, yeah. That would be harder. Wow.
01:05:44
Okay. Good to know. I love that movie.
01:05:47
Anyway, we want to hear from you. Send
01:05:49
us your questions about business, tech,
01:05:50
or whatever's on your mind. and go to
01:05:51
nymag.com/pivot to submit a question for
01:05:54
this show or call 855-51 pivot. Okay,
01:05:57
that's the show. Again, thank you for
01:05:59
joining me today, Kristen. Everyone
01:06:00
should watch her bowling. She also
01:06:02
appears on in on CNN and she's does
01:06:05
wonderful stories in the pieces in the
01:06:07
New York Times which I learn a lot from
01:06:09
just she lets the voters speak and
01:06:12
actually it's really interesting to hear
01:06:14
them because it's a little more um
01:06:16
complex and that's why it's great and
01:06:17
that's important to understand the
01:06:19
complexity of all this. Anyway, uh,
01:06:21
thanks for listening to Pivot. Be sure
01:06:22
to like and subscribe to our YouTube
01:06:24
channel. We'll be back on Friday. Thank
01:06:26
you, Kristen. Thank you, Karen. Thanks
01:06:28
for listening to Pivot from New York
01:06:30
Magazine and Vox Media. You can
01:06:31
subscribe to the magazine at
01:06:33
nymag.com/pod.
01:06:35
We'll be back later this week for
01:06:36
another breakdown of all things tech and
01:06:39
business. Sam Alman, Pivot's not for
01:06:41
sale. Sorry, so sorry.
