Chuck’s Commentary - Trump Fails On Economic Messaging At PA Rally + Democrats Win BIG Again In Special Elections - The Chuck ToddCast

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
It's sponsorship time. But you know what, it's really great
when you get a sponsor that you already use. And
guess what. Quint's is something that in the Todd household
we already go to. Why do we go to Quint's
Because it's a place you go where you can get
some really nice clothes without the really expensive prices. And
one of the things I've been going through is I've
transitioned from being mister cot and ty guy to wanting

(00:22):
a little more casual but to look nice doing it.
Is I've become mister quarter zip guy. Well guess what.
Guess who's got amazing amounts of quarter zips? It is Quints.
I have gotten quite a few already from there. The
stuff's really nice. They have Mongolian cashmere sweaters for fifty dollars.
I just know, hey, cashmere, that's pretty good. You don't

(00:43):
normally get that for fifty bucks or less. Italian wool
coats that look and feel like designer the stuff. I'll
be honest, right, you look at it online, you think, okay,
is this really as nice as it looks? Well, when
I got it, I was like, oh, this is real quality.
So yeah, I'm going to end up making sure I
take it to my dry cleaner so I don't screw
it up when I clean it. But I've been quite impressed.
In Hey, it's holiday season. It is impossible to shop

(01:06):
for us middle aged men. I know this well. Tell
your kids, tell your spouses, tell your partners. Try Quints,
or if you're trying to figure out what to get
your adult child, what to get your mom or dad,
I'm telling you you're gonna find something that is going
to be comfortable for them on Quints. So get your
wardrobe sorted and your gift list handled with Quints. Don't wait.

(01:27):
Go to quints dot com slash chuck for free shipping
on your order and three hundred and sixty five day
returns now available in Canada as well. That's qui nce
dot com, slash chuck, free shipping and three hundred and
sixty five day returns quints dot com slash chuck. Use
that code. Hello, They're happy Thursday and welcome to another

(01:53):
episode of the Chuck Podcast. Our third episode of the week,
which means this is our big weekend episode of a
terrific guest on a topic that I think is getting
more and more attention. And conversation and it's about screen
time and our kids. Interviewing Julie shell Foe. She is

(02:16):
the founder, former journalist, but the founder of an organization
called Mama Mothers Against Media Addiction. It is modeled after
Mad Mothers Against Drunk Driving and it is simply that
just trying to focus on getting screens out of schools,

(02:37):
not just you know, cell phone bands and schools, which
of course is you know, when you think about how
hard it is to get our two parties to agree
on anything about the one thing this year where there
has been bipartisan agreement on a policy idea, it has
been cell phone bands and schools, and the early metrics

(02:58):
in the places that implemented it first, you're already seeing
at least some evidence of teachers saying students are paying
more attention and test scores being up, and you know,
we'll see again it's it's it's a it's a small
sample size of the of the early adopters of this,
but it goes further than just phones and schools. As
I said, you know, this has to do with iPads

(03:21):
and you know, using devices and you know, what's the line.
And in this case, Julie makes a pretty uh, a
pretty credible case as to why even using screens, you know,
using school iPads, that there's got to be an age

(03:41):
where we don't do it until, you know, maybe it's,
you know, ninth grade, maybe it you know, you don't
get your first device as a teaching tool until eighth
or ninth grade, something like that. But to at least
have some sort of marker here, we've seen Ram Emmanuel
became the first major potential presidential candidate in twenty twenty

(04:02):
eight to call for a you know, a nationwide band,
which is what of course Australia is trying to implement,
I believe in just the last couple of days. So
it is the relationship with tech and our lives in
many ways I think is going to continue to be.
I mean, look, the economy is obviously first and foremost

(04:24):
in any campaign year. Healthcare is always a part of that.
But after those two issues, the impact of tech on
all of our lives, whether it's screen time and our kids,
whether it's AI and the and the fear of AI
job displacement, the the you know, the impact of Silicon

(04:49):
Valley and big tech in our lives is something it's
clear more Americans want more control over this. There's this
feeling that you don't you know when you the reason
I think you're seeing this growing bipartisan sort of revolt
and pushback. I mean, even look at the pushback that's
taking place inside the Republican Party where Donald Trump is

(05:10):
saying he wants to sign an executive order that prevents
any state from trying to put regulation on the AI industry.
And immediately, you know, they tried to put it in
the government. You know, they try to get it in
the bill to reopen the government, and there wasn't the
votes for that, and there was a total revolt on that.

(05:31):
But even on this, I mean, you have Ron de Santis,
the governor Florida, unveiled He's already unveiled his own what
he calls here, I'm reading it here a citizen's Bill
of Rights for artificial intelligence. And the proposals he's presenting
are the types of things that a lot of lawmakers
left and right would like to be talking about, including

(05:53):
protecting consumers from from anxiety inducing things like deep fakes,
data collections, chat box, it's engaging with minors, chatbots posing
as mental health experts. You know how to deal with
fraudulent use of our names and likeness. You have the
revolt of people thinking that these data centers are the

(06:17):
reasons why our electricity bills are spiking all over the country.
There certainly appears to be a direct correlation, for instance,
in the state I live in Virginia. So it is
you know, I think it is worth noting how much
this is more than just you know, in some ways,
sometimes I bring it up as very singular issues, you know,
when it comes to well, what are we going to
do about AI job displacement, what are we going to

(06:39):
do about these data centers? Or what are we going
to do about you know, kids in schools. There is
a larger sort of tech in our lives, right, and
there is a growing feeling that we have less and
less choice of how do we how tech interacts with us.
And I think, you know, that's it's almost a universal

(06:59):
sort of political complaint, right. You will get a revolt
of the masses when there is a feeling that control
that they used to have they no longer have, right,
control that we all used to have. We feel as
if we no longer have I mean, you know, I
go back take the there's a there's a there's a
movement to try to sort of flip the script on

(07:20):
the Internet. Right, instead of us having to agree to
terms and conditions to use apps that big tech asks
us to click yes on that, it's the other way
around that when they want access to our data, they
have to ask us permission. Right. It's a little bit
what the Europeans have been trying to do and their

(07:40):
ability to regulate interactions between social media or AI and
the general public. But this is, you know, none of
this is unpopular, right, And it is interesting to watch
the Trump administration wanting to barrel through. They've gone they
have sort of are they they want government and AI

(08:03):
to be fused together. They bought they accept the premise
that America has to win the AI race. Right. I
think a lot of the AI tech founders have convinced
the Trump administration that if they attempt any restrictions, China

(08:24):
is going to win the I race. And it's it's
like it's the plot of the most recent Mission Impossible. Right,
whoever gets to the finish line first suddenly controls the globe.
Right is sort of the fear I think that has
been presented to the Trump administration and may explain why
they're going along with this idea. And of course I

(08:48):
think there's a reason there's a lot of us that
are very skeptical of just racing down this road. You know,
if you like the way the tech companies introduce social
media into society, then by all means, let them go
unrestricted introducing artificial intelligence into society. But if we look

(09:10):
at what social media has done and we look at
it as a failure, not a success. And that's the thing,
is social media been a success or a failure? If
in some ways there are successful elements to it, there
are plenty of people that have made money off of it.
It has certainly allowed more access to influence and attention

(09:35):
from around the world, but it is destroyed truth. Right.
Why do we have so much skepticism about truth where
we're having a debate about what is true and what
isn't could arguably blame the algorithms and social media. And
so to me, it's not surprising that you have an

(09:56):
electorate that it won't take much to fire up against
the forces of Silicon Valley, because when you start to
say do you want to have artificial intelligence introduced into
society in a similar way that social media was. Or
do you want more guard rails? I promise you you
probably get seventy to eighty percent supporting that. No, there

(10:20):
better be more guard rails as we introduce artificial intelligence
into society than there was during social media. And so
you put all this together and you can start to
see and I still think this is not going you know,
I think these will be debate talking points in twenty
twenty six. I think you will certainly see various candidates

(10:42):
test driving some of these things. A citizen bill of
rights on when it comes to the implementation of artificial
intelligence will certainly, I think pop up in governor's races
in particular, and this cycle will have is the big
cycle for governor's races. I do think it'll be really
the presidential campaign that'll make this more of a national issue, right,

(11:04):
because that's when you're gonna you know, there'll be when
it comes to the job displacement issue, I think that
is what will feel more front center. And then of
course we want to see what is the state of
this economy. Right, this is an economy that is not
a good economy, but it is being essentially rescued right

(11:26):
now by AI investment. Right, you have a whole bunch
of you know, I talked to one smart observer of
the financial and a trained economist who said to me today,
actually that we're already in a recession. We just haven't
you know, the numbers just aren't out yet, and it won't.

(11:48):
You know, it looks like productivity is doing okay because
of just how much investment the sort of the six
or seven largest companies in the world are making into
artificial intelligence. It's essentially up and up America's GDP. It's
sort of propping all these things up. So it's masking
what is likely a recession for half the country. Right

(12:11):
there are parts of the you know, there's certainly the
one percent and those with some savings and some money
in the stock demartment. They are they are not experiencing
the recession. But for the for the other half of America,
they are experiencing recession. Right there. They have costs or
too much. Right, you have an affordability issue on health care,

(12:31):
and affordability issue and groceries, and affordability issue on housing.
These are things that you just can't skip. You can't
pinch pennies on right, you might be able to you
might be able to skip some things and try to
save money in certain places, it's not like you can
delay paying a health insurance premium and and risk to

(12:55):
go without health care. So this affordability crisis and this
recessionary feel that those that don't have that are paycheck
to paycheck, that don't have a bunch of savings in
the stock market is pretty acute, which transitions me pretty
well to what was, you know, another debacle by Trump

(13:19):
and this economy and his rally in Pennsylvania. Every time
this administration over the last couple of weeks, frankly, it's
been about two or three months that they try to
get you know, it's clear his own staff realizes they
have at least they have a political problem, if not
a real problem. Right, they know they have a political
problem messaging on the economy. And how do I know

(13:40):
that they all know? Because JD. Vance on Wednesday morning
basically was desperately trying to re explain Trump's comments from
Pennsylvania where he started calling it a hoax and then
he started, I mean to me, he went down this
road again where okay, well, you know, you know, your

(14:02):
little girl doesn't need thirty seven dollars, they can handle one.
Your child doesn't need fifty pencils, they can just have
one or two. It is such a tone deaf Let
them eat cake, mindset. Right, It's as if we have
President Marie Antoinette here, and it really rings as super

(14:24):
out of touch. And it's clear you of people like
Jade Vance realizing how bad this is. So he tweets
this morning, which is just the fun. I'm gonna read
his tweet, and then Joe Biden's insane policies left American
families unable to afford a decent living in their own country.
Through tax cuts, better paying jobs, and investment in American industry,
prisoner Trump is making America affordable again for working families,

(14:45):
one step at a time. Right. They're trying so hard
to explain this economy, but they're making the same mistake
that the Biden White House made, which is, hey, you
you feel like this economy and good, You're wrong. This
economy is doing We're doing really well, and it's healing,
and this is happening, and this is happening. You know.

(15:05):
In Biden's case, he kept leaning on, look at all
the new jobs that are being created, look at all
the money that's being invested. Well, in some ways, Trump
is trying to make the Trump and Vance are trying
to make the same case. Hey, you know, we're spending
all this money and we cut your taxes, and oh,
by the way, look at the stock market and look
at all these deals that we're doing, but pay no

(15:26):
attention to how tariffs are increasing your every day your
everyday bills. So the trumpet, the Trump White House is
walking into appears to be the same trap as Biden there,
you know, want to tell the public, don't don't believe
what you're feeling. That's essentially right. It was essentially the

(15:48):
message that Biden was communicating on the economy, that Harris
was communicating on the economy, until they realized now they
had to be they had to sort of do a
little I feel your pain. You know, Vance here trying
to do a little bit of I feel your pain.
But Trump wasn't going to go there under and if anything,
he sounded dismissive and defensive. And that's just you know,

(16:13):
this we've we've already seen in you know, another week,
another election that indicates that Republicans are troubled there's a
reason results matter more than promises, just like there's a
reason Morgan and Morgan is America's largest injury law firm.
For the last thirty five years, they've recovered twenty five

(16:35):
billion dollars for more than half a million clients. It
includes cases where insurance companies offered next to nothing, just
hoping to get away with paying as little as possible.
Morgan and Morgan fought back ended up winning millions. In fact,
in Pennsylvania, one client was awarded twenty six million dollars,
which was a staggering forty times the amount that the
insurance company originally offered. That original offer six hundred and

(16:57):
fifty thousand dollars twenty six million, six hundred and fifty
thousand dollars. So with more than a thousand lawyers across
the country, they know how to deliver for everyday people.
If you're injured, you need a lawyer. You need somebody
to get your back. Check out for the People dot com,
Slash podcast or Dow Pound Law Pound five to two
nine law on your cell phone. And remember all law

(17:19):
firms are not the same, So check out Morgan and Morgan.
Their fee is free unless they win special elections and
runoffs that took place on Tuesday. The most prominent race
was the City of Miami mayor. And for those of
you are wondering, Miami Dade County elects a county mayor.
That is a very powerful position. It's a strong mayor.

(17:43):
It's a huge budget. Miami Dade County's budget is bigger
than many states, you know, probably nearly half the states.
It is that large and complicated a county, the City
of Miami and the City of Miami mayor. City of
Miami is a is one of thirty plus incorporated cities

(18:03):
within Miami Dade County, but it does have the brand
City of Miami, so is the Mayor of Miami, you know,
when which is for those you know, there's the mayor
of Miami Dade County and then there's the mayor of
the City of Miami. So this was a runoff for
the mayor of the City of Miami. Now in the
City of Miami, it's it is there is a strong,

(18:26):
large Cuban American population, and you've had nearly a generation
of Cuban Republicans who have won that mayor's rate won
that office over and over by the way the office itself,
it's considered a weak mayor position. It's a part time job.
If you recall, the previous mayor of Francis Suarez had
all sorts of jobs, private sector jobs that he was

(18:47):
that he held while simultaneously being mayor. He got a
little brazen about it, so it gathered a lot more attention.
But it's considered a part time job, and it is
allowed to have other jobs. But the point is is
that that's how quote unquote small the job is. And it's
and like I said, it's a weak mare system, which

(19:08):
means you're just you've got the title, but you're essentially no.
No had the same amount of power as a city
council person that's elected. So but symbolically it's a big deal.
And it's the first time Democrats have won the mayor's
race in over thirty years. Now, it is worth noting
Kamala Harris actually carried the city of Miami even as

(19:31):
Donald Trump carried the county of Miami Dade, which in
itself was a surprising development. So but the margin that
the Democrat won this race and the fact that it
was the first time in thirty years, and oh, by
the way, there was a special election that no one
was paying attention to in a state house seat in
Georgia that flipped a twenty plus point Trump district that flipped.

(19:56):
We're starting it's the same pattern. We'sa on Tennessee seven
and that special same pattern we saw in twenty twenty five.
There's somewhere between a ten to fifteen to in some
places twenty point overperformance by Democrats. Now, why is this happening? One,
you have fired up Democratic voters. Two Democratic voters in general.
Are Democrats now have the more reliable voters the voters

(20:19):
you know we're divided on education. It's another way of saying,
you know, who's paying attention to the minutia more so?
And who's who the voters that parachute in for presidential elections. Well,
the Democrats now have the line's share of the voters
that are paying attention to all political minutia versus Republicans
are the ones that we'll see it turnout spike now

(20:42):
in presidential years. It's a total reverse of what it was.
What it was for the eighties, nineties and even the
first part of the twenty first century. But we have
now seen this is as as sort of Trump created
a realignment of the party the way he did. The
less reliable voter who used to be more likely voting

(21:04):
Democrat than Republican. Now that less likely voter more likely
votes Republican the Democrat. Which is why Democrats are overperforming
in all these special elections, all these non presidential elections,
whether it was the Supreme Court race in Wisconsin right
after Trump got elected, or it's what we just saw
earlier this week in the city of Miami or in

(21:25):
the state of Georgia, the everyday regular voter is just
showing up and that it is benefiting Democrats. Then you
throw in what is a sort of a growing demoralized
base of the Republican Party. Right, it's best expressed of
watching what's happening in the House, where you have more

(21:46):
and more Republicans getting cranky about not having any plan
on healthcare. Apparently Mike Johnson seemed to hint that, oh,
you know, we're going to have a healthcare plan and
really soon, and you're like, you are, you've had let's see,
when did Obamacare pass. Obamacare passed in March of twenty ten,

(22:08):
so they've had Republicans have had fifteen years to come
up with a healthcare plan alternative, and what they just
in another week they'll finally have one. Let's just say,
there's quite a bit of skepticism on that, and it's
deserved skepticism. And at this point, it doesn't look like

(22:29):
they're going to get a healthcare compromise before the end
of the year. But I'll be honest, I think it's
gonna come. I told you I think in the earlier
episode earlier this week, the outlines of a potential compromise
that will probably be more to the liking of Democrats
and Republicans is coming together in the House, and at

(22:51):
some point it will take Donald Trump just saying go
ahead and pass it. I'll support it, and I'll give
you cover. That's still but we are now to the
point where it looks like these are going to expire
and they're going to have to retroactively end up giving
giving people the subsidies back. I am, you know, maybe

(23:14):
I'll be eating crow on this, but I'm still convinced
that something's going to pass. These subsidies are going to
get extended a year or two. I think the only
thing Republicans have effectively said no to is the full
as a three year extension, which is technically what Democrats
have been asking for. But somewhere in the in the

(23:36):
two year range one to two year range, it is coming.
It's just at what point does Trump cry uncle? And
at this point it's not clear that he's ready to
cry uncle just yet. Before I get to the interview
with Julie Chelfo and Mothers Against Media Addiction and Mama

(24:00):
as the acronym spells, I want to just weigh in
on two things that are sort of business business see
issues that I'm actually particularly with one issue, I want
to hear from you. I want to hear from the
listeners and viewers on two things. One do you pay

(24:22):
attention to the prediction markets i e. Polymarket or Calshi. Two?
If you do, what is it that you pay attention to?
Is cultural predictions? Is it sports predictions? Is it political predictions? Three?
Do you participate? You know so, I will make a
full confession. I participated for the very first time on

(24:45):
the Calshi markets over the weekend, and it had to
do with the I was doing it simply to see
if anybody was leaking the information of the college football
playoff bracket So on Saturday, I sort of for the
first time, you know, I signed up for a Calshi account,
and I bought shares of Miami making the playoff, and

(25:09):
I bought shares of twenty five cents, which really meant that,
you know, essentially what the market was saying, they have
they have a one and four shot of making the
playoff or so. In the prediction markets, it was said
Notre Dame was in the ninety nineties, it was like
ninety two ninety three percent tile and Alabama was in
the mid seventies seventy four or seventy five percentile. So

(25:31):
I did it because I was mostly curious to see
if this was going to leak and we were going
to see people try to manipulate the prediction markets, like
we saw with the Nobel Peace Prize, where it turned
out the information got out. I think it wasn't an
official leak. It was I think somebody hacked into a
website and saw a website preview before folks knew, and
all of a sudden, you saw the prediction markets move

(25:52):
as if they knew something. As it turned out, they
did know something. And I just wanted to see if
somebody was going to do that. So I was as
I was waiting for the college football playoff, I was
watching this happen and you would see a lot of volatility,
but it wasn't a hundred percent, you know. It was
like now people think they know, but they don't know. Right,
you could see how that works. It gave me some reassurance.

(26:17):
I was glad to see it. You know that something
you know, whether it leaking or somebody wasn't trying to
gain the system. And obviously I ended up making a
couple of bucks on how that worked. I actually was
monitoring it was I was I assumed that Miami's that
the share price of the Miami prediction was going to

(26:39):
go up sooner than it did, Like it didn't. Really.
It's clear the prediction markets did not believe Miami was
was going to get in, and that to me is
a reflection of what the conversation was. Right, If if
nobody has information, then they're basing it on sort of
the zeitgeist. Right. But I bring this up because recently

(27:00):
CNN signed to deal with Calshi where they're going to
in some form it start including or noting what the
prediction markets are saying about topics they might be covering.
So for instance, yesterday we saw the Federal Reserve cut

(27:20):
interest rates. Well, that was a market you could bet
on or you could you know, prediction marketing there, and
it was it was in the seventies over the last
you know, a few days, and then it got up
today eighty five, ninety, et cetera. But as much as
I do enjoy sports gambling, okay, you've heard me reference

(27:43):
it before, some of you know I do football picks
for Tony Kornheiser on his podcast, I fully confess to
enjoying it, but I've been extraordinarily uncomfortable with the idea
of betting on politics or betting on elections. I haven't
ruled it. I'm not I'm not trying to be, you know,

(28:04):
sort of a school barm about this, but it is
I'm not yet comfortable with it. And I'm curious what
you guys think, and I'm asking you send me, send questions,
put some comments in the comment section, or go ahead

(28:25):
and send us a send us comment via ask Chuck,
and we'll we'll dive into it next week. You know,
there's there's a lot of fear out there that do
you you know, at what point I believe in the
wisdom of crowds and at the same time I don't
want to see crowds manipulate an outcome, right, And you

(28:48):
know what is that line? You know, what should be
something that is okay, it's okay to that, and what
is something that is should we really be betting on this?
You know, I'll give you an example. I'm gonna let
me put up a pull up a few a few
things that they offer up that I some things that

(29:10):
make sense and others that don't. So, for instance, Calsh
will allow you to bet on what the Federal reserves
here J. Powell will say during his December press conference,
and the choices are, will he attribute terror inflation to

(29:31):
the tariffs? Will he says if he says dot plot
at his December twenty twenty five posts, you know, meeting
of the Federal Reserve, that would be somehow a win here.

(29:54):
If if he uses if he refers to the adp
AS report, apparently that would somehow be something you could
win a bet on it. There's sort of like it's
one thing to bet on whether there'll be an interest
rate cut, which again you know, I'm uncomfored you know
the State of Virginia. Let me give you an example.

(30:16):
The State of Virginia does not allow in its sports
mobile app for people to gamble on who might win
an award. Like if I wanted to gamble on the
on who wins the Heisman Trophy, State of Virginia wouldn't
do that. They are very strict. And how what they
approved for gambling, and that was games of chance, right,

(30:37):
And and a sporting event in some ways is something
that isn't knowable beforehand versus in theory there is somebody
that will know the answer to who won the Heisman
Trophy before it is announced, versus an actual sporting event
that we're all watching in real time, right. And so

(30:58):
they have decided not to legalized bets on outcomes that
some committee or group of people may know in advance.
And that's I think the line here. You got to
ask yourself, like, look, you can bet on who will
be the Democratic nominee, or excuse me, buy shares of

(31:18):
who you think will be the Democratic nominee. You can
buy shares of who you think Trump will nominate to
be fed chair. Okay, but how do we know somebody
within Trump's circle isn't gaming this and isn't going to,
you know, try to make money on this with quote
insider information. Right in the actual financial markets, it is

(31:39):
illegal to insider trade, right, And there's no doubt there'll
be some Certainly the rules about insider trading will apply
to this if it's ever if it's ever shown. But
then there are things like when will Trump announce his
new chair the Federal Reserve? So this is something that
you can will it be before December twentieth, Well, that's
sixth sense? Will it be before or the end of

(32:00):
the calendar year? That's twenty five percent? Believe that Will
it be before January fifteenth another seventy two percent? And
then you know, I guess everybody would get their money
back if none of those hit, or everybody loses if
none of those hit. But if you're you know, if
you already know the answer to this, or you're long
on something and you've got access to Trump, and you

(32:24):
know what, if we have a president who's extraordinarily transactional
and who's open to somebody financially lobbying them, which is
a more polite way of saying, Brian, And you know
I'm not saying I have no idea whether we would
ever have an American president who would be transactional like
that on things like pardons or whatever. But that's the

(32:49):
part of this that I will admit gives me some pause.
There's some parts of this that feels like the Democratic
nominee in Texas that looking at those markets, that's interesting
of interest to me. In case you're wondering right now,
Tall Rico is fifty six cents and Jasmine Crockett is

(33:11):
at forty two cents. So that's not what the polling
says right now, but this is what betters or predictors,
I guess you would say, believe is going to be
the outcome of that. And so look, they've been betting
on elections in the UK, you could bet on American
elections and overseas markets from before. But I guess what

(33:34):
I'm getting at here is if we're going to go
down this road, there probably needs to be a bit
more regulation around it. There probably needs to be sort
of a line drawn in the sand that is, hey,
this is a that's a manipulation. That's too that's too
much of a thing that can be manipulated. So take

(33:54):
this question that you can bet on the following on
Calshi who will visit mar A Lago BEFO twenty six,
And you can just and there's all sorts of choices
that you can buy shares of Benjamin Nett Yahoo. That's
according to Kaoshi that that's the leading prediction on that

(34:16):
one at eighty seven cents out of a dollar. NBS
of Saudi Arabia that's at thirteen, he's second on the list.
Zelenski's at ten cents. He's third on the list. Sam
Altman's at seven, Brittany Mahomes is at five, Jamie Diamond
is at five, Jerome Pals at four, Kim Kardashian is
at two. You know, it's kind of silly, right, But

(34:36):
here's something else. There was a huge spike for net
Yahoo over the last day or two, and I think
there's an assumption that he's going to somehow make his
way out here. He's desperate for Trump to continue to
lobby for a pardon on his behalf with the is
with the President of Israel, so there may be some
motivation there. But it's one of those things that feels

(34:58):
like somebody already knows the answer, but the public didn't
see it, so we have a betting market on it. Right. Look,
we're a free country. If you choose to do this
with your money, it's your choice to do this with
the money. The question I have is how comfortable are
you with news organizations incorporating this into their coverage, which

(35:21):
is a decision seeing in may You know, we already
have a lot of people that I think correctly complain
that our campaign coverage is always focused on the polls, right,
that it's horse race coverage. Will this make all political
and policy coverage horse race coverage? You know? Are we
going to see stories about the debate over extending healthcare subsidies?

(35:47):
And oh, by the way, the prediction markets, well, they
think there's going to be a deal, and that there'll
be a deal to extend these subsidies sometime by the
end of January. There may not be any reporting that
says that it may be true, it may not be true.
Is that stuff worth incorporating in reporting if you're seeing

(36:08):
it and look, in fairness to them, let's see how
they use it, let's say how they incorporate it. But again,
I do this more as you can hear in my voice,
as somebody who again I am, I am. I'm a
bit libertarian on the vices, right. You want to legalize cannabis,
you want to, you know, put a high age element

(36:30):
on it, legalize other vices. I'm gambling things like that.
I'm I'm you know that's your business, right, I'm I am,
I am. I am an empathetic libertarian here. The question
is whether our political debate, our policy debates, are they
going to be enhanced or harmed by the casinification of news.

(37:01):
So obviously you can hear my hesitance on this, you
can hear my concern on this, but I'm not unpersuadable
on this. So that's why I am This is one
of those I'd love to hear what many of you
think on this, whether any of you have enough of
an opinion to express it to me if you don't

(37:22):
want to put your name on and I get that too,
by the way, on this, so please do shoot me
an ope on this. Where are you on these prediction markets?
You know, I am a gawker of them. I'm fascinated
to see a lot of times it's just representative of
what the zeitgeist is already saying, or what the polling
is indicating. Or what reporting has already been out there.

(37:44):
So you know, for instance, they've got a market of
which world leaders will be out by the end of
the year. Which world leader do you think is number
one on their list? If you said Nicholas Maduro, you'd
be right, right, Well, that's common sense, But there's actually
it's only trading at eleven cents, which means it's essentially
the prediction markets believe there's only a one in essentially

(38:07):
a one and ten chance that Maduro is out before
the end of this calendar year. Does that matter to you?
Does that at all? And here's the thing. It may
have no impact whatsoever, But the minute I reported that,
have I planted a seat in your head and somehow
created a form of sort of news consumption bias, if

(38:31):
you will, right, So, anyway, it's that's the beauty of
this format is is we can sort of throw out
this idea. I'm not going to sit here and pretend
that I have concerns, I'm intrigued, and I'm rapped and

(38:53):
it's and I have my own hesitations and all of
those things. So I'd love for you to share that
do you hate hangovers? We'll say goodbye to hangovers. Out
of Office gives you the social buzz without the next
day regret. Their best selling out of Office gummies were
designed to provide a mild, relaxing buzz, boost your mood,
and enhance creativity and relaxation. With five different strengths, you

(39:16):
can tailor the dose to fit your vibe, from a
gentle one point five milligram micro doose to their newest
fifteen milligram gummy for a more elevated experience. Their THHC
beverages and gummies are a modern, mindful alternative to a
glass of wine or a cocktail. And I'll tell you this,
I've given up booze. I don't like the hangovers. I
prefer the gummy experience. Soul is a wellness brand that

(39:39):
believes feeling good should be fun and easy. Soul specializes
in delicious HEMP derived THHC and CBD products, all designed
to boost your mood and simply help you unwine so
if you struggle to switch off at night, Soul also
has a variety of products specifically designed to just simply
help you get a better night's sleep, including their top
selling sleepy gummies. It's a fan face favorite for deep

(40:01):
restorative sleep. So bring on the good vibes and treat
yourself to Soul today. Right now, Soul is offering my
audience thirty percent off your entire order. So go to
get sold dot com use the promo code toodcast. Don't
forget that code. That's getsold dot Com promo code toodcast
for thirty percent off. All right, let's get into Let's

(40:27):
get into a few of the questions here. Ask Chuck,
this one comes from Austin. From Austin, he is not
a first timer. I think we'll call him a long timer. Hey,
send say your interview with Sarah Esker blew my mind?
All right, I had no idea that the original article,
the first was about congressional representation and apportionment. Makes so

(40:48):
much sense that our founder's prioritize representation before anything else.
Got me thinking, could this be the basis for a
limited series or film? Most Americans don't know this history.
In dramatizing it, could it make structural reform like a
return to our roots? Man, Austin, what a terrific idea?
You know, you know it's interesting, I assume, and I

(41:09):
hope you're watching the Ken Burns American Revolution series. It's
fantastic and it's certainly also very you know, there's nothing
nothing harder than trying to put together a documentary like
he does, essentially without any archival material, archive video, things
like that, pictures, et cetera. It's not easy. But a

(41:35):
dramatic a limited series on the essentially the fight over
the Constitution and you know, the failure of the Articles
of Confederation and and sort of yes, and we could
create some drama. You get some characters. Ben Franklin's a
great character. Thomas Jefferson's a great character. John Adams is right.

(41:56):
We know a little bit something about all of them.
Some of them have been portrayed. I mean the Jot
Adams series and that that HBO put on some fifteen
or so years ago with Paul Giamatti is just one
that if you all consider yourself a history junkie, then
you've already seen it. But I love this idea, Austin.

(42:19):
I think you're right because I think there's there was
plenty of drama. There was plenty of debate, you know,
and you can have different episodes. You know where the
cliffhanger is, you know, you know there was a cliffhanger
and what the official language was going to be. Right,
there's a cliff you know, all these little cliffhangers about
what were we going to be as a country, you know,
all those things. I think there would be interest in this.

(42:43):
And again we've seen this, you know, his historical dramas
have done well. And look, I have a I believe
that part of you know, I think we need to
offer more ways for people to learn how our system works.

(43:03):
Not everybody wants to read a book about it. Not
everybody wants to read a textbook about it. Not everybody
wants to listen to ten hour podcast about it. So
whatever way you get that into the ecosystem, and your
idea is a good one of sort of dramatizing you know,

(43:26):
the fights over the founding and the fights that took place,
so that people can see the compromises. You know that
the final the decisions that were made were all compromises, right,
it was. It was never designed to be perfect. So anyway,
it's a it's a terrific idea. Hey Netflix, are you listening, Austin?

(43:50):
And I would like to pitch this as a as
a TV series, Austin, I promise if for some reason
we get this opportunity. I'll hook you up, don't. Next
question comes from Michael Laurry says, Hey, Chuck, what were
your best and worst movies of the year. I also
love your thoughts on ken Burn's American Revolution series. Aha,
I already gave you that one. What's your favorite of

(44:11):
his work? And which upcoming projects are you most excited about?
African American History, LBJA, Baseball, Stand Up the Mormons. Lastly,
if Netflix is buying Warner Brothers, do you think David
Ellison heard his chances by criticizing the process and highlighting
ties as a selling point. So IM like a small
confession about movies. These days, I watch fewer movies than ever,

(44:34):
and I think part of it is I am trapped
in the joy of episodic television that we have right
we are living we are still living in the golden
age of this, you know, whether it's man I am.
I'm digging plorabis and I'm still curious where we're headed here,

(44:55):
Although I have a My latest theory on plorabis is
that it's a are you sure we want one collective
intelligence about who we are? Right? I don't know. I
felt like maybe maybe it's commentary on artificial intelligence. By
the way, I'm an episode behind, so no spoilers on
this front. And my other confession is when I travel,

(45:21):
that's when I kind of junk out on movies. So
I just watched it. I've been traveling this week, so
I finally watched the Naked Gun reboots. Eh, you know,
I there was some fun grace notes. I appreciated the effort,
but there's a part of me that feels it's almost

(45:44):
too far away, too long ago, like we lost an
entire you know, that was arguably three pop culture generations
ago that the last Naked Gun movie came out, So
I think, you know it, it's a you know, it's
interesting being in the later stages now of middle aged right,

(46:08):
which is right, I've got grown kids. But you know,
it's funny about the movie industry. There's two there's two
demographic groups that actually go to movie theaters. Apparently one
is teenagers, so that's that explains all the Marvel movies
and all that other stuff. And the other is empty nesters,

(46:30):
which is why you get right now, we you know,
you know, over the last fifteen years, it was a
lot of baby boomer nostalgia. Now we're getting we're starting
to get gen X nostalgia on this front. So as
for my favorite ken Burns, look, I've seen a lot

(46:50):
of them. I enjoyed, you know, I'm going to do
a deep cut here. I enjoyed the Prohibition one because
that was something I knew the least. It was one
of those gaps for me, so it filled in a
lot of gaps. So I really enjoyed that one. And Baseball,
of course, was I think transformational. You know, it was
in the Civil War, and obviously the Civil War was
his essentially the masterpiece that gave him the currency to

(47:16):
do all of this. Right, he is America's historian. And
what I had really admire about what ken Burns has
pulled off in the American Revolution. I mean, think about all,
you know, if he had asked me, well, what do
you think I'm going to do the American Revolution, I'd
be like, oh, boy, right after these debates that went

(47:37):
through sixteen nineteen versus seventeen seventy six, these competing commissions
and all of this, and like, boy, good luck trying
to make something that everybody can feel comfortable with. And
lo and behold he seemed to make something that you know,
he has not gotten. He has somehow avoided stepping on

(47:58):
too many political landminds. You know he's been I think
it's been very straightforward, and I have found it. You know,
I've certainly learned some things that I you know, you
think you know, uh, and there are more things that
you learn there. So it's uh. I really admire his

(48:19):
ability to have success with this in this polarized culture
that we lived in. We had to give him some
special award, like, I don't know how you did it,
but congratulations, you did something that we don't seem to
have any politicians capable of doing. So I owe you
a few more movies. I'll does do you care that

(48:41):
I watched the Mission Impossible Final Reckoning movies? I will
confess that, you know, I I it's a it's a
I always I designate. Like I say, most of my
movie watching now is when I'm want to be sort
of if I'm on a long flight and I'm trying
to pass the time. It's in fact, Mission and the

(49:06):
Mission Impossible series in the Jurassic Park series, right, those
are some I consider those guilty pleasures, meaning you know,
I know you know what you're gonna get. They are
what they are. I find them to be the perfect
airplane movies. So I did venture into both of those.
But I owe you a better Michael, I owe you

(49:29):
a better a better list of movies I like this year,
So cot me some slack on that, all right. Next
question comes from Yavari from Finland. He says, hey, check
listener from Finland here loving the longer episodes, keep them coming.
The Senate primaries in Texas are turning out to be

(49:49):
quite interesting. Oh yes they are. How bloody do you
think they can get? For example, between all Read and Tolerigo. Well,
in fairness, I think I did not answer this question
in a timely fashion, because, as we now know, it's
no longer all Read in tall Rico. It is tall
Rico and Crockett. If you are a listener to every episode,
you may have already heard my take on that. I'll

(50:10):
give you that in a second, but let me finish
your question. You noted between all Read and tall Rico,
you saw neither one seems to be the type to
knife each other that much. But she never know then
on the Republican side, now that Hunt has jumped in
the Republican side. Is there a lane for him in
your opinion? Also, could you give a brief outlook on
how Montana looks for the Dems in twenty twenty six.
I have a couple of friends there and they seem
optimistic about Russell Cleveland seating Ryan Zinky. That's in a

(50:34):
house race. I believe that Zinc is running their kind
regards Lea Fari, let me start with the Texas thing.
Like I said, I answered it before. Obviously, look, Jasmine
Crockett essentially drove colinra al Read out of the race,
and it was pretty clear three way primary was going
to create a runoff, that there was enough people that

(50:55):
got to all Red convinced him to run for something
that's the remnant of his old house seat there Texas,
Because you know, if Democrats Republicans are already with that three
way race, you know that's destined for a runoff, which
means even more money of them throwing mud at each other,
and it's an internal fight. You know, it did seem
to be a self inflicted wound for Democrats to also

(51:21):
have a large enough primary with prominent candidates that would
guarantee a runoff on their end. You know why, you know,
why not take advantage of the situation of Republicans And
so now you do have a situation where I all
want to agree to get out. It's Jasmine Crockett and
James Tollerico. And as I implied history, I think this
is going to be a race that is less about

(51:42):
ideology and more about style. Right. You're essentially this is,
you know, how much do you want a fighter and
how much do you want to uniter? Right? You're going
to have the pastor versus the fighter, right, and what
is the mindset of the electorate? And if like I said,
I went pretty long on this and yesterday's episode, so

(52:02):
I'll keep this one shorter. But essentially, I think this
is going to be a noisy primary on the Democratic side.
But I don't know if it's going to be a
nasty primary, right. I think both could pay a penalty,

(52:24):
you know, and how they go about it, right, Tyla
Rico has a as a brand that if he gets
too negative or sort of practices sort of conventional old
school negative politics, that could boomerang on him because he's
trying to be a different type of a different type
of candidate, a different type of Democrat and I think
Crockett are already sort of you know, she's she's a

(52:48):
bit polarizing, certainly in a general electorate, and she needs
a United Democratic Party behind her if she wins this primary.
So I definitely agree with your tam that if it
had been all read Tolrico and Crockett had decided not
to run, that that would have been a that would
have been a patty cake primary a little bit, you know,
I think it would have been sock. The curiosity I

(53:11):
have about the Democratic side of this is will outside
groups sort of be the ones to throw all the insults? Right? Well,
we see a bunch of outside Democratic money essentially try
to damage Crockett, because I mean, that's what I think
is most likely you do have. You're not going to

(53:32):
get the party leadership to admit that they prefer publicly
Tallerico over Crockett, but their body language is going to
come across that way. There's just a perception that she
can't win the general. I do find the story. I'm
not sure it's interesting that the NRSC decided to take
a victory lap and say, hey, look what we did
and try to take credit for talking Crockett into running,

(53:56):
and of course noticed this story about you know how
the NRSC is sort of taking credit for getting for
essentially coaxing Crockett into the race. Meaning they did some
early polling. They were curious to see if Crockett had
any traction. They tested her and they realized that she
was actually the best known, that she would do the
best in a Democratic primary, just sort of implying that

(54:17):
she had the highest name recognition of anybody that could
possibly run. And you know, John Cornan is not hidden
his belief that he thinks that that Crockett would be
easier to defeat than anybody else. He faces. Problem for
John Cornan is I do not see a scenario where
he's the nominate, and I'm mildly surprised he chose to run.

(54:39):
You know, I had a thesis and I think I
shared it, and so I will look, I was wrong
about the following. I thought he certainly was behaving like
somebody who was buying time from everybody, saying that he
let me give me to the filing deadline to prove
that I can win this thing. Well, then Wesley Hunt
got in. It got complicated. But you know, while Cornan

(55:01):
certainly has done a good job raising Paxton's negative was
his early TV negative TV ads. It hasn't accrued to
Cornan's benefit. And you know, there's there's certainly he just right.
He feels like he's just a fish out of water.
And where this Republican Party is these days, and it's

(55:22):
as if the electorate knows that Cornan is not one
of them. Right, he is getting a strong thirty thirty
two percent, which is about what's left of the Bush
wing of the Republican Party nationally, and it's about what's
left inside the state of Texas. Now, if Cornyn were
the general election of the Republican nominee, there's no doubt.
I think he's a favorite no matter who he would face,

(55:44):
whether it was Tylerico or Crockett there So obviously the
Republican primary is going to be scorched earth, just scorched earth.
But you know, nothing's really moved. What I'm curious about
what is going to move Cornan's numbers up. I know
what everybody believes will move Paxton's numbers down. What moves

(56:04):
Cornyn's numbers up? And in some ways he may have
made a mistake and the nrsc is bragging about getting
Jasmine Crockett in. But if Republican voters are convinced that
anybody can beat Crockett, then they don't have to hold
their nose and support Cornyn because he's quote unquote the
only one that can prevent a Democrat from winning the Senate.

(56:26):
See So I just find it interesting that the NRSC
is beating their chest when they actually that if Crockett
is the center of attention in the Democratic primary, that
actually may send the message to Republican primary voters that hey,
Democrats are going to nominate somebody who can win a

(56:48):
general election, so you don't have to worry about supporting
the mushy moderate John Cornett. And there's another reason why
Cornyn may regret that there is a competitive primary at all.
In the Democratic primary. It's a you know, Democratic you know,

(57:09):
if there wasn't a competitive Democratic primary vote, you would
have seen some that might vote in a Democratic primary
choose to vote in the Republican primary. There's a little
bit of choice in Texas, and he may cost himself
some potential sort of moderate Democratic voters who might have
if there really wasn't a competitive Democratic primary, they may
have done that so look, you are right to point

(57:32):
out those Texas primaries. It's certainly why why we're already
have identified the Texas primary night as the next night
we go live with election results in twenty twenty six.
That is going to be as consequential of a primary
night as there is in deciding whether or not Democrats
do have a serious chance at picking up the Senate.

(57:55):
All right, I'm sinking one more question before we get
into my little college football preview for the weekend. It
comes from Brian from Sterling, Virginia, says love the Todd cast,
especially the World War One discussions. Here's a favorite historical
what if of mine. What if arch Duke Ferdinand's driver
hadn't taken a wrong turn, Sorryjevo, placing the air to
the Austrio Hungarian throne right in front of Gabrielle prince Hip,

(58:15):
the guy who shot him. Without that fateful moment, we
might have avoided World War One, no rise of Communism,
no World War Two, no Cold War, no Holocaust, and
a radically different Middle East. That single wrong term may
have shaped the entire modern world. That's quite the what if.
I am. I am not a believer in that I
you know, I think we were on a hair trigger,

(58:36):
and I think that there were certainly, you know, we
were in a look think about the period we were in.
We were hypernationalists around the globe. We were. And this
is why I think we're in a similar period now,
which is, you know, every time we've had a massive
transition in our economy, you know, over the last one
hundred and fifty years, right, that was the advent, you know,

(58:58):
when we were moving from a raring economy to an
industrial economy. Globally, look at all that happened in the
first fifteen years twenty years of the twentieth century. You
had the Russian Revolution, we had all I mean, there
was disruption and voter revolt and people revolt and worker

(59:19):
revolts all over the globe. So it was a very
unstable time. So I as much as I mean, I
love the is I love a good alternative history, a
little good a little butterfly effect. I wish I hope

(59:40):
you're right. I'm don't think, but I look at it.
I think there there we were in a the whole
globe wasn't in a in an unsteady position. In fact,
you could argue we're in a similar position now right
where you know we were, we were pursuing a very
closed border. We were uh anti immigrant at that time,

(01:00:03):
we were had high tariff rates, we were a bit nationalistic. Remember,
we didn't want to get involved at all. What was
going on in Europe. You know, Hey, that ain't happening here.
That's why we're We've got two oceans between us and
the other contents. So that's that would be My only
pushback to your theory is that I think that we

(01:00:23):
were that that that we were just the transition of
the of the global economy from agrarian to industrial and
the race to industrialization. And you had this, you just
had there was all sorts of tumult that was happening
inside the Ottoman Empire. That was tumult. That was you know,
you had sort of it was the big we were

(01:00:43):
in the We were in the late stages of the
British Empire right that it was you know, uh, they
were it was getting chipped away at and certainly we
had you know, look at how the fact that that
did trigger a global you know, the Great War if
it will, I think tells you what a tinderbox the

(01:01:07):
globe wash was at that time, and that's something that
I think about in this current period. You know, we're
going to get through this, and we're going to get
through this, but this transformation of our economy has you know,
rattled the globe. Right, look at Brexit, then look at
what we're doing, and look at sort of the shift

(01:01:29):
and uh into nationalism here and what that is. Look
what that is triggered. You know, when when the biggest
economy in the world starts behaving in an isolationist, nationalistic
sort of you know America first, Well, suddenly other countries
are going to be Japan first, and Germany first, and
Italy first, and h and so on and so forth.

(01:01:51):
And so I certainly hope we can do we can
escape this without with the mass casualties that we had
with World War One. But it's not as if we're
in a stable time period in our globe's history at
the moment, right, you have a pretty active war taking

(01:02:12):
place between one of the largest countries in the world,
Russia versus Ukraine. Look at sort of the unsteadiness what
we may be instigating a military conflict in Venezuela. We're
a bit on Uh, there's certainly a lot of concern

(01:02:36):
about potentially hot conflict with China over Taiwan. You've seen
the rhetorical back and forth between the new Prime Minister
of Japan in China, so it's a it's an interesting
what if. But I think when you look at the
when you look at sort of what was happening around

(01:02:57):
the world at that time, why why were we in
this period where something like that could trigger all of this,
I think you're underestimating what was a very I think
a very unstable period that was taking place around the world.
Having good life insurance is incredibly important. I know from

(01:03:21):
personal experience. I was sixteen when my father passed away.
We didn't have any money. He didn't leave us in
the best shape. My mother single mother, now widow. Myself
sixteen trying to figure out how am I going to
pay for college and lo and behold. My dad had
one life insurance policy that we found. It wasn't a lot,
but it was important at the time, and it's why

(01:03:42):
I was able to go to college. Little did he
know how important that would be in that moment. Well,
guess what. That's why I am here to tell you
about Etho's life. They can provide you with peace of
mind knowing your family is protected even if the worst
comes to pass. As an online platform that makes getting
life insurance fast and easy, all designed to protect your

(01:04:05):
family's future in minutes, not months. There's no complicated process
and it's one hundred percent online. There's no medical exam
require you just answer a few health questions online. You
can get a quote in as little as ten minutes,
and you can get same day coverage without ever leaving
your home. You can get up to three million dollars
in coverage, and some policies start as low as two

(01:04:26):
dollars a day that would be billed monthly. As of
March twenty twenty five, Business Insider named Ethos the number
one no medical exam instant life insurance provider. So protect
your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get your free
quote at ethos dot com slash chuck. So again, that's
Ethos dot com slash chuck. Application times may vary and

(01:04:49):
the rates themselves may vary as well, but trust me,
life insurance is something you should really think about it,
especially if you've got a growing family. This is the

(01:05:10):
time where I've normally got this huge college football preview,
we only have one game this weekend. But I always
have good memories of this because I've been to a
couple of Army Navy games, and I'm sure if you've
never been to an Army Navy game, you've missed out

(01:05:32):
on something. And the first one I got to experience
was was the first time I ever got to participate
in a pool presidential pool, if you will. The fact
that I got to do it probably violated something, probably
was a secret service violation. But it is now thirty
years thirty one years ago, so I think I can

(01:05:54):
now it can be told. My late longtime friend Von Ververs,
who some of you have heard me talk about before
and I basically grew up in politics together working at
the Hotline. We lost him a couple of years ago.
I'm still still feels like yesterday. I miss him every day.
I miss talking politics with him, and we worked together

(01:06:19):
at the Hotline. We worked together at NBC. But when
he'd gone back and forth from the Hotline a couple
of times, and he actually got a network job before
I ever did, he went to CBS and he suddenly
he got roped into he was working in their political
bureau and they were like a whole bunch of people
wanted the weekend off and from their White House unit,

(01:06:41):
so they talked Vaughan into being the guy who ran
the transmission pool for the White House Press Corps for
the Army Navy game because the president was going at this.
The president at the time, of course, was Bill Clinton.
This year they were playing. That year, they were playing
the Army Navy game the old Veteran Stadium in Philadelphia.

(01:07:04):
The reason I remember this is because they also said, hey,
if you want to bring a friend, we'll give you
an extra an extra pass. So he says, hey, you
want to come with me? And I was like yeah,
So you know, we drive from DC to Philadelphia. And
the only if I had brought a Phillips screwdriver with me,
I pro there is a there's not a zero percent

(01:07:27):
chance I would have walked away with a mic with
a framed Mike Schmidt jersey from the Phillies locker room.
The White House transmission pool was in the actual Phillies
clubhouse in Veterans Stadium, and I just was mesmerized by it,
and we you know it is now. Of course I've

(01:07:47):
been through what a transmission pool is. I've been through
all of those things, and it's kind of a it
can it can be a lot of a lot of
work and a lot of sitting around, and it can
be a lone thing, which is why many networks are like,
you know, you should have some company with this. But
it was the first time I got to experience Army

(01:08:08):
Navy game, and I got to experience it sort of
behind the scenes, and we watched the entire game on
the on the sideline, and like almost every Army Navy game,
it came down to the last drive of the game,
and uh, it was it was just fantastic, the pageantry,
the passion. Uh watching halftime when the Commander in Chief

(01:08:33):
moves from one side, you know, sitting on the Army side,
moving over to the Navy side, or if Navy was
the home team, the Navy side moving over to the
Army side, and there's this sort of ordinate sort of uh,
you know, you get the Navy, you get all the
troops lining up and sort of lining and sort of

(01:08:54):
saluting the Commander in chief as they go. When I've
been to a couple of them, and some president doesn't
always go. Every year, when the president doesn't go, it's
usually the Secretary of defense that goes Sometimes a president
and the Secretary of Defense goes. I imagine we know
Donald Trump loves himself a football game, and if he
can officially go to a football game, he's going to go.
So I'm sure we're going to have a Trump moment

(01:09:16):
or two at this Army Navy game because he's not
gonna he's not going to miss a moment to miss
a moment. But uh, it's it's a it's just one
of those, it really is. It's it's probably the only
it's probably the purest college football that we have left.

(01:09:39):
Right if you if you're sort of burned out on
nil and you're burned out on the conference realignment. Although
both Army and Navy have participated in conference realignments, in
fact they are now both members of conferences, there was
a period where Army was an independent and they were
sort of between conferences and things, and one of these
days it's very possible. I'm really excited did over the

(01:10:00):
last couple of years, we've actually seen Army and Navy
higher coaches that want to innovate and saying, okay, we
have a we're going to have size limits of what
we're going to have but you know, which is why
they run the triple option, but hey, why not throw
out of the triple option some And we've seen much
more dynamic offenses out of both both service academies, which

(01:10:21):
has just been which has allowed them to pull a
few upsets every now and then be a bit more
sort of punch above their weight as programs. And you know,
the only curiosity I have is I have no idea
how how these football programs are going to how the
how the NIL programs are going to work for Army

(01:10:44):
and Navy, and whether they're we're going to start to
see collectives for Army and Navy. I imagine we won't
feels like that that's a that that's that that's a
gray area that autumn that that folks ought to stay
out of. But you know, I don't want to rule
anything out that we'll start to see something on that front,

(01:11:04):
but I do I'm a sucker for it. And if
you ever get the chance to go in person, I
would just say take the opportunity. Even if you don't
consider yourself sort of a you know, a big sort
of flag waving type person. I know that's not everybody's cupetite,
doesn't make any less patriotic. I'm not. I don't want to.

(01:11:25):
I don't want to imply that at all, but I
it is. And here's the other day. It's always a
good game, and it's just an incredible atmosphere. And if
you want to know, I've some of my closest friends
and a former roommate. It's a Naval Academy grad. So

(01:11:48):
I always root for Navy. But I just say go Navy.
I don't say beat Army because you know I'm I
don't have I don't I'm not anti Army on this one,
but I do always come down on the Navy side.
So go Navy. I hope you do well. But what
I most want is just a great game, because when

(01:12:09):
the Army Navy game is competitive, it's a lot of
fun to watch, especially when it's the only college football
game we have this weekend. Although there is the FCS playoffs,
I'm not in denial on that. One of the things
I promise is that I might dabble a little bit
in NFL. I know I do a little bit of

(01:12:29):
that with Tony Koornheizer, but I'll be honest with you
until Miami. As long as Miami is alive in the
college football Playoff. I'm going to be pretty pretty focused
on that. But as a Packer fan, I'm starting to
feel as if i'm, you know, the beginning of this season.
After the first couple of weeks, first two games, Miami

(01:12:51):
beats Notre Dame in South Florida by pretty significant margins,
and they look like a really good football team and
was going to be championship caliber. First two games of
the NFL season, Packers beat the Lions and the Commanders
back to back. At the time when Commanders, we thought, hey,
you know, they just were in the NFC title game

(01:13:12):
the year before. They look like a juggernaut. Then they
had kind of a mid season dip. Miami had kind
of a mid season dip. And now both my teams
are starting to starting to look like they at least
they can compete for the highest title of the season.
So to say I'm a bit giddy about my two
football teams as an understatement, and I just thank them

(01:13:33):
in this In what can be when the day job
and the topics of what I have to cover for
the day job can be anxiety inducing and sometimes demoralizing
and sometimes depressing, it is always nice when your when
your sports teams can can provide a little bit of
a little bit of happiness. But of course, as we

(01:13:54):
all dedicated sports fans know, when your team, when you
suddenly have expectations for your team, you don't enjoy any
part of the game until you survived winning that game.
I can tell you I barely enjoyed any part of
that Packers Bears game, but I was but after we won,
then I was really enjoying the fact that we that
that the Packers won. So to say that, I'm I'm

(01:14:17):
I'm feeling pretty uh pretty excited about about what could
be coming over the next few weeks. I don't want
to jinx it, and for all I know, it could
come crashing down for both teams in a heartbeat. But
you know, when you have a pretty good defensive line,
it's amazing how far your team's can go. And both

(01:14:40):
the Packers and the and the Hurricanes have themselves pretty
elite defensive lines. And if to me, that's the key
to winning championships a disruptive defense, and both my Hurricanes
and my Packers have disruptive defenses. All Right, With that,
with my sports biases out of the way, I will

(01:15:04):
call it a week. I will see you next week.
Enjoy the weekend, be safe out there, and until we
upload again, m hmmmmmm

All Episodes

Chuck’s Commentary - Trump Fails On Economic Messaging At PA Rally + Democrats Win BIG Again In Special Elections

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

Crime Junkie

The Brothers Ortiz

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Chuck’s Commentary - Trump Fails On Economic Messaging At PA Rally + Democrats Win BIG Again In Special Elections