Realpolitik with Range (Trade Value Leaders Index P2)

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Jacob Shapiro (00:04):
Hello listeners, welcome to Geopolitical Cousins.
This is our postmortem of theTrade Value Leaders column piece,
whatever you want to call it.
Uh, Marco and I said we were gonnado an hour and a half and we ended up
doing two plus hours, so enjoy yourself.
Um, we, we saved the conversationfor why Trump is not on either
of our lists towards the end.
Uh, I'm sure that will cause lotsof controversy, but whatever.

(00:24):
We love your hate mail andwe love to hear from you.
Uh, jacob@jacobshari.com,marco@geopoliticalalpha.com.
You can send us feedback there.
Um, otherwise we're having fun.
We're hope you're having fun.
We're hoping that if you like thispodcast, you will share it with your
friends and your cousins and yourneighbors and everybody else, and leave
reviews on the podcast, if you will.
That is also super helpful.

(00:46):
So take care of the people that you love.
We'll see you out there.
Take us away, Marco.

Marko Papic (00:57):
Alright, well, super.
Um, this is the part two of our top 30leaders in the world, the trade value.
Uh, just as a little reminder for allthose of you who missed the first one.
So what we're trying to do here is we'reeffectively trying to, uh, create a list
of, um, policy makers, politicians inthe world if you were able to trade them.

(01:17):
So the, the person that ends upbeing top on our list, uh, is
technically untraded tradable.
Whereas somebody who ends up30th on the list, you would trade
for the 29 in front of them.
Um, now there are over 190countries in the world.
So if you are the last on the list, itdoesn't mean you're a terrible leader.

(01:42):
It just, it means you're betterthan all of those who we did
not put on our, uh, list.
Also, uh, an important pointhere is that we're assuming that
there are some qualities thatare universal to leadership.
So, uh, just as a reminder, if youdidn't follow our part one, uh, it means
that we're basically saying that, uh,it know these are policy makers who

(02:03):
overcome the constraints they face.
That's what we like.
We like those who makesomething out of nothing.
And unfortunately, yes, that'sgoing to, uh, favor, you know,
leaders of smaller countries.
So in the, in part one, Jacob andI both submitted our, uh, top 30.
Obviously there was a ton of overlapthere, but there were 14 leaders,

(02:25):
14 across the two of us that wereeither on one or the other's list.
And so those wereobviously penalized a lot.
So even if you were in Jacob's top10, but you were not in my top 30,
you effectively got ejected fromthe top 30 list, more or less.
It's, it's very difficult to, tobe, uh, near the top at that level.

(02:47):
So, um, we ended up with 44.
So, uh, I'm, I'm gonnastart off from the bottom.
Jacob, you just interrupt me at any point.
If you want, we can postthe list somewhere as well.
Um, yeah, we'll, we will.
Yes, for sure.
So the 44th is Abby Ahmed from Ethiopia.
Uh, that was Jacob's pick.
Very, uh, you went deepin your back for that one.

(03:09):
That was a, that was a good pick.
Uh, 43rd was Donald Tuskfrom Poland, by, by me.
Lots of, uh, pro Polishpropaganda out there.
You know, the Economist hadPoland on the, on the cover.
Tusk managed to squirrelhis way to our, uh, top 44.
Uh, one thing I will say aboutDonald Tusk, he may be a better
EU commissioner, the leader ofPoland, but let's leave that aside.

(03:31):
Um, Slovenia's Robert Goup was 42nd.
That was me going deep into my bag.
I felt like some Balkan representationfrom former Yugoslavia was needed.
Uh, it's more about what Goup has donein disrupting the politics of Slovenia,
you know, coming out of nowhere.
And it's also just because I'm ahuge Laker fan, and Luca Doche is
my Jesus Christ Lord and Savior.

(03:53):
So, uh, 41st o Christen, uh, lots ofhate mail from, uh, Scandinavia, by the
way, for both the 40 41st and the 39th.
39th pick was met f Fredrickson.
So data leaders.

Yeah, I'm, I'm, I'm surprised that one was controversial.
Maybe I, maybe I'm just offhere, but I think she's great.
Anyway.

Well, well, what I would say is like, one of the consistent things
that came out of this exercise is thatif you are in the west, if you're a, if
you are listening to us from the westernworld, which most of our, uh, listeners
are invariably you hate your leader.
I mean, that is what we have learned fromdoing this exercise because the amount of
hate mail we got for doing this exercisewhere our listeners are like, man, I

(04:38):
love the MBS aspect, like you nailedMBS, but let me tell you about my prime
minister of my perfectly run country.
They are complete and utter morons.
So, uh, we got more hate mail for the41st and the 39th pick than anyone else.
Also, um, there was some constructive,uh, uh, feedback about the Nordics,

(05:01):
uh, which I thought was really good.
And I think my, maybe wedid, uh, drop the ball.
President of Finland, uh,Stubb came up couple of times.
Hey, God bless you for thatdifficult place to run.
Uh, both because politics, uh, in Finlandhave been in a state of transition just
like they have been in neighboring Sweden.
So lots of new parties coming up, thetrue fins rising, falling, uh, you

(05:24):
know, transition away from a immaturepopulist party towards a kind of a
center right, you know, leadership party.
So that was interesting.
But also obviously theelephant in the room.
Largest, uh, land border of any NATOcountry with Russia now joining nato.
So maybe we did, um, ignoreFinland here and, uh, well, I, I

just wanna say, I just wanna say I seriously considered Finland.
I just didn't include Finlandbecause I'm still mourning the loss
of Sauna Marin, who, I'm not sayingshe was a great geopolitical leader.
I'm sure we'll get morehate mail if I said that.
Just like, uh, this ispolitically incorrect.
Had a crush on her.
She's, she's awesome.
Like, I couldn't, couldn'tmake the transition.
Sorry.

Jacob had a crush on the leader of Finland.
That's fair.
Uh, and that she left and UBjust didn't do it for you, you
know, so like, there you go.
Uh, but yeah, so, uh, I dofeel like that was, that,

that, by that by the way, folks, that's the level of
analysis that we're giving you here.
I just want you to understand.

Sorry.
Well, I mean, you know, if MarioDraggy was still around, I would've
picked him just because I havea man crush on him, as I said.
So yes, uh, that is,that is perfectly fine.
It's our list, Jacob.
We own it.
We do whatever we want with it.
Um, Egypt, Egypt's, uh, l ccc,uh, 40th, the Jacobs Pick.
Kind of jealous of that.
Well done.
Then Provo, Subianto, Indonesia 38th also.

(06:37):
Jacobs Pick, A lot of theseare very individualistic.
The two of us did notnecessarily agree on these.
Uh, but that's fine.
We didn't, I'm sorry.
I mean, we actuallyagree on most of these.
We just didn't, uh, havethem on our combined list.
37th, Christopher Luxon from New Zealand.
Uh, 30, uh, sorry, that was37, 30 sixth Anwar Ibrahim from

(06:58):
Malaysia, New Zealand was your pick.
Malaysia was mine.
35th.
Okay.
So you got a lot of hatemail for this Jacob.
And I'm gonna let youtake all this hate mail.
Uh, I'm not gonna share this with you.
You did pick Ki Starr.

I did, did

I think it's defensible,
but I didn't want to pick him.
And uh, yeah, there, there wasa lot of, again, woe is me.
I live in an O-E-C-D-G 20, uh,you know, first world country.
And my leaders are terrible, but oh boy,do I look that love that Victor Orban.
So that's one of thosewhere we got some hit mail.

(07:33):
Another, uh, I

I also just wanna say about Kiir, like remember that
this list is like you would tradefor the people in front of you.
So he was number 22 on my list.
So I'm saying that anybody belowhim would wanna trade for him.
So there's still 21 leaders outthere that I'd, that I'm saying,
um, are not better than Ki Starer.
And also just like, think of theincompetence that he inherited from
Liz Trust and you and everything else.
And things are notlike, completely broken.

(07:56):
Like, not to mentionBrexit and everything else.
Like he's, he is uninspiring,he's relatively boring.
He's perfectly competent.
Like he, he's a boring, competentleader of a very fractious democracy.
Like that gets him, thatgets him points in my book.
That's all.
It's, I'm not saying that he's thegreatest thing since sliced bread.
He is not.

And listen, I, I'm letting you take this hit meal.
I am, I'm not gonna share with you.
But I agree with you because hedid inherit a terrible situation.
Um, he hasn't made it worse.
And quite frankly, I put Matt Fredericksonalmost exclusively because of her handling
of effectively American, uh, aggression.

(08:34):
You know, like the United Statesof America is the threatening
to seize Greenland from Denmark.
She handled that well.
I mean, Keith Star, uh, ki Starmerjust purely for handling the
trade negotiations with the US,I think should get some props.
I mean, he handled it, I think,better than most countries.
Obviously.
He got the trade deal first, andso he got out of that wave, uh,

(08:56):
very, very quickly, which was very,you know, tricky for a labor prime
minister of the United Kingdom.
Mm-hmm.
I mean, he is ideologicallyopposed, uh, like ideologically.
He and Donald Trump areobviously not on the same plane.
So I thought that was a a, you know, Ithink, I think it's not a crazy pick.

(09:16):
The next one.
I do think you werecompletely out to lunch.
Um, maybe you also have a crushon Lula the Silva, but, uh,
you did pick him very high.
Um, I thought that was looking backwards.
Now forward he is 34th.
We got I think, a little bit,a little bit of hate mail.
I got some texts about it.
Um, one of my friends, uh, who'sin finance basically said next

(09:38):
to the dictionary definition ofcorruption is Lula's picture.
So, you know, 34th.
Um.

I think that, that, that's fine.
But literally, show me a leaderon here who is not corrupt.
And I'll show you a chipmunkthat speaks Swahili.
I mean, really, you, you're tellingme that politicians and leaders
are not corrupt to get to the top.
Like that's not a meaning.
I, I think the pushback that hisbest days are behind him, that he
doesn't actually control congress.
That he's actually, he's using 2008policies for a very different multiple

(10:08):
environment and there's no successor.
Like there's lots of different ways Ithink you could go at the Lula pick.
I'll tell you though, one of the thingsthat, I didn't mention this when we
talked about it, um, I actually usedto shit on Lula a lot more and hung out
with a couple of Brazilians and, youknow, you're, you're gonna know who the
Brazilians are or what their ideology isbased on whether they like Lula or not.
But, but, but was sort of slappedon the hand being like, uh, Lula,

(10:28):
like change things in Brazil.
No matter what you think of him.
He's a formidable politicianwith an idea of Brazil's future.
And he got closer to realizingBrazil's potential than literally
any Brazilian leader ever.
Arguably.
So like, I, I definitely was like,privileging some past performance,
but even, even if you don't like himideologically, like pre pre Brazil Lula
and post Brazil Lula, like, I think hedeserves, um, some of the credit there.

(10:53):
But I, I al Yeah.
Sorry, go ahead.
You meant

Prej pre jail and post jail.

Yes.
Sorry.
Yes.
Oh

no, sorry.
Yeah, yeah.
Sorry.
Go ahead.
I didn't mean to interrupt you, just

No, no.

Um, well, what I, what I would also say about Lula is that, um.
You know, we, we are modeling thison Bill Simmons, uh, trade value for
basketball players, which is awesome.
And one of the things that, um,you know, goes into establishing
the trade value for a basketballplayer is not just this skill.
So when you think about Lula, he clearlyis over the course of his career and

(11:26):
incredibly adapt politician, he wrangledcongress to pa pass pension reform.
I mean, this is like a Maoist likeguerrilla leader for God's sakes,
you know, passing pension reformthat OECD gave a thumbs up to.
So, so he's an incrediblyskilled player of this game.
But the two things that go in addition,um, in the Bill Simmons basketball analogy

(11:50):
of this is like, how young are they?
How much future do they have?
So you don't want to necessarilytrade a 23-year-old basketball
player with a lot of upside for a39-year-old, 40-year-old LeBron, even
though LeBron is better right now.
So that's a knock on Lula as well.
Uh, I mean, to be fair, it is also a knockon my pick of Anwar Ibrahim who got six.

(12:10):
He's been around for 40 years.
Uh, the other issue also withLula is the, the contract issue.
You know, so, um, on the Bill Simmonsbasketball analogy of what we're doing
here is like you contract matters.
If you're a 23-year-old basketballplayer, young, you've got another 10,
15 years ahead of you and you're on arookie deal, oh my god, that's so much
better than being in, in your thirties.

(12:32):
Your knees are already hurtand you are, you know, 30,
$40 million a year with Lula.
That's also like, you know, whenpoliticians overstay their welcome.
And so I do think that the, the comphere between the real world in the
basketball world, the rookie contract issort of like the honeymoon phase, right?
Mm-hmm.
When you get elected for thefirst time, or you just seize

(12:53):
power in a coup, God bless you.
You know, like we're, we're, we're neutralhere, you know, but whatever kind of
seizing of power you are involved inthose first couple of years, you kind
of, on your rookie contract, you're,you're cheap if you will, you know,
you're, you have that fresh new car smell.
And so I think that, uh, with Lula,that's definitely not the case.

(13:14):
So what I would say about Lula ishe's like Paul Pierce late in his
career, you know, he's still gota chance to hit a game-winning
jumper, but he's kind of overweight.
He's probably out in theclubs too long and he's about
to launch a podcast with kg.
So I would say that Lula Lula is likeabout two to three years away from
doing a podcast with like, um, I don'tknow, the parishioners, I don't know.

(13:36):
Like with somebody.
Well,

yeah, and I, I take your point.
I actually think the biggest argumentagainst Lula, and I think he shares
this quality with a couple other folkson our list that will be higher up.
I think he shares it with NarendraModi, I think he shares this with, uh,
Erdogan and Turkey for a little bit.
And I think Claudia Shane Baum,who we're gonna give a lot of, a
lot of d to on this podcast, likealso needs to be aware of this.
His legacy as a leader is, isnot looking particularly good.

(13:59):
Who is one is the next Lula.
Like what is the future of theBrazilian left when there's no Lula?
He cannibalized the left.
What could have been a movement thatbrought Brazil and his image of Brazil
forward for generations has sort ofbeen subsumed, as you said, in this
sort of corruption, charisma, personalleadership, uh, sort of figure.
And I think that's something thatModi is really struggling with.

(14:20):
Like who takes over when Modi's gone?
Is the BJP still gonna be theBJP when Modi's not on top of it?
If you're extrapolating today,maybe not Erdogan, he's casting
about, is it his son-in-law?
Is it somebody else?
Like who's the successorthat follows through?
And with Shane Baum too, like ShaneBaum is the leader of a party that
looks like it's gonna just be thepre, again, it looks like it's

(14:41):
gonna try to be a single party.
Dictatorship in Mexico.
And even though I think she's very adeptand pragmatic and all these other things,
what happens when the next person is notand takes the mere and machine and does it
for things that absolutely should terrifyMexicans and people who are thinking
about the Mexican economy in general.
So for me, the biggest shot againstLula is not what he's done so far.
I think he's been very skilled and,you know, corruption aside, whatever,

(15:02):
these people are all corrupt.
But I don't know, I don't know thathis legacy will look particularly
good because I think that he letthese things get to his own head.
So if I'm arguing against myself,that's, that's I think my weak point.

You know, first of all, to answer your question,
who takes over from Modi?
I would, I would pay money to seeSue m Ja, Shankar, Ja Shankar,
the Foreign Minister of India.
Listen, if you don't know what I'mtalking about, that's perfectly cool.
This podcast is just for normal people.
Go on YouTube and Google.
S Ja Shankar, the foreignminister of India.

(15:32):
Um, the, I mean, this guy, uh,actually that's not how you say it.
It's a minister of external affairs.
Um, yeah, yeah.
But, uh, the guy, he'st guys, he's brilliant.
He's a g Maybe we should do thisfor ministers of Foreign Affairs.
That would be kind of cool.
The top 10.
We should like Avi, Avi Lav is likeLeBron, but like we put that aside.
Uh, I think that Chen Carr is amazing.

(15:54):
He's only four years youngerthan Modi do, so I don't think
he would be really a replacement.
But, but this is an interesting point.
We didn't actually think about this, thislegacy question like who comes after you?
That is not something that you would, uh,really have in a basketball trade value.
Maybe we were over indexing to it, butBill Simmons does talk about people who
raise the quality of their teammates.

(16:15):
Right.
That is important.
And I do think that, you know, whenyou, when you think about that, who
does come after, uh, Lula, who comesafter Modi to, to give AMLO credit?
I mean, he did create Shiba.
Yes.
Did, I mean, you know, like, andhe stepped aside and he's now,
you know, uh, sort of like an, uh,like an old advisor, like a grandpa

(16:36):
or like a Vito Corleone Right.
In, uh, in Godfather.
I mean, I think that's, that's amazing.
And to AM's credit, he's really,uh, he should be high on this
list as well, if he was still, um.
Playing.

Well, I, I, I, I actually do think that, just to close it out on
Lula, I, I do think there is a basketballmetaphor here though, for the trade
list because, and we had one listenerwrite in and compare Lula to LeBron, and
I'm jealous of the comparison becauseit's dead on because like the legacy
thing comes in when you're LeBron andyou're forcing the Lakers to, uh, get
Russell Westbrook on the team becauseyou think that's what's gonna happen.

(17:08):
You're gonna leave unless you getRussell Westbrook on the team.
That's what I'm talking about.
Yeah.
I see that.
Like, you're selling the future,you're forcing your organization
to do what you want right now.
Yes.
And not setting them up forlong term when you retire.
So I, I think there's an aspect of that.

Yeah, that's true.
I, I see that point.
That's actually pretty good.
And I mean, you're, you're 40 yearsold and still putting up points, but,
you know, are they empty calories?
Okay.
Uh, next one is also your pick.
So we got three picks of yours, 33.
Victor Orban, um, hated the pick at thebeginning, but I don't hate it anymore.

Hmm.

I'm surprised you made the pick, you know?
Oh, I felt,

I felt dirty.
I felt dirty making the pick, but thisis my allegiance to objectivity here.

No, that's excellent.
I mean, and, and I think, you know, atfirst, you know, I don't like leaders that
are just effective at staying in power.
You know, like that's notwhat this list is about.
You know, this list is aboutare you actually good at getting
your country to the NBA finals?
Basically, this is about winning.
This is about making the countrybetter, making it great again.

(18:09):
And I gotta say, I mean, VictorOrban has defended, I think
Hungarian interest very well.
Uh, and for the most part he hasused his, um, annoying qualities
in a really positive way in whichhe has extracted concessions from
Europe just to kind of play along.

(18:30):
And I think that's been,um, quite admirable from an
effectiveness policy point of view.
Now, whether he has brought, you know,soft authoritarianism back to Europe,
you know, the kind of things that theforeign affairs are, God forbid the
Economist would write about, I don'treally give a shit about that stuff.
That's not what I'm looking at.
Maybe in the long term thatwill be a problem for Hungary.

(18:51):
I'm not sure, but I dothink that was a good pick.
Jacob.
So he is 33 third.
I didn't have him onthe list, so he slipped.

I think he's good.
I think he has a ceiling.
Like if your country is facing likeother countries that are going after
it, or if you're, if you're in a realproblem neighborhood or something like
that, like you'll want Victor Orban.
If you're swimming with the sharks,you want a shark of your own.
If you start the upper levels of my list,where you're starting to get into open
democracies where elections are completelyfair and open and things like that,
Orban is not gonna work in that system.

(19:19):
His method of rule is not gonna work.
And that's why you probably tradesome of those people in front of him.
Like even if they're not as adeptas politicians, like you probably
still wouldn't trade for them.
But if you're any kind of country thathas like problems or you're thinking
about defending your interest in arough neighborhood, like that's why
he earns the, this spot on the list.
'cause if you're in that sort ofsituation, you're gonna want this
guy, like this guy is ruthless aboutpursuing national interests and tying

(19:41):
his own future to the national interest.
I think that's, I don'tthink that's arguable

correct.
I think he would've done abetter job, for example, than
me, him in Netanyahu in Israel.
So I would've traded himfor, uh, Benjamin Nhu.
The other thing I would sayabout Orban is that I think
you might be too harsh on him.
I mean, he, he did also, uh, he waselectorally successful even when he was
far more committed to liberal democracy,you know, so he's, he's got range.

(20:05):
Uh, what I would say about VictorOrban is if we were comparing him
to a, like a basketball player,he's someone who has transformed
himself and the way that he plays.
He was a down low banker in thepost, and then he learned how to,
you know, he's like Brooke Lopez.
That's a good to,

yeah.
Al Horford.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I got you.

There you go.
Yes.
Just, you know, kind of annoying.
Uh.
Francis, uh, Vatican, Pope Francis 32nd.
I gotta say, this was kind of a joke pic.
He ends up being pretty high, but Ithink he's gonna be a really good pope.
So let's move on.
Alright, uh, 31st.
Benjamin Netanyahu.
Your pick.
Uh, here, uh, I do disagree.

(20:44):
Um, unlike Orban, I don't think he is,uh, like 10 years from now after Orban
is gone, like 10 years after Orban.
I think the Hungary is better off thanOrban, particularly because I think
institutions of Hungary will swingback towards liberal democracy and
only Westerners sitting in London andwriting about, you know, other countries,
uh, disagree with that, uh, becausethey look down on Eastern Europe.

(21:06):
So I don't actually have a problemwith Orban and what he's doing.
Like it's gonna be fine.
Settle down, hung is not gonna go fascist.
Benjamin Netanyahu, eh, I don't know.
I think he's enabled, I think he'senabled the worst parts of, uh,
Israeli politics to kind of bubble upto the surface to be normalized and
purely for petty personal interests.

(21:27):
I really, really struggled to seemuch, uh, long-term strategy here.
But you did have a very, veryhigh, and I think that's, you know,
like if you look at him purelyfrom a geopolitical perspective,
I mean, he has kind of crushed it.
And I agree with that.
Iran is on the back foot, Hezbollahhesitating to check their text messages.
Uh, and, uh, you know, Hamas isobviously, um, yeah, basically destroyed.

(21:49):
So, uh, I do understand it from a,from an effectiveness perspective
and a military perspective.
He has done really well.

Yeah.
I, nothing really to add there for me.
Just that like, he probablywouldn't have made it this high
on my list even 12 months ago.
But the quick succession of decimatingHezbollah and then decimating Iran
like this, like it's extremely, like,it's, it's not something I thought.
So maybe I'm over-indexing becauseI didn't think that he was capable
of it or Israel was capable of it.
But I also think there's no arguingthat like he understood this threat

(22:19):
and he went after it to, to the pointof understanding the United States,
understanding that all he needed todo was back Trump into a corner and
give him FOMO on foreign policy.
And he would help in the war ratherthan slap Israel in the wrist.
Like he, he read the room correctly.
He's got a hot hand right now.

You know what I would say about Benjamin Thu, my comp for him.
I know I said Gilbert Arenas.
That's, that's not fair.
Gilbert Arenas, other than a fewyears in Washington, never really
took his team deep in the playoffs.
I would say Benjamin Thu is PaulGeorge three his playoff b hmm.
You know, like remember when the Indianapastries with Paul George like took
LeBron to like I do a couple like, yeah.

(22:55):
So, but, but he's terrible andhe's terrible for your team and he
whines and he's selfish and he'salso, maybe he and Lula will do a
podcast to together to complete thePaul Pearson Paul George analogy.
Alright, we go from the Vaticanto Israel to Al-Qaeda, Ahed Al. I
mean obviously that's how we go.

(23:15):
30th on the list.
He was very, very high on mine.
I know you love this pick.
I know you're jealous of it.
That's fine.
Mm-hmm.
We can share it together.
The former Al-Qaeda leader of Syria,uh, this is, this is your 19-year-old
seven foot six project from France.
This is the guy that youdon't know if he's gonna stay
healthy or in the real world.
The equivalent of that would be alive.

(23:38):
So you don't know any of those things.
You are confused, butjust the range is amazing.
Great family with a lot ofpolitical, uh, roots in Syria.
This is not some dude that cameout of a cave, picked up an AK
47 and decided to be a terrorist.
This is a university educated,frustrated dude, hated Assad.

(23:58):
The only way to fightAssad was to join Al-Qaeda.
And he did.
God bless him.
And then he was like,Hmm, Windsor changing.
Maybe I should put on atie and trim my beard.
And then here he is on CNN speakingto Christiana Amur, which was
one of the most fascinating 180degree turns from a PR perspective.

(24:20):
I think, uh, this is one ofthe highest rated leaders here.
This guy's got something, he'sgot that something special.
Um, I'm really fascinated, uh, was quiet.
The only Arab leader that was quietduring the Israel Iran conflict, the
only one that did not disparage Israelfor attacking Iran, has been pretty
unequivocally anti-Iran this entire time.
He's got Trump basically.

(24:42):
Uh, advocating for, uh, Syriato be brought back into the
international community is gonnabe very, very tough for him.
He's basically a draft project,young player, lots of potential
rookie contract, honeymoon period.
But he did get drafted byan absolutely terrible team.
What is a comp for Syria in the NBA?
Probably the Washington Wizards.

(25:03):
So, you know, we'll see if hesurvives, but he's 30th and
I think that's appropriate.
Um, I think that's so far whatwe've seen pretty extraordinary.

Yeah, I, I don't have anything to add 'cause I was jealous
of the pick, but I will say to ourNordic listeners who were sending in
the hate mail, you know, I had met toFrederickson up at 12, so as a result
of smooshing together, MAA Marco'sList, Metta comes in at 39th on this
list, and Ahmed Al Shara is at 30.
Would you trade MettaFrankon for Ahmed Al Shara?
Just throwing that out thereto the Danish listeners.
Like, just, just, just cookwith that question for a little

(25:33):
bit and then come back to me.
If, if you would still make the tradeand, and if you would, then, then fine,
then I respect the take, but like,just, just slow down a little bit.
Unless you want, unless you wantthe Alqaeda guy in charge, you know,

I mean, you know, like he's doing well.
I'm pretty sure he's gonna handle theintricacy of pension reform if he can
handle the intricacy of ethnic conflict.
We'll see.
Uh, alright, next pick was kindof a deep, uh, deep reach by me.
I, I reached into my bag.
Eddie Rama from Albania, hehas done really great job.

(26:05):
You then picked, uh, youwent deep in your bag too.
This guy was very high onyour list, wasn't on mine.
That's why he got penalized.
But I am jealous of this.
Shav got me from Uzbekistan whohas transformed the country.

I was jealous of the Albania pick.
And I, I think these are both like reallynice, like deep in the bag examples.
It'd be interesting to see ifthese guys could get called up
to, uh, to the, to the pros.
But they're doing very wellin their, in their spheres.

Uh, you then went with Shakiro Yeshiva from Japan.
Um, I thought that was a great pick.
I didn't have him, but I think he'sdoing really, really well despite, um,
relatively tap popularity in Japan.
The Japanese just does, don'tlike their leaders ever.
So, uh, God bless him.
He's doing great in the negotiationswith, uh, Trump is, uh, you know,
he's the one, the one leader that hasdecided to hold out for a better deal.

(26:56):
Kayak cull, uh, another personthat was very high on your list,
uh, is from Estonia, got, uh,penalized because I did not pick her.
I think that was a good pick.
Karen Keller Suiter from Switzerland.
I thought this was, uh, you know, it's,it's kind of like picking, I don't
know, like Tony Parker outta the Spurs.
Is Tony Parker really good, orwere the Spurs really a great team?

Oh, it's, it's not even that.
It's, it's more like Shane Batier.
It's like a really, really safe pick.

It's a, it's a safe pick, but also it's like the
system, you know, this is a greatexample of, of just the country.
So, well, I think I could run Switzerland.
Um, and then we get into, so nowwe're getting into like the, the picks
where I, I, I mean, we're not thereyet, but like Abdullah's, second of
Jordan, very difficult situation.
Doing great.
Pedro Sanchez from Swaingot a lot of hate mail.

(27:46):
Somebody compared him to Merkelbecause of energy policy.
Please look at the datafirst before you say that.
Spain is one of the few places inthe world where it does make sense
to go hard into alternative energy.
Uh, so disagree with you completely.
There's a boom in data centers in Spainbecause of their alternative energy
policies, because their electricityprices go to zero for God's sakes.

(28:09):
Uh, Oman's, he bintaSaltan, he binta of Oman.
22nd.
Xi Jinping 21st.
We'll get back to that.
Let's hold that thought.
Moham Mohamed's, sixth of Morocco.
So, uh, also for the extraordinarytransformation of Morocco is 20th, top 20.
Kasim Jomar to Kazakhstan.

(28:30):
I went deep into my bag.
He was top five pick for me.
He did not make your list.
Because he was so highly ranked.
He sneaked into 19 and now Kuski,he was also top five for me.
Greek prime Minister, who hasled to extraordinary reforms.
Olo Deir, Zelensky 17.
Hold that thought will come back to him.
Mm-hmm.
Yep.

(28:51):
Uh, and now we get into, uh, someleaders that we both had on the
list, which is why they're so high.
These leaders are so high becausewe, there's consensus now top 15,
basically Amal Amman, Macron at 16.
Uh, neither one of us pickedhim actually this high.
But where we aggregated our list, hewent up because many of our higher picks,

(29:12):
better picks, in our opinion, in, inone of our opinions, just got penalized.
'cause they were only on one list.
So by default, Macron won kindof how he won his second term.
Exactly.
You know, like both ofus felt uncomfortable not
putting Macron on the list.
He did transform French politicsfor the first time since Charlotte
de Gold in a significant way.

(29:33):
So we're sitting therelike, yeah, okay, fine.
You know, he's always in the mix,but most French people are probably
lighting themselves in fire for us.
Having him, well, you know what guys?
You should do yourself with more gasoline.
'cause he kind of squirted hisway up higher onto our list.
Ami Rwanda also.
We both picked him 15th on the list.

(29:56):
I 14th.
Hey, listen, bald, don't lie, right?
Mm-hmm.
Now Goba not in Armenia anymore,so he is high on this list.
Although obviously we should,we should caveat this.
How difficult is it to win a war?
Uh, a war when you are washed in commodityproceeds Friedrich me of Germany.

(30:17):
Number 13.
I mean, we're treating Merzhere as if, I don't know.
He's Victor Van Bama or atleast, uh, what's, what's the,
the kid's name outta Duke.
My brain just stopped.

Cooper Flag

Flag.
Cooper Flag.
I mean, Friedrich Mertz Cooperflag on this list just got
picked number one in the NBA.
We're basically givingMertz a lot of credit.
And to be, to be clear,he is, uh, summer workout.
YouTube videos are extraordinary.
So I, he, I do think he deserves it.
Um, Erdogan another guy who's courted hisway up 'cause he was on both of our list.

(30:49):
He managed to get to 12.
I don't think either one of usreally wanted him 12, but here he is.
Mm-hmm.
Lo wonk, Lawrence Wonk, I agreewith, I had him much lower than
you did, but I had him on the listcontemplating putting him in top 10.
He's number 11.
I agree with that.
He's young.
He's, he just started as theprime Minister of Singapore a year
ago, and so far what I've seenis, uh, pretty impressive stuff.

(31:13):
cyril OSA number 10, um, complicatedalliance with the, uh, da.
He's, uh, he's the first leader of SouthAfrica and has basically had to, uh, you
know, uh, reach out to the opposition tocreate a pretty significant coalition.
And of course, his, uh, handling ofDonald Trump, I think was very good.

(31:34):
Mm-hmm.
Now the most controversial,uh, part of this number nine,
massive hate mail from Australia.
I mean, Australians are quitting,they're unsubscribing from geopolitical
cousins in droves because they all hatethe Anthony Albanese pig, you know?
And, uh, I I, I have to admit, Ihesitated putting him as high as I did.

(31:59):
He was, where was he on my list?
He was really high on my list, I think.
Oh, no, he was 20, 20 20th on my list.

No, he was 10th on my list of br Bring the hate over here, Ozzie.
I'm ready for it.
So

I, he was 20 of mine, 10 on yours.
He ends up nine on the combined list.
Uh, and I think that that's too harsh.
You know, like all the, all the hate mail.
Fine.
Maybe he's 10 spots too high.
Who cares?
I think he's, uh, done a prettyadmirable job of geopolitical balancing.
I think most Aussies that hatede pick don't understand why
he's saw Aloof of America.

(32:30):
And my answer is because heunderstands the world is not bipolar.
For the first Australian leaderwho gets the picking sides.
So clearly is probably a mistake.
So I give him credit for that.
What's your defense of albanese?

Well, it's sort of, first of all, it's sort of like kiir starer,
like think about who else is on this list.
So if you're in Australia, areyou gonna trade, uh, albanese for
somebody who's lower on those list?
Like, would you rather haveBenjamin Netanyahu running your
country or, you know, uh, ab fatalAssisi or somebody like that?
Like, like so slow.
Your role a little bit there.
I think you're right about, um, look,Australia's defense relationship with

(33:04):
the United States incredibly critical forAustralian geopolitics, but your biggest
trading relationship is with China.
You can't just give the middlefinger to China in a world that is
moving multipolar where the UnitedStates is less reliable in general.
And I guess also just withAlbany, like what's the scandal?
Like, what has he effed up?
I haven't heard, almost, almost nothingfrom Australian politics has risen to

(33:25):
the level of I need to work on this rightnow for clients in ever since he is been
elected, because he's just handling shit.
Like, is it brilliant?
Is he the, is he the bestAustralian leader ever?
No, none of this necessarily.
But when you start comparing him to someof the other folks on this list, and
by the way, doing this exercise makesyou realize just how few leaders there
are out there that you would even wantto be in charge of your own country.

(33:46):
But, you know, we're, we're talkingabout would you rather have Xi
Jinping as the leader of Australia?
Would you rather have, um, you know,Pedro Sanchez or somebody like that?
Like I, I think that if you're judginghim relatively, and you're looking
at his record, he's been competent.
Even if he's been uninspiring, he'scorrectly navigating geopolitical,
very tough geopolitical Cs.
Like I, yeah, it's, it's not a fullthroat that he's the, the best thing ever.

(34:08):
But if you're thinking, if you're beingfaithful to the exercise, I have a hard
time seeing why he should be penalized.
But I'm open to the Australians tellingme, no, Jacob, you don't know all these
other terrible things that he's done.
Please tell me the terrible,awful things that he's done to
collapse the Australian economy.
Because here, sitting here in NewOrleans, I don't see, it seems
to me Australia's doing okay.

Yeah, no, I, I think you, you did a great job there.
And I, I do think it was funnyhow much hate mail we got from
Westerners hating their own leaders.
Uh, by the way, just to beclear, we love the hate mail.
Please keep it coming.

Yes, please.

Absolutely No problem.
But we will expose youand make fun of you.
Like that is something thatyou have to take on that risk
if you send us hate mail.
So, uh, lots of, lots of criticismof these leaders and, and
again, nobody in Turkey sent us.
Uh, it's funny because, you know,a lot of these picks are very
controversial in the countries.

(34:59):
They're picked, but only the westernersunequivocally hate their leaders.
Mm-hmm.
Now we're getting into idea or, or, or, or

feel safe about, uh, or feel safe, uh, izing their leaders Fair.

Alright.
That's, that is fair.
Okay.
So let's, uh, let's getinto, uh, number nine.
Sorry, number eight.
Number eight on our list is Javier Mil.
Uh, high on both of our lists.
Um, you know, I think that's, but,

but, but, but also a great example of what I was just talking about.
'cause he was 17 on my listand Albanese was number 10.
So I say again to the Australians, wouldyou rather have the chainsaw wielding
maniac as the leader of your country?
Because in my list, no, you wouldn't.
There's, like, if you're a certainlevel of like, messed up country,
yeah, you might want the chainsaw tocome out and try and do some reform,
but like, that's not exactly whatI would wanna trade for in general.

(35:43):
But because Melay was on both of ourlists, and because he is do, he's really
doing such an ambitious thing and tryingto turn around Argentina, which for
over a century has been a basket case.
Like he gets some dier, butthat just to push back against
the Australians one more time.

Yeah.
I think, you know what, I, I thinkyou're right and I think a lot of, uh,
so, so I, I'll take two sides of this.
First of all, I, I think a lot of ourlisteners in the West, they have to
understand that this is kind of like.
What moment in your life are you in?
Like when you're 23 years old?
And I'm gonna try to do thisin a gender neutral way.

(36:18):
Okay, good for you.
When you're, yeah, when you're, whenyou're 23 years old, when you're 23
years old, you kind of want someonewho's riding a bike and got tattoos.
Yeah.
When you're like 50 me, you might wantsomeone who's in their mid thirties

(36:38):
with a stable job and occasionallylikes to ride motorcycles, right?
And so I think a lot of our listeners inthe West, they're pretending they're 23,
they want a zelensky, they wanted to cavehell, maybe they want to let their hair
down and even go out with Xi Jinping.
But the truth is, you'relike 57 year olds old man.

(37:00):
You know?
You don't need someone who's 23on a motorbike with a tattoo.
You know?
Like, you don't need that.
That's not what you want.
And so I think a lot of our listenerslook at someone like Alban or Starmer,
and they're like boring, you know?
Like, we don't want theseguys, they're there.
There's nothing interesting about them.
And uh, and I think that's a mistake.
Now that said, we're gonna get into somepeople right now who I think are as high

(37:24):
as they are because they have vision.
Mm-hmm.
They have, they have vision.
And the problem is, if some of theseleaders don't have vision, well this
next mid thirties, non tattooed,non motorbike riding, uh, person.
Is is I think does have vision.
And that's Mark Carney.
He's number seven.
He was high on both of our lists.

(37:46):
Mm-hmm.
Uh, I think, you know, Ithink that's appropriate.
Top 10 leader, uh, incredible range.
Former central banker who can both talkto you about the Laffer Curve and all
sorts of other advanced economo metricconcepts, while also shaking your
hand and talking about junior hockey.
'cause he's got it all.
He's got range.
He was the Central Bank governor of bothCanada and the United Kingdom Bank of

(38:10):
England that is, uh, and Bank of Canada.
He also comes from a small town in Canadaand knows how to, uh, please both the
crowds wearing the, uh, the white hats.
Uh, and also, uh, how to please thecrowds, uh, at an investment fund.
So I think it's very interesting.
And again, he is somewhat, that's higherlist because there's a lot of potential.

(38:31):
He's not particularly young,but he's early in his term.
And there's, uh, more to go.
Next one is Modi.
I do think that it's a little bitunfair to Lula, who's 34, Modi six.
I do think Modi is better at this pointin his career, but I do think you can
bring up the fact that he's at the endof his career, you are paying a lot.
Uh, for Modi, he's got anotherthree years at $50 million a year.

(38:54):
That's kind of player He is.
So, mm-hmm.
Uh, you know, that's kind of a problem.
Alright.
Top five.
Universally loved numberone on Jacob Shapiro's list.
And every single male listenerbetween the ages of 25 and
40 absolutely loves this guy.
It is naive BU from El Salvador comingin at number five, the crypto king, the

(39:19):
Bitcoin baller, the guy who has cleanedup el, by the way, I'm doing this off
the top of my head, so you're welcome.
He has cleaned up El Salvador.
Uh, everybody swears by it.
Uh, I do think he has range.
I think that you would trade forhim even if you were in Canada.
I actually think that he would be ableto run even an OECD economy because he's

(39:41):
got pr, he's got marketing, he's savvy.
He knows how to talk.
He's got charisma, he's got big ideas, bigideas, and that's useful in any country.
I love this guy.
I love this big.
He was number one on your list.
He was number 13 on my list, but Iflirted with putting him in the top five.
Um, and I think, uh, I puthim too low, quite frankly.
I think he should be top three.

(40:03):
Yeah.
Great pick.
Alright, next one.
Mohamed Bin Zaid, leaderof, uh, the Emirates.
Uh, absolutely crushing it.
The Emirates are not just Dubai,they're not just about fake islands.
I. Other fake things, by the way,just we're not gonna mention what,
they're not just about Dubai anymore.
They're a financial capital.
They're uh, actually a manufacturing hub.
If you're flying in an airliner, you'reflying in an airplane whose parts were

(40:28):
partly manufactured in the Emirates.
Uh, the other Emirates are coming up.
It's not just Abu Dhabi and Dubai.
Sharjah is blowing up as well.
Abu Dhabi has become a financial center.
They're doing some incredible things.
Also, did I mention ai?
They're probably gonna be theearliest adopters of everything.
So, great job of the Emirates.
Uh, also geopolitics donewell on that front as well.

(40:49):
Number three, neighboring SaudiArabia, Mohammed bin Salman.
Uh, he's hired this list, not justbecause of effectiveness, not just
because of dramatic socioeconomic changethat has gone on in Saudi Arabia, that
I would only compare it to the majorrestoration in mid 19th century Japan.
Not just that, but also because of vision.
Yes, some of this vision is too much.

(41:10):
Yes, some of these projects are notgonna happen, but if 30% of this
vision is actually articulated,that will be extraordinary.
More than that, I also think BinSalama should be number three, because
the reforms that are happening inSaudi Arabia and the handling of
geopolitics, particularly navigatingthe very tricky Israel Iran situation

(41:31):
is not just good for Saudi Arabia.
It's good for the region.
Saudi Arabia has decided to becomea responsible regional power to
reduce its reliance on variousmilitants and various extremists.
And that is, has just made theworld a better place, quite frankly.
So that's number three.
Obviously everyone's gonna bring upKhashoggi and what happened, um, with

(41:53):
the death of that journalist, I wouldjust remind you that the United States
of America, uh, bombed Al Jazeera's,uh, headquarters in Iraq during the war.
So like, don't talk to us aboutkilling journalists, although I
obviously think that's terrible, butthat's not what this list is about.
And now, top two, oh, sorry.

Well, I, we, I can't believe I'm, I'm really, I, I'm,
I'm really impressed with the moralequivalency between the United
States bombing Al Jazeera and, uh,Jamal Khashoggi being literally
dismembered in a consulate, uh,at MB s's uh, MB S'S request.
I think that was young mbs.
So hopefully he is a little bitolder and he understands that, uh,
taking off the arms and limbs ofthe people who disagree with you

(42:35):
is not a good way to stay in power.
Better to lock them in the Ritz-Carltonand make sure that they give you
billions of dollars in order to get out.
Um, but yeah, I, I can't letthat one go without some comment.
Cousin.

I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry, Jacob.
But, uh, you know, like, you,you should hold countries with
institutional norms and rules tohigher standards, my friend, you know?
So that's, uh, that's, that'swhere I sit on that one.
So, yes.
Okay.

Mr. Ma, you disagree with that?

And he was number three on my list, by the way.
But do you hear me well?

Yeah, I got you.
You, you slowed down for asecond, but you're good now 'cause

it's kind of choppy.

Hmm.
You there?
It got choppy for a second, but yeah.
I'm good.
I'm here now.
Can you hear me

okay?
Yeah, I, I hear you now.
Yes.

Okay, cool.

Okay,

I got you.

Alright.
Top two.
Oh man.
It's, it's choppy again.
Okay.
Hopefully it's good now.
Okay.
Top two.
We got Georgia Maloney fromItaly at number two, and Claudia
Shine Baum at number one.
So number one and two, both women,both relatively new leaders.
Um, Georgia Maloney, I think,uh, had a tougher time because

(43:44):
she had to actually wrangle herown party and win from scratch.
Fratelli Talia were not in powerbefore Claudia Shaba was kind of
handed the presidency by amlo.
But she has done an admirable job innegotiations with, of course, the us.
Um, you haven't heard anything aboutMexico over the last four months,
and that is why she's number one.

(44:05):
She's number one because she's somehowmanaged to avoid President Trump.
Uh, very tough to be a leader ofMexico so far from God and so close
to the United States of America.
And, uh, obviously, uh, I think that,uh, her handling of that situation
has rocketed her to number one.
We'll see though how she, uh, you know.
How they both do, but for the mostpart, nobody really complained

(44:27):
about that one, two punch.
Um, and, uh, I thinkthat we did really well.
I'm on at least the top fight.
I'm surprised,

I'm surprised that we didn't get more Mexican pushback
from Shane Baum, but that's sort ofbeen true of her from the beginning.
Like, I've done a lot of work on Mexicothis year, and every single person
I've met doesn't like Shane Baum swearsthey didn't vote for Shane Baum says
she's an awful communist populist who'sgonna take their money and et cetera.
And yet you look at the approvalrating, she's 80 plus percent.
Marina got a supermajority in both houses.

(44:55):
Um, and she seems to be goingfrom strength to strength.
And even the ones, like even somepeople who would tell you like,
yeah, I didn't vote for this person.
I hate this person, blah, blah, blah.
And the next breath they'll say, yeah,but she's doing pretty good with the
United States, or She hasn't been asbad as I expected, so I I have yet to
meet a full throated Mirena supporter.
Uh, it, I'm almost, I almost thinkthat they don't exist because
everyone I sort of come across,uh, doesn't think that way.

(45:15):
But even the people who are againstShane Baum, I think are sane.
She's done a really good job so far.
Now that said, I think there, thereare two things though, because if
I was a Mexican and I was listeningto this list and I was anti Shane
Baum, there were, there were twothings I would really push back on.
Number one is the cartelsand the security situation.
And this didn't go verywell for AMLO either.
And she's got like asignificant problem there.
And it's, it's not just her problem.

(45:36):
Like Mexican leaders have had to deal withthis and it's an almost impossible problem
to deal with, but it's not like she hasfixed that or made big moves in fixing
that at any point sort of going forward.
So I think you can favorablycriticize her for that.
I think also.
Though, I mean, there's Shane Baum herselfwho is a relatively pragmatic politician.
, and then there's Morena andwhat Morena is pushing for.

(45:57):
And she may be the beginning of a newsingle party dictatorship in Mexico.
And if you are a wealthy Mexicanand thinking about your relationship
with the Mexican state, you should bepretty concerned, be pretty concerned
about the centralization of power.
And you can see Claudia Shane Baum as,as the totem of that centralization,
you should view her as an enemy.
So I, I think it's actually ironic.

(46:18):
I think Shane Baum will probably be goodin terms of moderating some of Marina's
worst instincts and good for a largemajority of the Mexican population.
But if you're that upper crust ofMexican society, like you should be a
little bit afraid of the power that'sbeing concentrated and in some of
the things, um, that she has said.
So we, we didn't get the hate mail thatI was expecting from Mexicans, but I
know from talking to them like overthe past year that like, there's plenty

(46:40):
of it and she's not a perfect picker.
Nobody on this list is gonna be perfect.
So she was not number one on my list.
Like she is number one because of,you know, when you smush our list
together, she's the one that comes up.
But even though she was top five forme, like she does have some words.
I just wanted to put that out there.

Yeah, I think that's a great defense, uh, Jacob,
and, and thank you for that.
I, I, I, I love it.
And, uh, I think it's a good pick.
I think what you reveal by focusing onthose points is that she might be this
high for us because we expected worse.
And so, you know, I certainly did.
I thought she would not dowell with President Trump.

(47:18):
I thought that she would, uh, be farmore normative and moralistic with him.
And when she, uh, countered his Gulf ofAmerica gimmick with a western Mexican,
United States of America, whatever he,whatever she said, that was amazing.
And I bet you the Donald Trump loved it.
I think he was in his office sippingon a diet Coke, going like, wow, wow.

(47:41):
Like she gets it, you know?
She gets that this is trollingand she's trolling back.
And, uh, you know, I mean, it's a sillything to point out, but that won't be over
when she threw trolling back at Trump.
That takes confidence.
That takes, uh, taking yourselfless seriously than some of
these leaders take themselves.
That's the world we're in.

(48:02):
And, uh, I like that.
I think she, she won me over, but at thesame time, that might mean that we are
overrated her because we underrated her.
You know?
And so that's the fear Now withMaloney, I just wanna say a couple
things in defense of Maloney, becauseMaloney was my, uh, number one pick.
Mm-hmm.
So you had, uh, shine Baumat number, I think four.

(48:24):
Five.
Five.
I five.

And I had Maloney at seven.
So

yeah.
So you had, uh, I hadMaloney as number one.
So she ends up being numberone because she was number one.
My list.
Number seven, yours.
Lemme just explain why she's so high inmine for just an economic performance.
This is an extraordinaryturnaround for, uh, for Italy.
Um, Italy is, uh.
Uh, debt to GDP has come downfrom 160, 170% of GDP to 130.

(48:50):
So huge decline.
Yes, it's still 130, but give her credit.
And the deficit, the deficit,uh, for Italy as percent of
GDP was in the 12% range.
Even, uh, right after the, uh,pandemic, she's gotten it back to 3%.
I mean, that's an extraordinarycorrection in deficit that most Americans
listening to this would've loved.

(49:12):
Um, so she's done a really good job.
By the way, Miata is, uh, out of Greece.
Uh, the Greek economy is actually,uh, outperforming the Euro area.
Uh, Malone is managed to getItaly to be on par with the Euro
area, which is extraordinary'cause Italy has a growth problem.
But Mitsa in Greece, just a littledefense for him, he's managed
to, uh, actually outperform.

(49:33):
And the debt to GDP of Greece has comedown from 210% to 150%, and it now has a
5% almost, um, positive budget balance.
So that's extraordinary, uh, extraordinaryperformance, uh, by these two leaders.
Spain, by the way, massively outperformingthe Euro area in terms of growth.
Uh, debt to GDP is down from130 to a hundred percent.

(49:56):
Deficits are down aswell to two point a 5%.
So all these leaders have managed to,you know, move their, the Mediterranean
leadership has gotten really betterin Europe, and I think that's why
they're, they're high on her lists.
Okay.

Yeah, I think so too.
I, I just wanna say about Maloney.
She's, she's a unicorn on this list,and she's a unicorn because she is
this sort of social conservativeleaning right wing, a little bit
euroskeptic, but has, wants nothingto do with Vladimir Putin in Russia.
Like, there is a lot of weird Putin lovein, when you think about Euroskeptic
circles in the right wing in Europe.
But her, think about the lap.
Yeah.

(50:27):
Not her, but not her.
No.
Yeah, she, she's a one of one, like,I don't know anybody else who could
replicate the sort of differentideological things she has put
together and to dominate Italianpolitics the way that she has.
I mean, I think, I, I forget if, if it'sItaly or some other country has had like
the most leadership transition since WorldWar ii, like Italy is either up there,
number one bad and she's dominating.

Yes.
She, no, listen, so

she's, she's sort of like pingus if, uh, he
didn't get hurt all the time.

Who bad?
She's Dirk Dubiski, I would say.
She's, she's like, oh,

okay.

Yeah.
The first like tall white dudefrom Europe who shoots threes
that America's ever seen.
That's who she is.
We're all shocked by her.
That's why she deservesto be in the top five.
I would definitely take her over Bhel.
Sorry.
No, no offense.
If you're a 25 to 40-year-old male.
I know you all love Bhel.
That's cool.
God bless you.
But I would take Maloney for presidentof any one, prime minister of anything.

(51:14):
I think she would crush it in Israel.
I think she would crush it in Ukraine.
I think she would crush it in Canada.
I think she would crush it in Syria.
I think she would crush it in the Congo.
I think Maloney is a badass.
And I'll tell you why.
She's authentic and shedoesn't give a fuck.
You do you?
Okay.
Georgia, you do you Italy.
Amazing job.

(51:35):
Amazing job.
Slow clap.
Just nothing to say other thanwe've got two women on the top.
And quite frankly, I think both ofthem are bad asses and they will crush.
Crush in any situation.
Um, now that's, that's the summary.
That's the amalgamated, that's your list.
Let's talk about peoplenow that are not on it.
Um, and then I wanna talk aboutsome people that are on it.

(51:57):
Yeah.
So I wanna talk about twopeople that are not on the list.
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.
I wanna ask you why youdon't have them on the list.
How dare you.
And then I wanna talk about two peoplethat are on the list that are your pick.
So you can, you can ask me to defend mine.
I just think that you picked twogentlemen that I have to kind
of defend for why they're not.

(52:18):
They were very high up on the list.
So Zelensky ends up being 17and Xi Jinping ends up being 21.
They were very high onyour, uh, your list.
You had, uh, lemme just see here, Zelenskyin terms of your list was number two was.
Yeah.
And Xi Jinping was number six.
So if you want me to defend some,we can also do that in that segment.

(52:39):
But neither one of us hadDonald Trump and Vladimir Putin.
And I think that, um, you know, it'sfunny because when I ask a lot of
people, who would you have in the top?
A lot of them said Putin.
Um, and there's a lot of truth inthat and we have to talk about that.
Um, but neither one had it on.
So let's start with Vladimir Putin.
Why is he not on your list of top now?
44. 44 leaders?

(52:59):
We would take, we would takeAbbi Ahmed over Vladimir Putin.
Why you and I?
Like, what did we do on, what did

he do?
Yeah.
And I, and we need to spendsome time on Xi Jinping.
'cause I think I probablyranked, uh, Zelensky too far
too high for my own reasons.
But I, I think Xi Jinping is the onewhere we're gonna disagree the most.
But as, as for Mr. Putin, um, look,he would've been towards the top of
this list until he invaded Ukraine.
And that was such abig, big unforced error.

(53:31):
And also I think, showed that he was notin reality, um, like if you read some
of the reports around him at that time,like he had sort of isolated himself.
He wasn't talking to anybody.
He was lecturing foreign dignitariesabout like 18th century Russian
history when they came to visitover the very, very long table.
Do we remember that with COVID?
Very long table.
I mean, he didn't even tell he wasso nervous to maintain the element of

(53:56):
surprise that he didn't give his generalsenough information so that they could
actually plan a military operation.
That should have been a layup for Russia.
This is also like, this is somethingthat he said he had fixed, like part
of the reason to invade Georgia in 2008was to test out the Russian military.
Yes, they crushed Georgia, 'causeGeorgia was puny, but the Russian
military didn't do very well.
They had huge problems in coordinatingair and land forces in 2008, and Putin

(54:19):
was the one who said, we have fixed this,like we are gonna throw so many, so much
money into fixing the Russian militaryand professionalizing it and modernizing
it, and Russia is gonna be this moderncountry and all these other things.
And it turns out, no, it's just thesame old Slavic corrupt Saudi Arabia
with terrible demographics and isonly a great power because they have
nuclear weapons in the first place.
I think history will lookback at Vladimir Putin.

(54:41):
They'll look back at that firstroughly 20 years of his rule as some
of the most inspired leadership in adifficult country that we've ever seen.
But everything that has happenedsince he invaded Ukraine, he
looks like Czar Nicholas ii.
And, and maybe he'll dragon for another five years.
Maybe he'll drag on for another 10 years.
But he made an existentialmistake, um, in invading Ukraine.

(55:01):
And also in not being able to do it,and in believing that he could do it
and believing his own propaganda thatthe Ukrainians would welcome him and
that he could do the Blitz Greek attack.
So I think just based on that, he'soff the list entirely because I think
he sacrificed any future of Russia asa great power in a multipolar world
for this fool's errand in Kyiv thatwasn't actually gonna get him anything.
All Russia will be now because of Mr.Vladimir Putin is a Chinese gas station.

(55:25):
Congratulations on your foresightand leadership, Mr. Putin.

Yeah.
I mean, I think it's even worse than Isecond, quite frankly, I think, uh, his
Nicholas, the first, who, uh, also hada disastrous war in Crimea and then, uh,
died or, and or committed suicide becausehe was, uh, such a terrible leader.
Um, Alexander II cameafterwards and was a badass.
So, what I mean, look, I I, I actuallydefended Vladimir Putin more than

(55:53):
anyone in my circles, from 1999 to2000, and let's say eight maybe.
Why?
Because to understand VladimirPutin, you have to understand how
bad Russia was in the nineties.
Mm-hmm.
It was terrible.
It was a complete andutter collapse of society.
And if Vladimir Putinshows up, he fixes it.
He fixes 80% of it.
He really does.
He fixed it.

(56:13):
He crushed it.
He stood up to the west.
But in a kind of a cool, like,Hey, I'm a partner, but like,
yo, you gotta respect us.
We got our own interests.
That's all fine and dandy.
And then, uh, Ukraine.
There were several pro western kindof revolts starting 2004, 2005.
The Orange Revolution.
Putin handled that masterfully coollylike, like, like James Bond, you know,

(56:36):
my name is Putin, Vladimir Putin.
Like, go ahead.
You want to be pro western,uh, you know, Chenko and Tim
Chenko, you guys go right ahead.
And what happened?
They drowned in their own corruption,feebleness and uh, incompetency.
And so in 2010, the electionYanukovich wins Fair and square,

(56:57):
you know, hashtag great job.
Paul Manafort, you know, so you've gotUkraine basically swing back towards
Russia because Putin was cool, calm, andcollected, and didn't overreact to this
like kind of flirtation with the West.
He lets the pro western leaders ofUkraine do what they do best, which is

(57:19):
be complete incompetent fools and justswooped in through a democratic process.
No problem.
Nothing bad happened.
And then in 2014 where there's more prowestern protests, he loses his cool.
So I don't even think that it's 2022.
Hmm.
That's the problem.
You know, I actually thinkit goes back further.

(57:39):
In 2014, he lost his school becauselet's be very clear, if you annex
and remove Donbas and Crimea.
Now, of course the Parisian andher, these, these regions of
Ukraine that Russia has captured.
There's actually Russianethnic people living there.
Not just Russian speaking Ukrainians,but actual ethnic Russians.

(58:01):
They're actually politically pro-Russian.
They're actually anti-Western,the human beings that live there.
That's your kind of fifthcolumn inside of Ukraine.
That's your permanent likespace inside of Ukraine.
They will always vote for pro-Russianlike foreign policy and so on.
So by taking it out of Ukraine, you'vecreated a far more anti-Russian Ukraine.

(58:27):
You've left the rest of Ukraineto be a far more sovereign
and self identifiable country.
So in other words, not only wasthe military invasion a blunder,
and by the way, I can spend a wholehour on this, maybe we should.
'cause there's a whole lot offolks in the West who think that
Russia is doing great militarily.
They're not.
But not only was the military invasiona blunder, but the fact that you decide

(58:49):
to carve up Ukraine is an old goalbecause now you've created Ukraine.
You know, one thing that I will agreewith, uh, Putin and all of our Ukrainian
listeners will light themselves onfire and or cancel us, which is fine.
God bless you.
The one thing that Vladimir Putinis right about Ukraine is that
Ukraine kind of didn't exist.
Sorry.
And you know who agrees with me?

(59:11):
The Sociological Institute of Kiev.
In other words, there's been a poll that.
The University of Kyiv has beenrunning from the nineties where they
ask Ukrainians, what do you feel like?
And under 50% of them have felt Ukrainian.
So Vladimir Putin is right,right up until he created Ukraine
and you created identity twice.

(59:33):
There's a huge jump in self-identificationof Ukrainian people as Ukrainian
after the 2014 invasion by Russia.
And then another huge jump in 2022.
So you know, if I'm a Ukrainiannationalist, hell, I'm building statues
to Vladimir Putin all over Ukraine.

(59:53):
'cause he is probably single mostresponsible person for the creation of a
sovereign free and pro western Ukraine.
And that you cannot abide.
And here's why.
Your point about demographicsof Russia is very important.
Ukraine, 43 million people at its fullest.
43 million people who will buystuffed in nobody else will.

(01:00:16):
You know what we buy fromRussia oil, the rest of us.
But you know who will buy likea Russian insurance product or
a share, or God forbid, a car.
Ukrainians.
This was your sphereof influence, Vladimir.
This is 43 million people,which is like a third of Russia.
Highly educated.
Pretty wealthy relative to therest of Russia, you know, um, with

(01:00:39):
similar cultural affinity, similarthoughts, similar dreams, similar
tasting music and art and cinema.
And yes, also willing to buy your crappyRussia products outside of commodities
did none of us would ever wanna buy.
'cause we don't find them cute at all.
That was Ukraine and you lost it.
And what you got insteadis West Virginia of Europe.
No offense to the mountaineers,West Virginia is fucking awesome.

(01:01:02):
God bless you.
But let's be honest, Don Nets,it's like coal mines alright.
Like that's what you got.
And I think that's an incredible blogger.
Anyone who advocates for VladimirPutin to be on this list is
straight up, like just high.
Or five, if it's,

Jacob Shapiro (01:01:19):
if it's pre 2014 or pre 2021, like, I think you can make the
case that he should be in the top five.
But I agree with everything,everything you said.
He created Ukraine, he enlargednato, he forced the best, he best
and the brightest to flee Russia.
He like put like, you know, uh, heput Russia at the behest of China.
He has like, he just did allthese other different things.

Marko Papic (01:01:36):
He has handedly made me money and not because I've just, uh,
done well playing him, but becausemy crappy real estate possessions
in Belgrade, Serbia that I neverthought I would give a shit about.
Have basically like quadrupled in price.
Thank you Vladimir.
Thank you for sending Serbia, a bunch ofRussian IT experts who have to rent crappy

(01:02:00):
Soviet departments at egregious prices.
So well done, well done.
Slow clap for you,

Marco.
That, that actually reminds me I,before I forget to ask, I wanted to
ask you why, why Uch was not on yourlist to give the Serbian perspective.
'cause he's been around for awhile and he's got some cred.
Why, why did you leave him off?

You know, uh, I think I left him off because there's so much potential.
First of all, Serbia has one of the,uh, best performing economies in Europe.
Uh, the investment intoSerbia is skyrocketing.
It's incredible.
Uh, and it's all thanks to him.
Like straight up, like he has createdgeopolitical stability in the country.

(01:02:37):
Um, and, uh, you know,basically good relationship.
He's one of the bestbalancing acts out there.
The problem is thatdomestically, I feel that, uh.
He had so much potential, andthat hasn't revealed itself.
Hmm.
You know, it particularly because he'sfacing now these, uh, student protests,
which are massive against his rule.
And no, it's not some sortof foreign interference.

(01:02:59):
It's the fact that basicallyhe's a victim of his own success.
So let me explain what I mean.
Serbia is no longer concerned aboutsecurity, basic material needs.
Um, you know, it's, it's a country thathas economic growth, has investment.
That's all thanks to him, actually.
But the problem is, once you givepeople a taste of that success,
you have to start delivering onother things, improving governance,

(01:03:22):
improving institutions, and, uh, andhe hasn't, uh, and he hasn't done that.
You know, the, the level of corruption,the level of, uh, uh, you know, and not
all of that is on his back, but he's theleader and he should have cleaned that up.
So he's not in the top 30.
Uh, I mean, I don't thinkhe's in the bottom 190.
You know, many, many other leaders aremuch worse than Ridge in the world.
But I do think that he's avictim of his own success.

(01:03:44):
And by the way, I, I defend OTwith, with fellow Serbs because
there's a lot of criticism of him.
And I always say like, yes, butyou wouldn't be criticizing him
for corruption and institutionalincompetence if the country was still in
sanctions or a pariah state and so on.
So he's clearly navigated globalgeopolitics, perhaps better than
anyone else, other than, you know,big countries like India or Malaysia.

(01:04:07):
Like, well done.
Mm-hmm.
The problem is, onceyou've delivered that.
People's appetites and desires rise.
And so that's why he's not here.
But he's definitely, he hasn't donea huge blunder like Vladimir Putin.
Vladimir Putin is just, he's the,the, the largest fall out of anyone.
If we did this 10 years ago,Jacob, I agree with you.
He would've been easily in the top 10.

(01:04:28):
He's now not even, I think in the top ahundred, Vladimir Putin is an absolute
failure over the past three years.
I would've defended him in the top five.
If we did this in 2007, 2008,2009, 2010, a hundred percent,
he would've been in my top five.
He's out of there.

Yeah.
And, and he really squandered.
I mean, he had everythinggoing with Ukraine.
To your point, the way that he wanted.
He had everything going with theEU and NATO the way that he wanted.
He had everything with Russiagoing the way that he wanted,
like cheap energy, the rise of ai.
Like, can you get peopleinterested in Russia?
Like he just kind of squandered.
Um, it all, to your point about ish,it sounds like there's not a one-to-one
player comparison, but he sounds likeTom Thibodaux, like he's good for getting

(01:05:06):
you to a certain point, but he can't.
Yeah.
He can't get you above.
Yes.
That's a

good one.
That's a good comp.
Uh, Tom Thito and Che area good comp, by the way.
One other thing, but

Oh, yeah, go ahead.

If, if I could just stick with Lair Putin, some of our
listeners might say, yes, but theWest forced him to invade Ukraine.
You know, let's say, oh, please, mayor

Shimer.
I hope you're listening,

but listen, let's see.
That's, that's true.
Let's say that's true.
You know, my mother always used to say tome, if, if j if your friend Jacob told you
to jump through a window, would you do it?
You know.
It's like, fine.
Let's say that America entrapRussia, God bless America.
That's what rivals are supposed to do.

(01:05:47):
America's not supposed to be niceto you, Russia for, for God's sakes.
Of course, the America's tryingto get you to invade Ukraine.
You don't have to do it.
And they did it.
They did it, and they didn't doit in 2004 and 2005, they let
Orange Revolution burns itself.
And you know what would'vehappened to Zelensky?
And we'll get to Zelensky.
Your your number two pick.

(01:06:08):
I'm gonna get after that.
But you know what would've happenedif Zelensky didn't have a war?
He would've been the worstpresident of Ukraine probably ever.
He was unpopular.
He was incompetent.
He didn't know what the fuck he was doing.
And then.
Putin invades instead of letting Ukrainefall on its sword as it has in the past,
again, there is nobody, not even zelensky,more responsible for the success that

(01:06:32):
is Ukraine other than Vladimir Putin.
Well done, my friend.
Yeah, well done.
And

I, I think we should talk about Zelensky now too.
So I'm gonna give a brief defense.
Okay.
But I, but, but I do think I'm wrong.
So, and, and then you can take it after mybrief defense and, and tell me why there's
he, he doesn't belong on this list.
I will say two things for, for Mr.
Zelensky.
Number one is incrediblecourage and bravery.
What he did when the invasion startedwalking around the streets and like giving

(01:06:57):
the Ukrainian people a symbol that was notafraid and unbounded and pushing forward.
That was like, mostleaders would not do that.
That took a tremendous amount of courage.
And most leaders will never reach amoment in their career or never hope to
reach a moment in their career where theyhave to show off that kind of courage.
And they either have it or they don't.
And he has it, like there issomething inside of him that said,
I will resist, I will push back.
And it's admirable, and it's probablywhy I let myself be blinded a little bit

(01:07:19):
and put him at number two on my list.
The second thing I'll say, though,and again, this is a situation
that most leaders don't want tobe in, but when Putin invaded.
It wasn't just the bravery, it was, heunderstood the mistake that Putin made.
He called him on it.
He said, okay, fine, let's go.
You want to do this?
Like, we're gonna do this.
You just gave me the way out ofmy terrible presidency, and now

(01:07:41):
I'm gonna put Ukraine on themap for the next hundred years.
And, you know, there have beenfits and starts, and he's done some
wrong things since the war started.
But just, you know, as a wartimepresident, you can't really
ask for much of a better recordconsidering the cards that he held.
Now, I'm sure you're about totake him to town for everything
that happened before that.
And really, I, the reason I think weshould talk about him is because he's
a creation of Putin's incompetence.

(01:08:03):
He is not himself a leader whowould've scaled the heights and
done all these things on his own.
He needed somebody to make such amonumental error, um, like, you know,
trading, uh, uh, of, or, you know,passing on Chris Paul in the draft so
that we could get Marvin Williams withthe hawks or trading the pick that
became Luca Dridge to get Trey Young.
Like, you need that kind of mistakein order to get a Zelensky figure.

(01:08:24):
Oh my God.
So I know you're gonna take himdown, but, oh, I'm, I'm, but those
are my two things in his defense.
Go.
First of all,

first of all, first of all, every Russia apologist sycophant
of Vladimir Putin hates me right now.
And now every liberal westerner isgonna hate me too, and I love it.
The only thing, the only thing thatgives my cold, nihilist heart any
fucking passion, is your hatred.

(01:08:48):
So give it to me.
I couldn't care less.
So right now everybody who secretlyhas a poster of shirtless Putin and
there are many of you out there.
I know you, you hate me, right?
But now you're gonna, everybody else whoreads the Economist and thinks it's a
great publication is gonna hate me too.
Do you know what my comp is for Zelensky?

(01:09:11):
No, but I can't wait.
Jacob.
Jacob, it's Mack McClung.
You picked Mack McClung asnumber two in your draft.
Yeah.
You're telling me he's agreat wartime president.
That's like telling mehe knows how to dunk.
By the way, if you don't knowthis, because you're, I'm sorry.
We keep using basketball,we just can't help it.

(01:09:32):
We're degenerates.
But Mac McClung, God bless him, he'slike a five foot 10 white guy who's
won three dunk contests becausehe's a five foot 10 white guy.
But he doesn't play in the NBA.
He plays in the developmentleague 'cause he sucks.
And being an NBA player, okay, he's not,he's not actually capable of making one
of the 30 15 men rosters in the NBA andthat's who you pick for your number two.

(01:09:57):
This person is so specialized.
Yeah, he was a greatwartime, first of all.
I would, I would argue against that.
I think he was greatin the first 18 months.
We did this last time, sowe're not gonna go over it.
I think he's made some disastrousmoves over the last 18 months.
I think he's completely lost his space.
I think he's unrealistic and I thinkthat, uh, his cost Ukraine lives.

(01:10:19):
I think he's caused Ukraine territoryand more than that before the invasion.
There's a whole slew of things,including that he got suckered by
the US into believing he could get abetter deal than the mis minka courts
that the Europeans negotiated for him.
Well, guess what?
Millions of lives later,20% of territory later.

(01:10:39):
How do you like that?
How do you like them?
Apple?
So I think that Zelensky isgoing to go down in Ukrainian
history as a great leader.
And he deserves that.
Just like Mack McClung is gonnago into history as one of the
best NBA slam dunk champions.
And he also deserves that.
And I don't care 'cause itdoesn't make him a great leader.

(01:11:03):
So he's not in my top 30.

I don't know that.
I don't know that Ukraine exists if heisn't there or somebody like him, isn't

there?
So that's the, that's theother thing I kind of disagree.
I think a lot of people on their list,Jacob, have the temerity of Zelensky.
I think they do.
Not all of them, I agree.
But like sitting there and seeing thathe's a great leader because of a personal
equality that maybe 30% of humans have,you know, love of your country sacrifice.

(01:11:31):
You know, would, I don't know, likewould Georgia Maloney stayed fight?
Yeah.
Fuck.
I think she would've, I think shewould've looked Vladimir Putin straight
in the eye and said comment, bring it.
But I think she would'vealso known when to quit.
I think she would've alsoknown when to fault them.
When not to invade Russia withyour best troops to get trapped

(01:11:53):
and killed for no good reason.
And so, yeah, I do think that, um,the Western myth of Zelensky is like,
oh my God, nobody would've done that.
That comes out of the Western elites thatthey, they truly would not have done it.
'cause their kids go to private schoolsin Bethesda County and you know, they
are, they've never actually done anythingdangerous in their lives because they

(01:12:15):
don't come from a place where you haveto make decisions like that every day.
I think there's a slew ofleaders out there that do
come from places like Ukraine.
I come from one of thoseplaces and yeah, absolutely.
I don't see that, whathe did in that moment.
I think it's extraordinary.
So I don't wanna say it wasn'textraordinary, but I don't think that it
was as unique or surprising as I thinkit is in a western world where we haven't

(01:12:39):
had a serious conflict in 80 years.

I think this is great because you, uh, you, you sent me this
email, what was it last week or thisweek, where you said that I was a humble
elitist and that you're an arrogant manof the people and we're getting right to
this point right here, because I don'tthink that many people would do what
he did and risk their lives to do this.
And I think the, the Churchillcomparison with Zelensky is overwrought.
I think we're constantly looking forthe next Churchill because of the myth
of Churchill and things like that.

(01:13:03):
But.
But there is an element here becauseif you read the Manchester biographies
of Churchill, which are amazing, um,and you read the opening of the first
book, he basically does this prologuethat makes, like Churchill is the, is
the, the antimatter to Hitler that hehas many of the same characteristics.
He just uses them in favor of liberaldemocracy and is willing to do all

(01:13:27):
the things and let people die andall of the, you know, narcissism and
everything else that comes with it.
But that when you're in a warwith somebody like of Vladimir
Putin, like you need that kind ofessential quality to push back.
And I think in that way, likeZelensky, like he had that thing.
And I don't think that mostpeople have that thing.
Maybe Maloney, like maybe some of thetop fives on our list have that thing.

(01:13:49):
But like, you know, as we'regoing down our list, does Anthony
Albanese have that quality?
Does uh, you know, I, I'm sure PaulKagame does, but like as you're
going down the list, like, but,

but, but this is, but Jacob, this is why I don't wanna rank him high.
'cause I come from the third world.
I come from Serbia.
I'm Serbian fully except for quarterGerman, which makes it even more
likely that I will have this view.
Yeah.
Like when you come from that world,those situations are not that far off.
You, you meet them every timeyou walk to school as a sixth

(01:14:18):
grader, you meet those situations.
And so that's why two Apol.
And, and it's funny yousettled on Paul Kagame.
You were like, well, Paul Kagame has it.
You know what I, I alsothink Abi Ahmed has it.
Sure.
You know, I also think Ab FatSii has it, Provo Ibrahim.
There's a slew of people thatcome from the non-Western world
where there is volatility, thereis conflict, there's pain, there's

(01:14:43):
death, and you're surrounded with it.
And so it isn't as surprising, butwould it be surprising if, you know,
uh, Liz Truss stayed in Kyiv and fought?
Yeah, it would've been, itwould've been very surprising.
And that's why Western journalistsobsess about Zelensky because it makes
Westerners hearken to an era wherelike, men were men and women were women.

(01:15:07):
You know, it hearkens back to the idea,uh, to an era when, of that photograph
of that, of that Navy, Navy guy kissinga girl in Times Square as the war ends.
And so we look at Zelensky, we're like,oh my God, we haven't had that in decades.
Yeah.
But the rest of the world does.
And so I'm not gonna put him in the top30, you know, because he stayed and fought

(01:15:28):
for his country, because that happensevery day in a lot of places in the world.

Yeah, I'm, I'm, I'm, I agree with you that he
should not be in the top 10 andmaybe not even in the top 30.
I think I overindexed based on that.
Um, but I, I don't think that weshould, uh, I don't think that we
should downplay like the extentto which he was successful.
I'll turn your point about Serbia aroundon you, your, your Serbian friends who
are saying like, okay, you wouldn'thave these issues if Vch VCI hadn't done
some basic level of remediation here.

(01:15:55):
I don't think there's a Ukraineif there isn't somebody like
a Zelensky in power and Kyiv.
And it's not just the courage andbravery, it's also like the assessment
of, no, Putin can't do this.
Like, I can win this.
I will push the rightbuttons to push back.
And the Churchill comparison is alsoespecially apt because Churchill was
a fucking terrible prime minister assoon as the war was over, and they

(01:16:15):
got rid of him as quickly as possibleas soon as the gun stopped firing.
And I bet you the Ukrainians willget rid of him as soon as possible.
Like, they'll drive him to the airportand say, go, like, go like Dine Western
capitals, go make your TV shows again.
You did your job, but you are notfit to be a non-war time leader.
But the problem, but the questionthat, the question I wanna ask you
though is, and this is a really funone, is, so I know that neither,

(01:16:37):
uh, Putin or Zelensky are on yourlist, but on your list, who's higher?
Would you trade Putin for Zelensky?
Or would you trade Zelensky for Putin?

Yeah, I would think Zelensky.
Okay, cool.
I mean, I would take Putin over Zelensky ahundred times at a hundred times pre 2014.
Um, of course,

but today, but today you would take Zelensky over Putin.

Absolutely.
Yeah, absolutely.
Like no, there's no contents.
No contents.
Uh, Putin has a lot more to work with.
He has more resources.
He is, uh, he's the catalyst.
He has choice, he has agencyand he's using incorrectly.
But one thing I will say that if youare going to compare landscape with
Churchill, you know, one thing thatI would say is that, first of all,

(01:17:22):
Churchill was a terrible militarystrategist before World War ii.
I mean, he's, he's, he'sthe reason Gallipoli failed.

Uh, go, go, go check your history.
My cousin.
I, I, no, I think hegets a bad rap for that.
Okay.
And he's also responsible for lots ofdifferent advances and things like that.
So,

okay.
Well, that's fine.
I mean, yes.
Technological advancements, yes.
The tank and so on.
But what I would say is that inWorld War ii, he was really good.
That's where I was headed.
I, I think that if you're going to defendLansky's track record and say wartime
president, you can't then ignore the,the blunders of his strategy as well.
Mm-hmm.
And I think that that's where Ithink, um, that's why I would probably

(01:18:03):
have him top 30 if he had just keptmaking the right military moves.
But he hasn't, the offensive in2023 was way too, way too, uh,
aggressive, way too overbuild.
He didn't know what to start negotiating.
And then finally, I think the curseinvasion was just unnecessary.
So I do think that there's a lotof things that he's also done.

(01:18:25):
That don't make senseon the military level.
So not just politic.
Yeah.
Alright.
Well, we go to,

he, he's, he's, he's a standup comic, not a general, like,
Churchill spent his life readingabout strategy and things like
that, like Zelensky did not like.
And yeah, so

that, that's a, that's a very good point too.
Yeah.
Uh, I think, I think, uh, he hasmaximized his potential, just like Mac
McClung has thus great comp, great comp.
Um, by the way, your video is frozenfor me, but I hope mine isn't for you.
So I don't know what's going on, but like

No, it's not.
I'm fine.
I, and I'm recording herelocally, so we're good.
I'm sorry I'm frozen.

No, no, no.
It's okay.
Alright, so we gotta talkabout two, two big ones, right?
Two big ones, two guys that, uh,we're gonna keep Trump for the
end, uh, but let's do Xi Jinping.
So, you know, like Xi Jinping.
And by the way, please, uh, bring upsome other ones you wanna discuss.
But I wanted to talk about Xi Jinping.
You had him, uh, a very, uh,very high, you had it six.
I did not have him in top 30.

(01:19:20):
Uh, just like with VladimirPutin, I am disappointed, uh,
in some of his performance.
I think geopolitically, wedon't have to discuss it.
I think I, you know, we can probablyagree with a lot of geopolitical moves.
There's the wolf warrior diplomacy.
You brought up yourself in the firstpart of this series as, as an own goal.
Uh, I have two issues, which XiJinping, first and foremost, I think

(01:19:42):
in 2012 when he ascended to power, hedecided to wake up a sleeping giant,
a giant that was stuck in the morassand the sands of the Middle East.
I think he overly aggressivelypursued some of the national
security interests of China.
There is absolutely nothingthat China needs to do.

(01:20:02):
There's nothing inherentlynecessary in the South China Sea.
You don't have to start pushinginto the South China Sea in 2012.
You can wait until 2030.
Uh, the United States ofAmerica is today 2025.
It's July 9th, 2025.
The United States of America isspending its tax dollars on ensuring

(01:20:25):
the security of Chinese oil supply.
I mean, that's literallywhat's happening today.
The Fifth fleet in Bahrainis not securing my gasoline.
It's securing your gasoline Xi Jinping.
So you have actually not doneanything to improve that situation.
And by waking up the United States ofAmerica to the assertiveness of China,
I think that he accelerated the need tochallenge, uh, the United States too soon.

(01:20:49):
So that's the first issue.
I think that was, uh,that was unnecessary.
You know, the 2020s could have been thedecade where China wakes up America.
It didn't have to happen in 2010s.
Uh, the second thing I would say isthat China wasn't the path towards a lot
more entrepreneurship and innovation.
I mean, it has the wallops of it already.
So it's not like they're,you know, doing poorly.

(01:21:11):
I mean, obviously EVs, uh,there's a, there's a lot in the
financial sector where the paymenttechnology is much better than ours.
There's biotech.
Biotech.
Yes, biotech for sure.
Uh, so, but that could have been better.
Why tinker with the model?
Now?
Yes, there is income inequality.
I agree with that a hundred percent.
But do you improve income inequality bystifling innovation or do you improve

(01:21:36):
income inequality by creating, you know,things that a communist party should care
about, like a healthcare system, likea social security and pension system?
Those are the things that the stateis failing to provide in China.
It's, it's not, it's not entrepreneurshipand income inequality of the top.
That's the problem.
The problem is that the stateprovides very scant, uh, very

(01:22:01):
scant social welfare network.
And that's, by the way, theroot of many problems in China.
The reason that people buy so manycondos is because they expect to sell
them so that they can get dentures whenthey're older so that they can, you
know, heal themselves when they're older.
That's, that's theimbalance to this economy.
And quite frankly, this guy's beenin charge for 13 years and he has not

(01:22:21):
addressed that social, uh, welfarestate that's actually pretty poor Amer
uh, America and China in many ways.
Similar.
I mean, one of them is that theydon't rebalance income inequality
and, um, and they don't have.
The level of government spending onsocial welfare state that I think
an advanced economy would have.
So, um, I think that's another failure.

(01:22:43):
So those are my twoproblems with Xi Jinping.
I think he challenged theUS unnecessarily early.
Seems like an ego play quite frankly.
He ascend to power.
So China must then at thatmoment, challenged the us.
I thought that was unnecessary.
And then the second thing is,uh, he and his government have
talked about social welfare state.
They understand how important itis in reducing leverage to condos

(01:23:06):
in real estate, but they haven'tactually addressed it significantly.

Yeah.
Uh, you and I disagree on this andmaybe I have rose tinted glasses
when it comes to Xi Jinping.
This is the first thing I canthink of as cousins that we like.
We truly are on opposite sides of this.
Um, I think you're reading.
His embrace of Chinesenationalism in 2012 and 2013.
Wrong.
And I think you're underestimatingjust how bad the situation was
in China when he became leader.

(01:23:32):
Um, you had, you know, Deng Xiaopingeventually leaves the scene and then
you have by consensus these rulerswho are coming in every five years and
China's becoming fabulously wealthy,but it's also becoming even more corrupt
and it's becoming even more unequal.
And you get to the point where thefactions can't agree on who the next
consensus candidate is gonna be.
And they end up on the, themiddling person that everybody

(01:23:53):
can agree, okay, fine.
We'll do that because he doesn'tgive me everything that I want.
And they pick this guy Xi Jinping.
And I think when Xi Jinping comesinto power, he thinks that something
is fundamentally broken in China,and that if he does not fix things,
this system and the Communist Partyunderneath it is going to come apart
at the seams because the ideologicallegitimacy of the party is dead.
It was all gone.

(01:24:13):
It was all these corrupt parties with yourbogie lies and Lamborghinis everywhere,
and people hanging out in the coasthaving great parties and people in
the interior are less than $2 a day.
So like the ideology of communism.
Was dead and he needed to buy sometime to rebuild communism and rebuild
that sense of, so social equalityin the welfare state that you're
talking about, uh, while not havingpeople come at him with a knives.

(01:24:35):
So I think he started with this notionof Chinese nationalism and yes, starts
playing around with the South ChinaSea and Taiwan because communism is
nothing, it's bankrupt at this point.
And he needs to give the Chinesepeople something other than, Hey, like,
you know, the preternatural growthyou've had for the last 30 years,
it's not gonna happen for the next 30.
We can't deliver that to you.
So I have to give you, the statehas to give you something else

(01:24:57):
rather than the growth that you'vebecome accustomed to if you're gonna
continue to believe in the system.
And by the way, I've got all theselocal governments and these military
guys and these boje lies that arerunning around that have way too
much money and way too much power.
And if I don't do somethinghere, we're closer to warring
states than you might think.
So I think he takes thatfirst period of time.

(01:25:18):
Um.
To do that, to purge people, to get rid ofpeople, to reassert the Chinese Communist
Party and what it's supposed to stand forto get people accustomed to the idea that,
okay, like the last 30 years, the growthyou've seen, it's probably not gonna
be like that for the next generation.
I need you to buy into the state.
I need social stability.
I need you to think as the stateof the arbiter of equality.

(01:25:38):
And also I need you to have nationalpride in China as a national project
because obviously, and ironicallythe, you know, communism with Chinese
characteristics wasn't quite doing it.
If you go back to Xi Jinping'searly speeches, and he still
talks, talks like this.
He, he sounds like Ronald Reagan.
He talks about supply side reformand things that belong in like 1980s
western deregulation narratives thatare coming out of the president of

(01:26:01):
China when he's sort of first in power.
Now.
I think you're absolutely rightthat he went off the rails.
He, he went too early around 20 18, 19when he is doing wolf warrior stuff and
he is got the first Trump presidency.
I think he overestimated how strong hewas at that particular moment, and I think
it's actually a good sign of a leader whorecognizes a mistake and walks it back.
So that's the first thing I would say.

(01:26:22):
The second thing I would say is that.
For all your shade at, uh, thrown at theEconomist, you sound like somebody who
reads The Economist when you're fetchingabout China and its private markets.
Um, this is exactly the thingthat Xi Jinping diagnosed.
He's been talking about it since2015 and he's been trying to do it.
And doing it in a country like Chinawith a billion people with a sclerotic
authoritarian, Marxist communistsystem is really fucking hard.

(01:26:46):
So that's why he let the real estatebubble pop because he wants Chinese
people to do what the Indians are doing.
He wants them to go puttheir money in the market.
He wants them to trust the marketenough that they will do that rather
than buying the third or fourth condo.
And he hasn't been ableto pull it off quite yet.
He still doesn't have the averageChinese person trusting the
market the way that they want.
But the flip side of this is that heknows, as Deng Xiaoping knows after

(01:27:08):
Tianmen, if you give too much freedom, ifyou give too much openness, it will be a
challenge to the Chinese Communist Party.
So yes, we need to stimulate innovationand growth and all these other things,
but it also needs to be at the behestof the Chinese Communist Party.
So that's why in 20, I think it was21 or was it late 2020, I forget.
He gets the leaders ofthe major China tech.

(01:27:28):
Companies like your 10 cents andAlibabas and says, okay, you guys
need to make sure that X percent ofyour budget is going towards social.
We welfare in China and devoting moneyto things that actually make things
better for Chinese people and companieslike Tencent said, yes sir, Mr. Emperor.
And people like Jack Ma said, no sir.And look what happened to him and
look at what happened to the ant IPO.
He had to make an example of them justas he made an example of Bo and he made

(01:27:51):
an example of the real estate marketso that a couple years later he could
start to loosen the ties and say, okay,now you understand how serious I am.
You also understand that the UnitedStates is coming for us in the long run.
You need to alignyourselves with the state.
So I think it's unrealisticto suggest that China's gonna
replicate what worked in the West.
They have to have a version ofopenness and tech innovation
that also allows that Communistparty to maintain its power base.

(01:28:15):
And maybe it won't work.
Xi Jinping has not announced a successor.
He's getting old.
There's some weird stuff.
And then like he didn'tcome to the Brick Summit.
Like the biggest risk to him is like,what if he gets hit by a car tomorrow?
And there isn't a successor andhe hasn't been able to work out
some of these things in time.
But I just think in terms of degreeof difficulty, in terms of vision,
in terms of the scope and level ofthe challenges that he's gone after.

(01:28:36):
And he has every single rival he has.
He has either eliminated or evisceratedor put in a gulag somewhere, uh, and he is
hanging on the global stage and people arethinking better of China, uh, than they
are in some places of the United States.
Like all those things together, likeI see a leader who has done a very,
very good job and who was dealt a very,very bad hand, um, at the beginning.

(01:28:56):
So that's my defense of him.

Yeah, I mean, my con here is that I think you can do
anti-corruption drive, which I agree with.
I think that that was correct.
You know, that was genuine in the West.
A lot of people thought the Xi Jinpingwas just taking out rivals, but it was
genuinely an anti-corruption drive.
It wasn't just about the dragons,it was about the flies as well.
Right.
That was the kind offocus of the government.

(01:29:19):
I think it can be successfulwithout making the other own goals.
I think where we disagree is that yousee everything as sort of centrally
about the anti-corruption drive.
And so you're saying like, look, he neededto ramp up nationalism in order to also
pursue something that was good for China.
So I think we disagree on thatfor partly that's just fine.

(01:29:40):
But I don't, I I, I agree with youthat in 2012 going after corruption
in China was, was, uh, extraordinarilydifficult and he has for the
most part really been successful.
The part where I disagree alsois, uh, the supply side reforms.
You said he sounds like Reagan.
Um, I'm okay with him lettingthe real estate bubble pop.

(01:30:01):
I'm okay with some of his supplyside reforms that focused on dirty
industries and sort of antiquatedindustries that he's gone after.
My problem is that when he startedinterfering with private business in a
very haphazard way, so you mentioned,uh, going after tech entrepreneurs
fine, telling 10 cents to pay effecteffectively a higher corporate tax
rate is not what I'm talking about.

(01:30:21):
I'm talking about, youknow, Jack Muds appearing.
Mm-hmm.
I'm talking about waking up, wakingup on the wrong side of the bed
and saying like, you know what?
Computer games are anti-revolutionary.
Or like waking up on the wrong sideof the bed, ano a different day
and saying that, you know, tuitionprograms, uh, are anti-revolutionary.
And so it's that kind of like terskelter intervention in the private

(01:30:43):
sector and in the tech space that'snot very hands off Les Fairish.
And I think that, um, that'sthe one thing where again, he
didn't really have to do that.
You can.
Like, it's just notnecessary, you know, like No,

I, I think it, I think it is necessary if, if you're Xi Jinping
and you've been dealt the cards thatyou have, it absolutely is necessary.
Yes.
The video games are counter-revolutionary,and yes, you don't want the students
going to the universities tolearn about the rest of the world.
That's absolutely counter-revolution.
I know.
But then China, China gets introuble when the emperor doesn't
have control when the hills are high.
But yeah.
And the emperor's far away.

(01:31:18):
He needed control, but also neededto let China still innovate and grow.
And that's the weirdest thing about China.
It's become more authoritarian andyet more creative and more innovative.
And in our Western language,that's not supposed to happen.
He's not supposed to be able to dothe things that you're talking about
that make us both uncomfortable.
And yet China goes from strength tostrength when it comes to innovation

(01:31:38):
and technological development.
But I'm not sure that's what's happening.

But how do you know that it's going from strength to strength?
Like what are we comparing it to?
I mean, it's a counterfactual.

Look, look at their education system.
Look at the PhDs that they're minting.
Look at the patents that they're getting.
Look at their share of likebiotech startups and all
these other different things.
Okay, sure.
But they're, but they're alreadyoutclassing the United States on
these things with what they're doing.

I know, but like the economy is clearly sclerotic.
So like, uh, letting the realestate, uh, bubble pop has not been
replicated by another source of growth.
Right.
And so that's, that pivot did not happenbecause he has stifled the private sector.
He has stifled consum consumptionand letting the real estate bubble
pop was then complimented withvery antiquated ways of solving it.

(01:32:18):
So in other words, he didn'tlisten to Richard coup, he
didn't offset that decline.
It's very painful, de-leveraging.
Um, and some of the ways that you'redefending him suggest that it's like
good for him, but it's not, I'm notsure that it's really good for China.
I'm not sure that China's betteroff in 2025 than it would've been
with somebody who could both beanti-corruption and semi authoritarian.

(01:32:41):
Which, you know, like Ikind of agree with you.
It is to an extent relevant for China atthis point of development, but at the same
time could have done other things better,

you know?
Yeah, well

I, it's a semantic thing

and, but, but I wouldn't say that he stifled consumption.
I would say that the problem of multipleChinese leaders, including Xi Jinping,
is that the Chinese pension is notto consume for exactly the reasons
you think about political mistrust.
And you're right that he has not beenable to move them towards consumption.
I think part of the impulse aroundnational pride is to buy Chinese.
Like, I want you guys to consume more.
I don't want you to just buy condos.

(01:33:14):
And he has not been able to do that.
But I don't think he's stiflingsomething that was happening.
He has been trying to, to beatthe dead horse to do the thing
as have previous Chinese leaders.
And the Chinese people are justlike, uh, we were, remember
Mao, why would we do this?
We're gonna invest in thingsthat make more sense rather than
what you want us to invest in.
And this I think, also is a good, um.
It's a good comparison.
'cause let's think of our boy bouquet.

(01:33:34):
It's easier to put bouquet as numberone on my list because the scale of
what he's dealing with is so small.
Like El salvador's a That's a good point.
A really, really small country.
If you put now boule.
Yeah, yeah.
With one problem.
If you put bouquet in charge of Chinaand he tried to do that, how, how many
tens of millions would be dead and ingulags if you tried to do the same thing.

(01:33:55):
And Xi Jinping, and this is oneof the things that I think is so
interesting about him and historywill tell if it's positive or not.
Remember his father was purged byMao in the cultural revolution.
Like Xi Jinping's childhood was fucked upprecisely because he experienced maoism
at its height and he envisions himselfas a Mao or Deng xiaoping level leader.
But one who has to give China thatlevel of control without the chaos.

(01:34:18):
Because if he brings the Maoistchaos, he will, you know, self-defeat
everything that he's going.
So I would be the first to admitto you that yes, he has errors and
problems and unforced goals andall these other different things.
But again, I, I would just go backto the scale and the degree of
difficulty on the problem and what he'sbeen able to do in advance of that.
Like that to me, likegives me like, that's fair.

(01:34:38):
Some, like, if, if you put him incharge of the United States today,
he'd be like, this is, this is so easy.
What do you mean?
I get, I get to do all this stuff and Idon't have to worry about all these other
things like piece of cake, let's go.
Like, that's how I see him,

I think.
I think he does deserve a lot of credit.
For pivoting out of some problemshe created himself, unlike Vladimir
Putin who likes to triple down.
So, uh, you know, you mentioned that yes,he woke up the United States too early,
but he didn't like triple down on that.
No, so that's a good point.
I think he's, uh, pivoted out of theanti-corruption campaign when needed

(01:35:13):
pivoted out of zero COVID when needed.
He has the ability to calibrate, whichis a huge, huge quality that, um,
ironically a lot of leaders just don't,because they become overly ego driven.
You know, they can't,they can't change things.
Uh, so, uh, I think you've convincedme, I think he deserves a top 30 status.

(01:35:34):
You know, I, I will say that, andcertainly, certainly, um, when I left
him off my list, it wasn't because Isaw him as negative as Vladimir Putin.
I mean, in my view, VladimirPutin is in the bottom to 30%.
Uh, to me, v you know, Xi Jinping issomewhere in the top 60, 70, but you
know, I think you've made a good casefor why he should be in the top 30.

(01:35:55):
So that's, that's a veryfa uh, fair defense.
He ends up, where is he again?
On our, the updated list?
He ends up, uh, he's at 21.
I think.
I'm, I'm comfortable with that.
I think, uh, well don't lie.
And our advanced AI mathematics has puthim at 21st spot after you put him at six.
And I didn't have him, I think.

(01:36:16):
I think that's appropriate.

Um, well, and just, and just last thought on him before we
move to the, the elephant in the room.
President Trump.
Um, like I, I think that Xi Jinpingis also in Vladimir Putin territory.
Like this is a very, very dangerousperiod in his rule because it's
his interesting third term.
There's no successor like he's facing,like the walls are closing in a bit.
He's facing a United States that is notjust woken up, that is completely woken

(01:36:38):
up and is going after China meaningfully.
It's one of the only bipartisan issues.
And Xi Jinping has notannounced a successor.
Like there's, there's a very realsense, and he could make a strategic
error tomorrow and he could drop downthis list the way that Putin did.
Like if Xi Jinping ordered aninvasion of Taiwan, he would
fall to like 180 on this list.
If he dies tomorrow of a heart attackand he has not put in a system for

(01:37:00):
picking the next ruler, and you getfactional disagreements and maybe
even internal fighting in Chinaabout what's comes next, then he gets
like, put down this list as well.
So I think he's at a very dangerous momentwhere he's been leader for this long.
Maybe like the Kool-Aid isstarting to go to his head.
Maybe he's just getting old.
Who knows?
Like it's a very precariousposition for him.
But I do think, like based onwhat he's done so far, like he's,

(01:37:22):
it's a high degree of difficultyand, and he is done a good job.

The man is spring chicken, you know what I mean?
73 years old.
He is young.
72 man's.
72. He just turned 72.
My God.
What a world we live in.
Alright, let's go to the elephant.
The elephant in the room is Donald Trump.
Uh, I was shocked by thesurprising, uh, low number of.
Actually, nobody wrote inwith a problem with that.

(01:37:47):
Uh, one, uh, one, uh, listener saidthey were surprised that I didn't
have Donald Trump on the listbecause I've defended him on, uh, our
podcast probably more than you have.
Um, and so I'll just, I'll just kickoff why I did not put President Trump.
It's very, very difficult to gaugethe performance of a US president.
And the reason I say that, Iknow to a lot of you, it's very

(01:38:10):
easy because you just hate him.
And that's cool.
You know, have fun with that.
We have fun with that or love him.
Um, but the problem is that theUnited States of America is the
most powerful country in the world.
Like when we ranked countries,it's number one, it is really
difficult to gauge performance.
And the reason I say that is becausePresident Trump, you know, he's

(01:38:32):
very tough in negotiations and youget to do that when you are the
most powerful country in the world.
So, um, that's why it's very toughfor, for me, with any US president
to really gauge whether or notthey are doing a very good job.
Um, the other issue is that Ithink that President Trump quite

(01:38:53):
often identifies issues like hingeissues that need to be fixed.
I think he's very, very good at that, andI would give him a lot of credit on that.
But the problem is thathe then uses rhetoric.
That makes it more difficult to solvethat problem in the domestic political
context because he's not Xi Jinping.

(01:39:15):
He's not Vladimir Putin.
He doesn't run a country where he can justuse executive orders to change the world.
He does need to go through Congress.
And so you are often sitting there andyou're like, wow, you really identified
an issue that needs to be solved.
Well done.
But why did you say it like that?
That's unnecessary.
So I think that his governance styleoften makes it more difficult for

(01:39:37):
him to get things through Congress.
And by the way, he's got about 12months left until we got the midterms
and he loses the house, which he will.
And at that point, what happens?
I mean, everything is gonna grind to halt.
He's not gonna get anything done.
So for like, to me, immigration reformis a clear thing that needs to happen.
That is something that he needs to do.

(01:39:58):
I'm not sure if that's gonna happengiven the way that he has gone about
enforcing immigration policy right now.
So, uh, I think that his rhetorical, uh,style is not very conducive to compromise.
Um, and, and ultimately compromiseis what's needed, even if his end
goals are far more moderate thanhis critics actually accuse him of.

(01:40:21):
So those are my two problems.
I, I don't know how to gauge Presidentof the United States of America
who has awesome power before them.
They can wield incredible power.
It's difficult to gauge any USPresident, not just Donald Trump.
How, how would Barack Obama.
Deal with being a president ofEl Salvador, you know, how would

(01:40:42):
Donald Trump deal with beingthe prime minister of Italy?
How would, how would that work?
I'm not sure.
It's difficult to say, and I'm notsure that his style would work in
a mid power or another country.
So if I am, uh, you know, picking thenext leader for Belgium, would I pick

(01:41:02):
Donald Trump over Georgia Maloney?
The answer is just, no.
No, because I don't know if he can,if he has the range to be a leader
of a smaller, less powerful country.
And then the second thing is, I thinkhis, his heart, that his brain are often
in the right place, actually, and this iswhere I disagree with most of his critics.
The problem is that his executionand the rhetoric leaves a
lot of things, uh, desired.

Yeah.
So a a few things for me, if I'mbeing honest with myself, and if I'm
looking at my list, um, I feel prettycomfortable with him not being on
the list until I start getting downto like pro boho and Aliev and ce.
And there's a part of me that says,you know what, maybe he slots in there
because everybody above that know Iwould trade Trump for in a heartbeat.

(01:41:45):
Uh, but you start getting to some of thoselower names on my list, like Paul Kagame.
I think I'd rather have DonaldTrump as president of the United
States than Paul Kagame or AbbiAhmad or some of these others.
Like, so, so maybe I need this to bea little nicer to Trump on the list.

But those are, those are overflow candidates.
Let's just be very clear.
Those are 30 to 44, so, you know.
Yeah.
So it's, it's, it's.
Yeah, he's in Downage.
I agree.
Yeah.

But, um, I, I think there are four main points that
I would make for why I, I didn'thave him on my list when I did it.
The first is, and there might besome others on this list who are
guilty of this, but he's guiltyof it more than any of them.
The dude was born with moneyand influence, and that
makes a big difference.
Like Xi Jinping, who we, he who we werejust talking about, I mean, he had to
reli rehabilitate himself in the contextof Maoism to ascend political circles.

(01:42:27):
Donald Trump was born withbillions in his mouth.
He was born with a silver spoon.
Uh, I could become, I think, asuccessful politician if I had
billions of dollars in my backpocket, and I think most people could.
So, like, I think that thatmeaningfully like matters.
And if you're thinking aboutpolitician, like politics is a skill.
If you've already got the money, ifyou don't have to worry about it,
like it, it makes it easier to do it.
The second is, and, and you sortof touched on this, Trump, um, he

(01:42:51):
has incredible instincts for power.
Like he understands power instinctually,he understands where to put leverage.
You know, the Mr.
Dealmaker in chief, all theseother things, like, he's
very, very good at that.
He is just as bad at strategy as heis good at instinctual sense of power.
If the guy ever cracked open a bookand learned anything, maybe he'd
be one of the best statesmen of alltime because he is got instincts,

(01:43:14):
but he has no sense of strategy.
He does not think about the future at all.
Everything is, how does this feel?
Now?
What do I think about this now?
Why is this happening now?
I'm gonna tweet this.
I'm gonna think about this.
It's all raw instincts and it's a sourceof some strength for him, but he has
shown zero capacity to think long term.
And I don't think you get on this listif you can't like, you know, open a
strategy book, or if you can't sit througha briefing or if pop up pictures in the

(01:43:37):
briefing, like, you know, yeah, go ahead.

So I, I know you have two more.
That's perfectly fine.
I just wanna piggyback on this andsay, but that's why I say I'm not
sure he would be good with amid toyour power, like Belgium or Malaysia.
My, my concern with him is that you getaway with a lot of shit because you're
the president of United States America.
If you wanna tweet at somebody, youknow, if you, if you want to tell

(01:44:00):
Iran and Israel, they don't knowwhat the fuck they're doing, you
get to do that because you're thepresident of the United States America.
So when you say like, he sometimesthis instinctual gut feeling to
act brashly works in his favor.
I hundred percent agree with you.
A lot of the Trump fans say that he iswho he is and that's why he's effective.

(01:44:23):
I agree.
I don't disagree.
I just don't think it wouldwork with any other country
other than the United States.
Maybe, maybe Russia,maybe India, maybe China.
But like, you know, if I'm sittinghere trying to like, pick, trade,
my leader of South Korea, andby the way, do they need that?
You know, if I'm south, if I'm, if I'mthe general manager of South Korea,

(01:44:45):
I trying to pick my next leader.
Like, I just, I can't pick Trump, no way.
He's gonna say something stupidand then I don't have 11 aircraft
carriers with which to say, what,what are you gonna do about it?
Yeah.
My leader called you fat.
You know, like, you can't,you just can't do that.
Go ahead.
Sorry.

Yeah, I, I, I, I think the jury's still out on the,
on the New South Korean leader.
We can talk about that later.
Um, but yeah, I agree with that andI'll sort of get to that in a second.
The third thing though, um, andI, I'm not saying, I hope, I'm
not saying this pejoratively.
I think this is just objectively true.
I mean, we, we went, after BenjaminNacho met, we went after Benjamin
Netanyahu for this, Trump is allvanity and all narcissism, and he's

(01:45:25):
using the office to enrich himself.
Look at all these cryptoprojects that he's announcing.
Like he fundamentally does notgive a crap about anyone but
himself and the Trump name.
Well, wait a minute.
Wait a minute.
No.
Wait a minute.
Shake.
Okay.
You wanna defend him?
Fine.
I think, I think it's fairly clearthat that's, that, that's true.
Please.
I'll just,

I will just throw back at you what you said to me
when I accused Lola being corrupt.
Aren't they all corrupt?
Jacob?

Uh.
They are all corrupt.
But I didn't say that.
Yes, they're all corrupt.
But I didn't go at, I didn'tgo at him for being corrupt.
I went at him for beingvain and narcissistic.
I think there is no part of him thatactually cares about the nation.
I think it's all Trump.
Trump, Trump.
He would, he would change it to the UnitedStates of Trump if he possibly could.
Lula corrupt all theseother different things.
Cares deeply about Brazil and thefuture of Brazil, and has hitched

(01:46:15):
his wagon and his changes to Brazilrising up and being this Trump.
No way.
Like all this stuff with the cryptocoins and the Trump tokens, and I'm
having the dinners and I'm not gonnaput my assets in a blind trust like
every single other president before me.
It's all about enriching.
I wanna build Trump Tower andGaza and Trump Tower and Serbia.
Like, come on.
But

can't you, well, first of all, Trump Tower in Serbia will
be amazing because I'm sure it'sgonna be built on the burnt out,
uh, husk of the defense ministry.
So that needs to happen.
Please, Jared, don't back out of that.
Please build it.
But look, what I would say to youis, uh, on that point, I don't
know if it's exclusive, can yoube narcissistic in vain and also

(01:46:56):
think at least that what you're doing isin interest of the United States America?

You can, I don't think that's him.
I think that was, I think that was LBJ.
I don't think that's Trump, when I,what I'm saying is I really don't think
he gives a shit about this country.

Hmm.

I don't think he gives a shit about the community that he's in.
I think he gives a shit about himself.

I think on some level.

That to me just like disqualifies him from the list
because everybody on this list, eventhe Netanyahu's, have some sense
of their country's national future.
And this goes back to theinstinctual comment that I made.
I don't think he thinks long term.
I don't think he thinks strategically.
I think he thinks aboutwhat's good for me now.
And about using power inorder to get those things.
And if he could put those tools inservice of a higher strategy, like he

(01:47:40):
would be incredibly potent and competent.
But he hasn't done that.
And that gets to the lastpoint, which you already sort of
said, but I'll just repeat it.
It's so easy to be the president ofthe United States compared to every
other country that we've talked about.
The United States is the mostgeopolitically blessed country in
the history of human civilization.
We've got the energy, we've got thepeople, we've got the geography.
We're separated from enemies.
We're not surrounded by anybody else.

(01:48:01):
Like, and he doesn't have tobe there when the, when the
wars are actually being fought.
He's sitting on a military that spends,you know, 10 times or, uh, the, you
know, the next 10 countries combinetheir military budgets aligned with the
military budget of the United States.
Right now it's super easy.
And in his first term, hehad some huge missteps.
Like he basically had a Bay of Pigslight with Venezuela, uh, COVI.

(01:48:22):
And the lockdowns happenedunder this dude's watch.
Like, don't forget thatRepublicans, like he was the one
controlling the levers at the time.
And he was the one who like, okay,yeah, he insulted Fauci a bunch.
Did he do anything about it?

Well, I mean, uh, you know, I think COVID is both his best and worst.
I mean, operational war warp, warp speed.

Warp speed is his best.
But his response to COVID some of hisworst, well, the way that he's bitching
at the Federal Reserve, lower interestrates 300, like, I mean, you start
going through the stuff like, it's just,

well, here's what I would say.
Le let, let me, let me try to likeencapsulate what you're actually saying.
You know, I think that in a way,his instincts, his brashness,
his creativity, his bullying.
All of those things are why I thinkTrump's foreign policy is actually
much better than people think.
Like the way he handled the IsraelIran thing was, was really good.

(01:49:12):
I mean, you know, Israel wagged thedog, the tail being America, so he
had to kind of go along with it.
But he finished it, hefinished it quickly.
Uh, and you've got the Iranianpresident on Tucker Carlson for 30
minutes, basically sucking up to Trump.
And I don't know if youwatched it, please do.
Incredible, 30 minutes of television.

(01:49:32):
The president of Iran, after being justspanked by the United States of America,
is basically like glowingly suckingup to the United States President.
So, so here's what I wanna say.
I've always said this, I think WorldWar III is far less likely with Donald
Trump as president than Kamala Harris.
That's just my objective.

(01:49:53):
You know, we can have a whole hourfor why, but one of the reasons, you
know, one of the reasons, and, and bythe way, that's like important, right?
Like, like I think, you know, and,and, and one of the reasons is
that, yeah, he's, uh, kind of anasshole in many ways, but, but in
a way that limits further conflict.
He's a moral, and that really works wellwith geopolitics and foreign policy when

(01:50:18):
you are the leader of the best country,

when you're the leader of the most powerful country.

Exactly.
So you and I cannot give him creditfor his instinct, his abilities.
Because he's the leader of America.
But we have to criticize his predecessorswho did not do that, who were too
immoral and preachy and didn't know howto pivot out of difficult corners like
Israel, Iran tensions, which I thinkPresident Trump did not give anywhere near

(01:50:45):
enough credit for how he handled that.
That was masterful fuckingmasterclass of game theory.
And so that's where we can't givehim credit because like, well, he's
the leader of the best country.
And it's like, yeah, but otherleaders have done much worse.
But again, we can't put him onthe list of top 30 because who
cares if he's predecessors?

(01:51:06):
Were morons.
So that's the first thing.
Whereas, whereas where I dis whereI disagree with you is when you
say, being a president of the UnitedStates of America is very easy.
Yes.
And foreign, a policy side, all youneed to do is not be a moron who wants
to triple down on normative issues.
Like, stop it.
It's not 1993.
No, you president of theUnited States of America.
It's a multipolar world.

(01:51:27):
You kind of have to be a, uh, asshole.
So that's true on the foreign policy,but on the domestic side, it is
actually difficult to be a presidentof the United States of America.
It's not maybe as difficult asyou made Xi Jinping's job in
2012, great defense of Xi Jinping.
It's not as difficult perhaps as Brazilianpolitics, but it is really difficult.
And you have, you, you yourself,you've made a comparison that you

(01:51:49):
and I came from independent sidesand we've done the same thing to
clients comparing Brazil and America.
It's complicated.
It's difficult.
Being a prime minister ofCanada is far more easier.
Why?
Because Prime Minister ofCanada is an elected king.
Prime minister of any parliamentarydemocracy is a king for four years.
You know, you can dowhatever the fuck you want.
You've got parliamentary majorityor a coalition you good in

(01:52:13):
the United States of America.
It's very complicated.
And that is where his brashness and his,uh, you know, short-termism as you put it.
But I would say just like being led byhis own gut and instinct, it, it kind of
falls on its head because domesticallyit's not easy to be a president.
You need to be more nuanced.
You need to build coalitions.
And I think that quite oftenhe sees a potential solution

(01:52:36):
and then he doesn't get to it.
Because in the domestic arena, it'snot as easy as just saying, Israel and
Iran, dunno what the fuck they're doing.
You know, you can't just be thedad that shows up in the room,
says, who started the fight?
I don't care.
You smack both kids and go backdownstairs to reading your newspaper.
Like you cannot actually justdo that on the domestic front.
So that's where I would say, youknow, the qualities Trump have has,

(01:53:01):
we can't give him credit for it onthe geopolitical side, but on the
domestic side, they don't actually work.

No, I don't think they work at all.
And I think his thin skin, he's hisown worst enemy when it comes to these
things because he'll have an idea thatmight be good, but then somebody tweets
something at him and he completelydoes a 180 because he doesn't like
being insulted or something like that.
Like the top the, the Trumpalways chickens out thing.
Like there's a real aspect to that.
I also, you know, you and I have talkedabout the one big beautiful bill a couple
times now, you know, I'm slowly workingmy way through the thousand pages, but

(01:53:31):
it looks like a massive own goal to me.
The, the federal Medicaid cutsas a percentage of total Medicaid
spending are nearly doublewhat Reagan did in 81 and 82.
You

still think

it's

stimulative?

I do still think it's stimulative.
We can get to that in a second, butI'm just saying like, how does it
make political sense to cut Medicaid?
Like, like the percentage of Medicaidspending by almost 10%, almost double
what Ronald, what Ronald Reagan did.
All you're gonna do is close downrural hospitals and lead the people who
voted for you most passionately to die.
Like, I don't see any othersort of outcome of that.

(01:54:04):
Or look at like, you know, the cuttingto, to snap and things like that.
Giving ice a budget equivalent toItaly's military while you're also
cutting these Medicaid things.
Like what?
Well,

that whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
That could be Georgia Maloney's fault.
You know what I mean?

Well, I'm I'm just saying it's, it's also roughly
the budget that Israel has.
So Israel, Israel did pretty good.

Look, the, the one big beautiful bill, let's
just be very clear here.
If Kamala Harris had gotten electedas president, she would've paid, she
would've had to pass something as well.
Sure.
There is absolutely, there'sno, there's no way that we
would've let 2017 tax cut expire.
That's just a fact.
And so, you know, Kamala Harrisor Donald Trump, they would've

(01:54:48):
both had to put all sorts of bellsand whistles to get it passed.
And it is what it is.
But, uh, but yeah, I mean, I, I, I don'tdisagree you on, but No, it's, it's,

it's, it's just, it's like the policy errors.
Like, so you're gonna cut.
And, and I don't mean this,like, I, I hope listeners are not
thinking that I've been overtakenby Trump derangement system.
This is actually, like, literally,I don't understand what the
political logic of this is.
I don't understand how it makes politicalsense to cut something like Medicaid, but
then to do like Trump accounts, you'regonna give a thousand dollars to every
kid that's born in 2025 and on and beyond.

(01:55:17):
I think you should retroactive that to2022 when my first daughter was born.
Um, and, and you're gonna, you'regonna drive immigration down.
Like, I don't know if you've seenthe migration numbers at the border.
Oh yeah, yeah.
They tanked their record lows,which on the one hand, good
job dealing with the crisis.
On the other hand, we alsoneed immigration in the country
from a growth perspective.
So if immigration is going to zero'cause you've cracked down too hard,
like that's gonna show up in growth.

(01:55:39):
Well, this is where.

This word, I just

like, I'm having trouble making all these things make sense.
And like if I'm trying to evaluate himas a domestic political leader Yeah.
I'm looking at it and I'm like, Idon't, and maybe, maybe he's a genius.
Maybe in two years I'll be herebeing like, I'm sorry, I didn't
see the genius, but I see it.
I'm like, this is messed up.
I don't understand like, politically,how this is good for you for the
United States, for the Republicans.
I don't get it.

You know?
Um, where I will defend him is that Ithink his gut usually leads him into the
right decision in the long term becauseconstraints move him into that move.
Mm-hmm.
But, you know, so for example,U-S-M-C-A is a great free trade deal.
Like he started off negotiations,braley with some idiotic ideas.

(01:56:23):
None of that got implemented.
The, the deal that got made was awesome.
Like Hillary Clinton would've lovedto make a deal like that, right?
So Donald Trump got done somethingdone that, if you remember, of the C
ffr or if you're an economist at theIMF, you're like, wow, I, I like that.
That was awesome.
But he could have just gone to it maybeearlier had he just like, as you said,

(01:56:47):
read a strategy piece, you know, orlike, you know, listen to so-called
experts, quote unquote, and I shiton experts all the time, especially
American Learn elites, like, yeah,sure many of them are morons, but like,
some of this stuff is pretty normal.
So it's pretty obvious.
Like, you don't, youdon't need to be like.
Member of some elitist cabal to figure outhow to get a deal with Mexico and Canada.

(01:57:08):
So what I would say to you is like,I, I think one of the problems is
that, that, you know, his pension forkind of rediscovering sliced bread,
right?
So, so like, so on one handI think, I think people who
criticize him, who do have Trumpderangement syndrome just hate him.
And then when he does something, whenhe does something good, they attack it.

(01:57:31):
For example, I think it's absolutelyinsane that you've got a bunch
of liberals who would not havewanted to attack Iran now saying,
well, you didn't finish the job.
It's like, bro, what do you want?
You want him to go into a foreverwar and find more uranium to bomb?
Like what are you talking about?
You know, relax.
That was perfectly well executed attackon nuclear facilities and it's sufficient.

(01:57:51):
Shut up.
So on one hand there's that criticismthat everything he does is wrong, but on
the other hand, the criticism is reallythat the endpoint, the, the concluded
negotiations, the U-S-M-C-A, the phaseone, these trade deals we're gonna get.
Like, did it really require the wholeentire like volatility of policy

(01:58:15):
just so that you, Mr. President canfigure out that what was obvious on
day one is obvious on day 300, right?
So that's where I would say that someof that volatility is just unnecessary.
And, and that's where the domesticpolitics gets really messy.
Uh, the other issue is immigration.
I mean, like we did a wholeepisode, Jacob on immigration.
And, and my conclusion of that was like,look, let's be very clear, Donald, like

(01:58:39):
fans of Donald Trump, have to explain whywas it that he s cuddled in immigration
deal, the Republicans and the Joe Bidenadministration painstakingly produced.
He comes in and says, please don'tpass this deal to his Republican
friends so that he can use itas an election, you know, issue.
This happened in early 2024.
Look it up.
Donald Trump, right?
Says to senators, uh, Republicansenators don't pass this bill.

(01:59:01):
And then now we've got thesituation where he is the president.
He's got full control of Congress.
I, okay, fine.
You know what?
You wanted to win the election.
I, I can abide by that.
God bless you.
You know, you delayedimmigration reform by 18 months.
Who cares?
You're all well done.
But now that you are a president,like you have control of Congress, why
not pass your own immigration reform?

(01:59:22):
Why not do it?
You know what?
You can't find eight democratic senators.
Just, I don't know, pay them withsome pork or basically give them some
work visa programs for their state.
I don't know, but it seemsreally interest, like that's,
that seems like an own goal.
Instead, there's this added pressuredomestically, you know, like talking
about, uh, arresting the mayor ofa city because they're doing this

(01:59:45):
or that, you know, there's streetbattles between ice and so on.
Like, although that's obviouslyoverstated by the media, but that's
a good example of that domesticpolicy that that is unnecessarily
aggressive and, uh, as circumstantial.

Yeah.
And, and just to say like, I don'tthrow the baby out with the bath water.
Like I know I, I, I got a littlehot there, but I, I am saying like,
I do think he probably belongsat the bottom edge of my list.
So he probably belongs, like inthe, in the low thirties or maybe
he should have even cracked my list.
And he has done things like, I'm notone of these people who can't notice
when he does things that are good.
Like operation warp speedwas absolutely incredible.

(02:00:21):
I don't think he gets near enoughcredit for what he did with Operation

Speed.
No, he gets no credit.

He gets no credit for it.
No credit in the one, inthe one big beautiful bill.
This idea that you're gonna give athousand dollars to every kid that is
born between now and 2028 to have a nestegg so that they have, you know, that's
provided by the federal government.
Sounds great.
We should have been doingthis a long time ago.
That's something the Dems have beentalking about for years, and he's
the one that actually got it done.
Like, cool.
There's some stuff in thisbill that I'm like right on.

(02:00:45):
But it's, yeah, but come on,

come on.
We all know, we all know $800 ofthat thousand is going in like
his crypto plays though, right?
So like, come on.
Well,

you know, that, that goes back to my other point, but I'm
just saying like, he has these, hehas these like things that make you,
but then when you put together the sumtotal, I think you're exactly right.
Like, could you have gotten theU-S-M-C-A with all this nonsense?
Could you have gotten better tradedeals without ruining the relationship
with Japan and South Korea, whichhe's in the middle of doing.
Like one of, I think one of the only realforeign policy successes of the Biden

(02:01:12):
administration was really strengtheningthe trilateral between Japan, South
Korea, the United States that's gone now.
He's just like jettisoned them and turnedJapan and South Korea along with the
Europeans against the United States, butfor generations to come because virus
treating was that really necessary.
Like I.

Look what I would say, what I would say about this is, uh,
you know, it's what I feared the mostis that there are about five things
that President Trump has done thatare maybe like top 20 things that any
president has done in the last 150 years.
Like, that's how transformativehe can be on occasion.

(02:01:52):
And foreign policy is, is one of them.
But I fear that because of thedivisiveness and the rhetoric, the next
president of the United States of Americawho's a Democrat, will abandon those,
even if they're good for America, justpurely out of Trump derangement syndrome.
And you saw that with theBiden administration as well.
They kept some things like, you know, theChina focus, uh, but on the other fronts,

(02:02:16):
they categorically abandoned many ofthe things that Trump did that were not
completely insane or that were actuallyvery good, just like Trump abandoned
things that Obama did just 'cause theywere Obamas, you know, and that's petty.
But that's what happens when you'redivisive and when you, um, induce

(02:02:36):
derangement syndrome in people.
And you can blame liberals forhaving Trump derangement syndrome
if you're conservative, fine.
But it's also being induced by,uh, almost like this mean trolling.
And that's, you know, I thinkTrump defenders would say, well,
you need to have a character likethat to be truly revolutionary.

(02:02:56):
And I'm not sure that's the case.
I think there's leaders onour list who are revolutionary
and they're not divisive.
Yeah.
And they're in the top five and they'rein the top five of our list, by the way.
And that's why they're there.

It was Shelby Foote who said The Great American
art is is compromised andthere's none of that in him.
I guess the last thought I'll justsay here, and, and this goes back
to my questions about the one bigbeautiful bill and specifically the
Medicaid cuts and things like that.
Like, I wonder when we're lookingback if, um, you know, sometimes I,
I compare Trump to, is he Huey Long?
Is he LBJ?
But recently I've been thinking maybehe's Coolidge or Hoover, like maybe he's

(02:03:31):
just late stage in an economic cyclegoverning a country where inequality
is increasing and he's sort of doingthe things that the, the wealthy
class wants and things like that.
But like when you start cutting Medicaidby this much and you start cutting these
entitlement benefits by this much, evenif people think that they want that, once
they start experiencing that, they'reprobably gonna turn on the system and

(02:03:53):
they're probably gonna say, okay, wellthe system is not working for me anymore.
And I think this, I think you see this inthat Steve Bann and an A OC are basically
both saying you need to raise taxes.
So the fringes of bothparties are starting to say,
Hey guys, the party is up.
Let's go.
You know, there's Elon Musk outthere with the third party as well.
So, I mean, we talked aboutlegacy for some of these leaders.
I think that's another problem for Trump.

(02:04:14):
Now, maybe I'm wrong about the impactof some of the things that he's pushing
through, but some of the things thathe's pushed through domestically to
me seem like unforced errors and seemsto me like they're gonna set up both
the Republican party and his legacy.
For, for not, not having historianstreat them so kindly, but, but maybe
I'm wrong, but yeah, I don't know.
That's another,

I mean, it would be, yeah, it would be very fitting if
Donald Trump brought us a OC in 2028.
So there you go.
Uh,

alright, well I don't think he's gonna do that, but, uh,

alright, well listen, uh, this is over two hours now.
I think that, uh, we shoulddefinitely put a stop, uh, on stop.
Okay.
Yeah.
Um, alright, cool.
Well that's, that's, uh, the 2020.
Wait, wait, wait.
We,

we, we have to answer one more question, Marco.
'cause I said I, I think Trumpprobably belongs in my low thirties
or maybe even top twenties.
Do you have him anywhere close?
Like where was he on yourlist before you close it out?

Yeah, I think he stopped 50,

top 50.

I mean, he's not, he's like, again, like anyone who complains
about their favorite leader being35th, remember there's like a hundred,
190 plus countries in the world.
So, yeah, I don't think he's in the, thesecond half of countries on the planet.
Um, so yeah, he belongs probablysomewhere in the top 50.

(02:05:25):
last word I'm gonna say iswe should do this every year.
We should publish this,um, as a joint list.
The, the top 44 leaders, well, we'll callit top 30 and we'll see how many make
it, but uh, this is our 2025 edition.
So Mexico, you won.
Well done Italy, you came in second place.
Well done as well.

(02:05:46):
Uh, yeah, like 12 months from nowwe'll see where we are and we'll see
whi which were our biggest misses.
So that I think, uh, I'mreally looking forward to that.

Yeah, it's gonna be fun.
All right.
Cheers, dude.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

.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;}Realpolitik with Range (Trade Value Leaders Index P2)

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

All Episodes

Realpolitik with Range (Trade Value Leaders Index P2)

24/7 News: The Latest