WEBVTT - Does Nate Trust His Model? Debates, Prediction Markets and Poker

0:00:15.604 --> 0:00:28.724
<v Speaker 1>Pushkin. Welcome back to Risky Business, our show about making

0:00:28.724 --> 0:00:31.324
<v Speaker 1>better decisions. I'm Maria Kanikova.

0:00:31.164 --> 0:00:32.204
<v Speaker 2>And I'm Nate Silver.

0:00:32.804 --> 0:00:35.404
<v Speaker 1>So today, Yeah, Nate, I.

0:00:35.324 --> 0:00:37.124
<v Speaker 2>Think I think so much better at the intros, in

0:00:37.164 --> 0:00:39.844
<v Speaker 2>the positions, and now we're reverting me. It's been a

0:00:39.884 --> 0:00:42.204
<v Speaker 2>couple of weeks since we've had like a normal episode.

0:00:42.324 --> 0:00:45.524
<v Speaker 1>That's true, it's true. It's good to see you. You

0:00:45.564 --> 0:00:46.964
<v Speaker 1>are in Jackson Hole.

0:00:47.044 --> 0:00:51.084
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, Jackson Hole, Wyoming, a very you know, God's country

0:00:51.124 --> 0:00:54.364
<v Speaker 2>as they might call it, and that is very pretty.

0:00:54.284 --> 0:00:57.524
<v Speaker 1>Yes, and so it's actually quite appropriate. I'm back in

0:00:57.524 --> 0:01:01.924
<v Speaker 1>New York City, So we're in two different parts of

0:01:01.964 --> 0:01:05.924
<v Speaker 1>the country to discuss something that hopefully will help unite

0:01:05.924 --> 0:01:08.564
<v Speaker 1>those different parts of the country, the presidential debate from

0:01:08.724 --> 0:01:12.244
<v Speaker 1>last night. So we are recording this the morning of Wednesday,

0:01:12.284 --> 0:01:16.444
<v Speaker 1>September eleventh. So last night you and I both were

0:01:17.324 --> 0:01:20.484
<v Speaker 1>listening to the debate from our respective different parts of

0:01:20.524 --> 0:01:23.964
<v Speaker 1>the country, and Kamala Harris tried to make her appeal

0:01:24.004 --> 0:01:26.804
<v Speaker 1>to both of us, right to all Americans all over

0:01:26.844 --> 0:01:28.364
<v Speaker 1>the country. So what'd you think, Nate.

0:01:29.564 --> 0:01:31.764
<v Speaker 2>You know, I'm here in Teaton County. Well, actually it's

0:01:31.764 --> 0:01:33.804
<v Speaker 2>the one blue County in all of Wyoming.

0:01:35.324 --> 0:01:37.924
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I love your voices. I love your voice.

0:01:38.244 --> 0:01:41.084
<v Speaker 2>I thought Kamala Harris had an excellent debate, or maybe

0:01:41.324 --> 0:01:45.484
<v Speaker 2>maybe I think subtly more that former President Trump had

0:01:45.484 --> 0:01:50.724
<v Speaker 2>a really bad debate, playing into basically every critique that

0:01:50.764 --> 0:01:55.524
<v Speaker 2>you might have of Donald Trump, the fact that repeatedly

0:01:55.604 --> 0:01:59.564
<v Speaker 2>she was able to tease them about his rally crowd

0:01:59.604 --> 0:02:02.284
<v Speaker 2>sizes and things like that, and how foreign leaders don't

0:02:02.284 --> 0:02:05.044
<v Speaker 2>really respect him, and every single time he took the

0:02:05.084 --> 0:02:07.684
<v Speaker 2>bait and got distracted and had these long two minute

0:02:07.684 --> 0:02:11.844
<v Speaker 2>segments with no mics off, no interruption, and would spend

0:02:11.884 --> 0:02:15.964
<v Speaker 2>the first minute complaining about whatever Kamala said, and then

0:02:16.004 --> 0:02:18.004
<v Speaker 2>the next thirty seconds with a coherent point, and then

0:02:18.084 --> 0:02:21.244
<v Speaker 2>veering off in some other random direction for another thirty seconds.

0:02:21.564 --> 0:02:25.924
<v Speaker 2>A lot of talk about things like a reference to

0:02:26.004 --> 0:02:28.284
<v Speaker 2>if you're not really into politics, this will sound bizarre

0:02:28.324 --> 0:02:31.204
<v Speaker 2>because it is, but Haitian immigrants, oh.

0:02:31.044 --> 0:02:32.124
<v Speaker 1>My god, yes, in.

0:02:32.124 --> 0:02:37.724
<v Speaker 2>Ohio killing dogs and cats, you know, talking about Sean

0:02:37.764 --> 0:02:40.604
<v Speaker 2>Hanny and Laura Ingram and like just kind of not

0:02:40.644 --> 0:02:42.884
<v Speaker 2>really able to escape the fact that he's trying to

0:02:42.924 --> 0:02:46.204
<v Speaker 2>persuade over this tiny fraction five percent of the country

0:02:47.204 --> 0:02:48.404
<v Speaker 2>that is still undecided.

0:02:48.724 --> 0:02:51.444
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, can we just pause for a second. Not just

0:02:51.564 --> 0:02:55.764
<v Speaker 1>killing dogs and cats, but eating them, eating them. And

0:02:55.804 --> 0:02:58.604
<v Speaker 1>this is a conspiracy theory that came from like the

0:02:58.684 --> 0:03:03.124
<v Speaker 1>deep bowels of conspiracy theoryedom and here we have the

0:03:03.164 --> 0:03:07.004
<v Speaker 1>former president just like losing it and completely, you know,

0:03:07.124 --> 0:03:09.404
<v Speaker 1>just going off on this. He was actually fact chucked

0:03:09.484 --> 0:03:12.564
<v Speaker 1>on this by the moderators during the debate, which they

0:03:12.564 --> 0:03:15.164
<v Speaker 1>did a few times, which was new, right, they haven't

0:03:15.204 --> 0:03:18.484
<v Speaker 1>done that before, where they said, you know, actually there's

0:03:18.644 --> 0:03:22.244
<v Speaker 1>zero evidence of this. But he just didn't know where

0:03:22.284 --> 0:03:25.364
<v Speaker 1>to go. I think, you know, I was worried, you know,

0:03:25.404 --> 0:03:28.364
<v Speaker 1>going into this debate. I thought it could go a

0:03:28.364 --> 0:03:30.444
<v Speaker 1>lot of different ways, and I was just hoping that

0:03:30.524 --> 0:03:33.764
<v Speaker 1>she wouldn't let him get to her right because as

0:03:33.764 --> 0:03:36.804
<v Speaker 1>a female also, the risk is so much bigger because

0:03:36.804 --> 0:03:40.124
<v Speaker 1>if she starts feeling defensive or indignant or anything, you know,

0:03:40.204 --> 0:03:42.284
<v Speaker 1>because she's female, it's going to come off a lot

0:03:42.324 --> 0:03:44.564
<v Speaker 1>worse and it's going to just completely blow up. She

0:03:44.604 --> 0:03:46.764
<v Speaker 1>did not, and it was actually the other way around

0:03:46.884 --> 0:03:50.444
<v Speaker 1>where she was able to kind of just needle him,

0:03:50.524 --> 0:03:53.844
<v Speaker 1>and he every single time squandered most of his airtime

0:03:54.244 --> 0:03:57.484
<v Speaker 1>in responding to the needles as opposed to saying anything substantive,

0:03:57.564 --> 0:03:59.484
<v Speaker 1>which I think was the entire point.

0:04:00.284 --> 0:04:04.084
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, she is very different about gender issues tactically than

0:04:04.124 --> 0:04:09.324
<v Speaker 2>Hillary Clinton was, and to my male eye, more effect

0:04:09.764 --> 0:04:12.484
<v Speaker 2>I think in part by like sometimes jabbing. In poker terms,

0:04:12.484 --> 0:04:15.364
<v Speaker 2>we might call it. This is probably too esoteric. A

0:04:15.444 --> 0:04:19.884
<v Speaker 2>donk bet donk bet is when you unexpectedly lead with

0:04:19.924 --> 0:04:23.564
<v Speaker 2>a bet into the person that you're expecting to bet right, donk,

0:04:23.644 --> 0:04:27.324
<v Speaker 2>di O, and k. A donkey in poker is a

0:04:27.404 --> 0:04:29.964
<v Speaker 2>name for a bad player. A fish donk is a

0:04:30.004 --> 0:04:33.724
<v Speaker 2>shortening of donkey. So this was thought to be a

0:04:33.724 --> 0:04:35.804
<v Speaker 2>play that a bad player makes it doesn't know to

0:04:35.964 --> 0:04:37.964
<v Speaker 2>check to the person who made the last bet. It

0:04:38.004 --> 0:04:40.724
<v Speaker 2>turns out that and the fancy computer simulations you're supposd

0:04:40.724 --> 0:04:43.044
<v Speaker 2>to this sometimes but can also be a way to

0:04:43.284 --> 0:04:45.604
<v Speaker 2>exploit somebody, to get under their skin. And it can

0:04:45.924 --> 0:04:47.684
<v Speaker 2>I'm not gonna talk about the game theory here, but

0:04:47.724 --> 0:04:50.004
<v Speaker 2>it can throw them off rhythm. Sometimes it is correct

0:04:50.044 --> 0:04:53.604
<v Speaker 2>actually under game theory, but it's a way to take

0:04:53.684 --> 0:04:55.284
<v Speaker 2>charge of the hand. And she did that a couple

0:04:55.324 --> 0:04:57.844
<v Speaker 2>of times, like kind of premptively saying, Hey, Trump's going

0:04:57.884 --> 0:05:00.284
<v Speaker 2>to lie a lot, you know, even on issues that

0:05:00.324 --> 0:05:03.484
<v Speaker 2>would seem like relative weaknesses for her, like, for example,

0:05:03.564 --> 0:05:05.644
<v Speaker 2>the unpopularity of President Biden in the fact that she's

0:05:05.644 --> 0:05:07.164
<v Speaker 2>been the vice president for three and a half years.

0:05:07.404 --> 0:05:09.084
<v Speaker 2>She would say, by the way, I'm not Joe Biden,

0:05:09.124 --> 0:05:12.564
<v Speaker 2>and like actually lean into that. And I think she

0:05:12.724 --> 0:05:16.764
<v Speaker 2>was well prepared for this event. And I don't know

0:05:16.844 --> 0:05:19.244
<v Speaker 2>to what extent that credit goes to her versus her campaign.

0:05:20.124 --> 0:05:21.804
<v Speaker 2>The Democrats to have a lot of data. I mean,

0:05:22.204 --> 0:05:25.084
<v Speaker 2>Donald Trump has had one, two, three, four or five.

0:05:25.204 --> 0:05:28.164
<v Speaker 2>This is his seventh general election debate, and he doesn't

0:05:28.164 --> 0:05:30.604
<v Speaker 2>really change form that much, except in the Biden debate,

0:05:30.604 --> 0:05:33.884
<v Speaker 2>where Biden was so bad that some instinctual part of

0:05:33.884 --> 0:05:36.204
<v Speaker 2>Trump knew that you have to maybe not go for

0:05:36.244 --> 0:05:38.244
<v Speaker 2>the jugular that much. Although Trump was actually kind of

0:05:38.244 --> 0:05:41.484
<v Speaker 2>bad in that debate too, it's just that when Biden.

0:05:41.164 --> 0:05:43.244
<v Speaker 1>In comparison, he was he was fine.

0:05:44.124 --> 0:05:46.964
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, but you know, Biden couldn't like nail him on

0:05:47.044 --> 0:05:49.044
<v Speaker 2>the things he were saying that were very very false

0:05:49.084 --> 0:05:52.644
<v Speaker 2>and or crazy. So I mean, first of all, if

0:05:52.644 --> 0:05:56.124
<v Speaker 2>nothing else, if Harris loses and we'll talk about this

0:05:56.164 --> 0:05:58.364
<v Speaker 2>in a minute, probably still in the vicinity of fifty

0:05:58.364 --> 0:06:00.524
<v Speaker 2>to fifty. If nothing else, you have this a b

0:06:00.724 --> 0:06:03.924
<v Speaker 2>test where replacing Joe Biden with Kamal Harris was a

0:06:03.964 --> 0:06:04.884
<v Speaker 2>really good idea.

0:06:05.004 --> 0:06:07.844
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and I actually think your dunk bet analogy is

0:06:07.964 --> 0:06:10.884
<v Speaker 1>really really a good one. First of all, just talking

0:06:10.884 --> 0:06:13.964
<v Speaker 1>from personal experience. The first, you know, I've actually let

0:06:14.004 --> 0:06:16.684
<v Speaker 1>people get under my skin doing that, you know, because

0:06:16.724 --> 0:06:20.684
<v Speaker 1>it's so it's unexpected, and the attitude is, you know,

0:06:20.524 --> 0:06:23.604
<v Speaker 1>you check to the pre flop aggressor, right, so the

0:06:23.644 --> 0:06:27.684
<v Speaker 1>person who has them, has the aggressive lead, is supposed

0:06:27.684 --> 0:06:30.964
<v Speaker 1>to be allowed to continue that aggression. And there have

0:06:31.004 --> 0:06:32.924
<v Speaker 1>been a few times I even remember when I've made

0:06:32.964 --> 0:06:35.364
<v Speaker 1>big mistakes and hands because someone has donked it to me,

0:06:35.604 --> 0:06:37.684
<v Speaker 1>and I'm like, no, you fucker, you don't get to

0:06:37.724 --> 0:06:40.204
<v Speaker 1>do that, and I raise, which is exactly what I

0:06:40.204 --> 0:06:43.924
<v Speaker 1>shouldn't be doing in some specific scenarios where they actually,

0:06:43.964 --> 0:06:47.364
<v Speaker 1>like clearly are donk betting because they have something. And

0:06:47.444 --> 0:06:50.884
<v Speaker 1>I remember those hands vividly because it's very unlike me

0:06:51.404 --> 0:06:55.524
<v Speaker 1>to to start tilting in that particular way. I've gotten

0:06:55.524 --> 0:06:58.684
<v Speaker 1>over it now, but it's actually, you know, it can

0:06:58.724 --> 0:07:01.164
<v Speaker 1>be a very effective strategy. And she did that. There

0:07:01.204 --> 0:07:04.004
<v Speaker 1>was actually one time where at first I was like, wait,

0:07:04.044 --> 0:07:05.444
<v Speaker 1>what the hell did she just do? And then I

0:07:05.484 --> 0:07:07.644
<v Speaker 1>realized what she was doing right when she was answering

0:07:07.644 --> 0:07:09.804
<v Speaker 1>a question and all of a sudden she says, by

0:07:09.844 --> 0:07:11.684
<v Speaker 1>the way, you know, I invite you to go to

0:07:11.724 --> 0:07:14.044
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump's rallies. And I'm like, wait, you know what

0:07:14.124 --> 0:07:15.964
<v Speaker 1>a non sequort or what did she Why is she

0:07:16.164 --> 0:07:18.044
<v Speaker 1>doing that? And then it became very clear was a

0:07:18.124 --> 0:07:20.884
<v Speaker 1>very good strategic move because she was kind of deflecting

0:07:20.924 --> 0:07:23.564
<v Speaker 1>away from her record on something that she didn't really

0:07:23.604 --> 0:07:27.204
<v Speaker 1>want to talk about, and instead then Trump kept, you know,

0:07:27.204 --> 0:07:29.004
<v Speaker 1>for the next two minutes talking about how he has

0:07:29.044 --> 0:07:30.324
<v Speaker 1>the biggest rallies in history.

0:07:30.444 --> 0:07:32.484
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and she is taking some I mean, she is

0:07:32.564 --> 0:07:34.724
<v Speaker 2>veering off topic, and she often did it on questions

0:07:34.724 --> 0:07:38.324
<v Speaker 2>like immigration that are not great topics for her. Yeah,

0:07:38.364 --> 0:07:41.564
<v Speaker 2>And if Trump had responded coherently and not taken the bait,

0:07:41.764 --> 0:07:44.284
<v Speaker 2>then you'd have his media buzz about how she went

0:07:44.324 --> 0:07:47.204
<v Speaker 2>really off topic and was evasive, right, And instead he's

0:07:47.364 --> 0:07:49.164
<v Speaker 2>more often absolutely absolutely.

0:07:50.044 --> 0:07:52.524
<v Speaker 1>But yes, I actually thought, you know, it was it

0:07:52.524 --> 0:07:55.564
<v Speaker 1>was quite funny because I was like, oh, you know,

0:07:55.644 --> 0:07:58.124
<v Speaker 1>she's learned to play the game of not answering the question,

0:07:58.404 --> 0:08:01.604
<v Speaker 1>because Donald Trump never answers the question. And as the

0:08:01.644 --> 0:08:04.404
<v Speaker 1>debate went on, she was doing the exact same thing,

0:08:04.444 --> 0:08:06.844
<v Speaker 1>and I'm like, huh, okay, well you know what that's

0:08:06.884 --> 0:08:09.804
<v Speaker 1>I guess how these debates go. But she she definitely

0:08:09.844 --> 0:08:11.724
<v Speaker 1>learned to play that game, and I actually thought she

0:08:11.804 --> 0:08:14.484
<v Speaker 1>became much stronger as a night war on. I was

0:08:14.564 --> 0:08:17.844
<v Speaker 1>very nervous when she started giving her first response, because

0:08:17.844 --> 0:08:19.724
<v Speaker 1>you could tell she was nervous, you know, as someone

0:08:19.764 --> 0:08:21.924
<v Speaker 1>who has done public speaking, who's kind of watched a

0:08:21.964 --> 0:08:23.804
<v Speaker 1>lot of debaters, you know, you and I were both

0:08:23.804 --> 0:08:28.244
<v Speaker 1>debaters all through school. You could tell, like the first

0:08:28.284 --> 0:08:32.244
<v Speaker 1>few minutes, you know, she was nervous and she was

0:08:32.284 --> 0:08:34.364
<v Speaker 1>a little stiff. But then she kind of got over it,

0:08:34.404 --> 0:08:36.924
<v Speaker 1>and I think she kind of became much more fluid

0:08:37.084 --> 0:08:39.524
<v Speaker 1>and really kind of picked up in style. And I

0:08:39.564 --> 0:08:41.524
<v Speaker 1>was very happy to see that. And he had kind

0:08:41.564 --> 0:08:43.964
<v Speaker 1>of some of the opposite trajectory where kind of he

0:08:44.044 --> 0:08:48.004
<v Speaker 1>started off thinking that, you know, I'm gonna just completely

0:08:49.004 --> 0:08:51.524
<v Speaker 1>demolish her, and then he started getting very defensive.

0:08:52.244 --> 0:08:55.244
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, public speaking for me, at least, I don't know

0:08:55.284 --> 0:08:57.764
<v Speaker 2>if you're different, Maria, but like it's not It isn't

0:08:57.764 --> 0:09:00.964
<v Speaker 2>actually like just having a conversation with a friend at

0:09:01.004 --> 0:09:04.004
<v Speaker 2>a bar that your body recognizes that this is a

0:09:04.124 --> 0:09:09.404
<v Speaker 2>high stakes momentolutely and you're operating under a elevated person

0:09:09.764 --> 0:09:14.764
<v Speaker 2>but also a stress response. Now, in my experience, what

0:09:14.804 --> 0:09:16.524
<v Speaker 2>you have to do is just kind of be a

0:09:16.564 --> 0:09:19.324
<v Speaker 2>little bit self conscious about it. Right, You're like, I

0:09:19.364 --> 0:09:21.364
<v Speaker 2>am on terrain that I either rehearsed or that I've

0:09:21.364 --> 0:09:25.644
<v Speaker 2>spoken about many times, and I'm just gonna say words

0:09:25.684 --> 0:09:29.084
<v Speaker 2>and lo and behold, they come across coherent most of

0:09:29.124 --> 0:09:32.164
<v Speaker 2>the time. If you're tired or fatigued, or or you're

0:09:32.164 --> 0:09:33.964
<v Speaker 2>in a room where the setting is weird, the lighting is,

0:09:34.164 --> 0:09:35.524
<v Speaker 2>you can be thrown off and that can be hard

0:09:35.524 --> 0:09:37.684
<v Speaker 2>to recover from. But you have to like you can't

0:09:38.004 --> 0:09:42.004
<v Speaker 2>overthink it too much, and you have to trust your

0:09:42.044 --> 0:09:44.564
<v Speaker 2>experience base that like, yeah, this is actually gonna go fine,

0:09:44.844 --> 0:09:47.324
<v Speaker 2>and some people are even better in that setting than

0:09:47.324 --> 0:09:49.004
<v Speaker 2>they would be a meeting or something.

0:09:49.284 --> 0:09:51.364
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think that's absolutely true. And I actually have

0:09:51.404 --> 0:09:54.244
<v Speaker 1>a stress response every single time I give a talk

0:09:54.324 --> 0:09:56.684
<v Speaker 1>right before I go on stage every single time, and

0:09:56.724 --> 0:09:59.764
<v Speaker 1>I give lots of talks. So this is something that

0:09:59.764 --> 0:10:02.404
<v Speaker 1>that definitely happens. But then you know, you could you

0:10:02.404 --> 0:10:05.004
<v Speaker 1>could tell that she does have the experience, she was prepared,

0:10:05.684 --> 0:10:08.324
<v Speaker 1>and she was able to kind of establish the momentum.

0:10:08.644 --> 0:10:11.204
<v Speaker 1>The other thing that I thought was very interesting was,

0:10:11.244 --> 0:10:13.164
<v Speaker 1>you know, Trump won the coin toss and decided that

0:10:13.164 --> 0:10:14.804
<v Speaker 1>he was going to give the closing, you know, the

0:10:15.204 --> 0:10:18.284
<v Speaker 1>final closing, and I actually think that that worked against him,

0:10:18.324 --> 0:10:21.364
<v Speaker 1>because he spent most of his closing remarks yelling at

0:10:21.444 --> 0:10:23.884
<v Speaker 1>what she said, as opposed to kind of giving any

0:10:23.924 --> 0:10:27.284
<v Speaker 1>summary of anything that he had said. So so I think

0:10:27.284 --> 0:10:29.244
<v Speaker 1>that she came across much better at the end of

0:10:29.284 --> 0:10:31.844
<v Speaker 1>the debate. And the way that you know, impressions and

0:10:31.924 --> 0:10:34.444
<v Speaker 1>memory formation works, I think that that really works in

0:10:34.484 --> 0:10:35.004
<v Speaker 1>her favor.

0:10:36.484 --> 0:10:38.244
<v Speaker 2>And the beginning too. I mean, in the beginning, I

0:10:38.244 --> 0:10:40.444
<v Speaker 2>agreed at the very first question on the economy is

0:10:40.484 --> 0:10:44.604
<v Speaker 2>strong territory for Trump. But then you have extended remarks

0:10:44.684 --> 0:10:47.724
<v Speaker 2>on abortion for a moment, I thought that might be

0:10:47.724 --> 0:10:50.004
<v Speaker 2>the story of the night. And then you have which is,

0:10:50.124 --> 0:10:52.084
<v Speaker 2>by the way, if you're not a very good issue

0:10:52.084 --> 0:10:52.644
<v Speaker 2>for Democrats.

0:10:52.644 --> 0:10:55.564
<v Speaker 1>Since she did very well, she did very well Onlke Biden,

0:10:55.644 --> 0:10:59.084
<v Speaker 1>who kind of you know, pivoted to immigration instead of

0:10:59.084 --> 0:11:01.964
<v Speaker 1>talking about abortion. She really nailed the abortion.

0:11:02.284 --> 0:11:04.604
<v Speaker 2>And then you have the bait taking phase. I mean, look,

0:11:04.924 --> 0:11:08.804
<v Speaker 2>we may look back if Harris wins and say that

0:11:08.804 --> 0:11:11.524
<v Speaker 2>the Trump can made a series of really predictable mistakes.

0:11:12.204 --> 0:11:14.844
<v Speaker 2>The lack of preparation tonight were even in the closing statement.

0:11:15.124 --> 0:11:18.364
<v Speaker 2>He can't really stay on focus and talk about Harris's record,

0:11:18.404 --> 0:11:21.044
<v Speaker 2>for example, I mean other things too. I mean, naming

0:11:21.124 --> 0:11:25.324
<v Speaker 2>Jadie Vance is one. Not preparing for the transition from

0:11:25.364 --> 0:11:27.924
<v Speaker 2>Biden to Harris when they had been telegraphed at least

0:11:27.924 --> 0:11:30.724
<v Speaker 2>for a few weeks as a possibility, a strong possibility.

0:11:31.764 --> 0:11:35.444
<v Speaker 2>His convention speech where he rambled off topic after a

0:11:35.484 --> 0:11:39.804
<v Speaker 2>more subdued thirty minutes on the assassination attempt, you know,

0:11:39.884 --> 0:11:42.884
<v Speaker 2>frankly accepting that first debate with Biden. I mean, I

0:11:42.884 --> 0:11:45.044
<v Speaker 2>guess you may not have played out all the tactics,

0:11:45.044 --> 0:11:48.284
<v Speaker 2>but if he hadn't done that, then Biden's on stage

0:11:48.284 --> 0:11:51.724
<v Speaker 2>tonight having that debate from June tonight, and Democrats are

0:11:52.324 --> 0:11:55.324
<v Speaker 2>appropriately panicking because they're probably totally fucked at that point.

0:11:56.684 --> 0:11:59.164
<v Speaker 2>So thanks to the White House for moving that forward.

0:11:59.164 --> 0:12:02.644
<v Speaker 2>If you're a Democrat, I guess yeah, for sure. By

0:12:02.684 --> 0:12:04.404
<v Speaker 2>the way, did you notice that he did not call

0:12:04.444 --> 0:12:06.364
<v Speaker 2>her by her name a single time during the night.

0:12:06.604 --> 0:12:10.124
<v Speaker 2>He kept saying she and pointing at her, and he

0:12:10.204 --> 0:12:13.364
<v Speaker 2>never said vice President Harris. He never said Kamala Harris.

0:12:13.484 --> 0:12:16.124
<v Speaker 2>He used her name exactly zero times. I've actually haven't

0:12:16.124 --> 0:12:18.684
<v Speaker 2>seen anyone mention that, But that's something that really struck

0:12:18.764 --> 0:12:22.844
<v Speaker 2>me and kind of shows how, you know, it shows

0:12:22.844 --> 0:12:26.044
<v Speaker 2>you so much about his attitude about kind of his

0:12:26.084 --> 0:12:28.764
<v Speaker 2>conception of women, his conception of her. You know, she's

0:12:28.804 --> 0:12:31.404
<v Speaker 2>not even worthy of calling by the name. Because I

0:12:31.484 --> 0:12:33.564
<v Speaker 2>was I was actually paying attention to it because I

0:12:33.604 --> 0:12:36.324
<v Speaker 2>was wondering if he was going to mispronounce her name

0:12:36.364 --> 0:12:38.644
<v Speaker 2>on purpose the way he's always done, and what her

0:12:38.684 --> 0:12:39.764
<v Speaker 2>reaction was going to be.

0:12:39.964 --> 0:12:42.204
<v Speaker 1>But he didn't. He didn't even say her name. So

0:12:42.244 --> 0:12:45.764
<v Speaker 1>I thought that that was something that was an interesting point,

0:12:46.724 --> 0:12:48.764
<v Speaker 1>and I thought that she tried to do a really

0:12:49.004 --> 0:12:50.684
<v Speaker 1>she tried to do a nice job since she was

0:12:50.684 --> 0:12:54.244
<v Speaker 1>in Pennsylvania of talking about the fact that she wasn't

0:12:54.284 --> 0:12:57.204
<v Speaker 1>going to stop fracking and that she, you know, was

0:12:57.804 --> 0:12:59.844
<v Speaker 1>upping well production in all of these things. And it's

0:12:59.884 --> 0:13:01.804
<v Speaker 1>a very fine line for her to walk right to

0:13:01.884 --> 0:13:04.084
<v Speaker 1>try to say, you know, I want a green future.

0:13:04.164 --> 0:13:07.804
<v Speaker 1>I'm worried about climate change, but believe me, I'm not

0:13:07.804 --> 0:13:10.084
<v Speaker 1>going to hurt your jobs. So I think that she

0:13:10.284 --> 0:13:15.044
<v Speaker 1>tried her best to appeal to Pennsylvania, which is obviously crucial, and.

0:13:15.004 --> 0:13:16.804
<v Speaker 2>She is flip flopping on a lot of this stuff.

0:13:17.884 --> 0:13:20.684
<v Speaker 2>So there's a lot of fertile ground that Trump could

0:13:20.804 --> 0:13:22.444
<v Speaker 2>what's the metaphere they could have trod or I'm not

0:13:22.484 --> 0:13:26.404
<v Speaker 2>sure what their metaphor is exactly. Yep. And again the

0:13:26.524 --> 0:13:30.604
<v Speaker 2>lack of discipline from Trump, you know, just to say

0:13:30.764 --> 0:13:34.044
<v Speaker 2>she's a radical left winger, as she showed in San

0:13:34.044 --> 0:13:36.604
<v Speaker 2>Francisco and in twenty nineteen when she wanted to do

0:13:36.804 --> 0:13:39.244
<v Speaker 2>X and Y and Z, and now she's flip flopping

0:13:39.244 --> 0:13:42.044
<v Speaker 2>because she's desperate to, you know, make up for Joe

0:13:42.084 --> 0:13:45.404
<v Speaker 2>Biden's mistakes. You can do a fair amount of that.

0:13:45.724 --> 0:13:47.764
<v Speaker 2>I do think that's an issue for Harris with some voters.

0:13:48.924 --> 0:13:52.244
<v Speaker 2>But look, they got another data point. So the convention,

0:13:52.284 --> 0:13:53.724
<v Speaker 2>we can talk about the trajectory of the horse race.

0:13:53.724 --> 0:13:55.884
<v Speaker 2>Maybe in a moment. I thought she gave a very

0:13:55.884 --> 0:13:59.564
<v Speaker 2>good convention speech. Also that was also kind of agro

0:13:59.804 --> 0:14:02.604
<v Speaker 2>and aimed at male voters. And she 's some of

0:14:02.604 --> 0:14:05.324
<v Speaker 2>these same themes tonight, talking about competitiveness with China, talking

0:14:05.364 --> 0:14:09.244
<v Speaker 2>about how aggressive and lethal our military is. For instance,

0:14:11.204 --> 0:14:14.004
<v Speaker 2>sometimes when you hear something for the second time, it

0:14:14.124 --> 0:14:17.604
<v Speaker 2>closes a deal, right, you know, So obviously there's some

0:14:17.684 --> 0:14:20.124
<v Speaker 2>chance that there's a bounce in the polls Harris, by

0:14:20.164 --> 0:14:22.684
<v Speaker 2>the way, so we're not just totally giving you our

0:14:22.684 --> 0:14:26.044
<v Speaker 2>subjective opinion. In the CNN post debate poll, she won

0:14:26.204 --> 0:14:29.084
<v Speaker 2>sixty three thirty seven or something, and Market.

0:14:28.884 --> 0:14:31.484
<v Speaker 1>As well also had her her odds going up, So

0:14:31.524 --> 0:14:34.164
<v Speaker 1>I think that that is also I think by three points, right,

0:14:34.884 --> 0:14:35.964
<v Speaker 1>she moved up by thy point.

0:14:36.964 --> 0:14:40.364
<v Speaker 2>Before the debate, it had been like Trump fifty four,

0:14:40.564 --> 0:14:42.844
<v Speaker 2>Harris forty six. These are not vote shares, these are

0:14:42.884 --> 0:14:46.364
<v Speaker 2>win probabilities, and after it's fifty to fifty technically forty

0:14:46.404 --> 0:14:48.924
<v Speaker 2>nine forty nine, they price in some chance that I

0:14:48.964 --> 0:14:51.124
<v Speaker 2>don't know, somebody has to drop out due to a

0:14:51.124 --> 0:14:55.244
<v Speaker 2>health issue, I guess, But basically drew the race back

0:14:55.324 --> 0:15:00.884
<v Speaker 2>to even. In the Silver Bulletin forecast, she had been

0:15:00.924 --> 0:15:06.804
<v Speaker 2>at thirty eight thirty nine percent heading in. If she

0:15:06.924 --> 0:15:10.244
<v Speaker 2>were to get that polymarket bounce, then she'd be in

0:15:10.284 --> 0:15:13.604
<v Speaker 2>the you know, forty five percent range. So fairly close

0:15:13.644 --> 0:15:16.644
<v Speaker 2>to fifty to fifty. The way the model works, the

0:15:16.724 --> 0:15:20.044
<v Speaker 2>model was very disappointed. Shall we say, not that it

0:15:20.084 --> 0:15:24.844
<v Speaker 2>has emotions. It's not some large language model that the

0:15:24.884 --> 0:15:31.284
<v Speaker 2>model is disappointed with Harris's post convention polling, where typically

0:15:31.324 --> 0:15:34.524
<v Speaker 2>after a convention is one of the best periods for

0:15:34.604 --> 0:15:38.084
<v Speaker 2>a candidate throughout the life of the election cycle. And

0:15:38.164 --> 0:15:41.884
<v Speaker 2>Harris was not only not getting a sustained bounce, she

0:15:41.884 --> 0:15:43.364
<v Speaker 2>may have gotten one for a couple of days and

0:15:43.364 --> 0:15:46.564
<v Speaker 2>then RFK drops out the new cycle changes, but actually

0:15:46.564 --> 0:15:50.164
<v Speaker 2>been declining. She had lost a point or two in

0:15:50.284 --> 0:15:55.164
<v Speaker 2>polls of Michigan, Wisconsin, you know, Pennsylvania, most of those

0:15:55.364 --> 0:15:59.604
<v Speaker 2>rust belt blue wall swing states. So it's like this

0:15:59.644 --> 0:16:01.124
<v Speaker 2>should be a really good period and it's a really

0:16:01.124 --> 0:16:04.044
<v Speaker 2>bad period. Therefore, it had gotten really grumpy about her polling,

0:16:04.084 --> 0:16:06.404
<v Speaker 2>and therefore a lot of Democrats, some of whom are

0:16:06.444 --> 0:16:10.484
<v Speaker 2>completely insane and should go, I don't know, moved to

0:16:11.604 --> 0:16:13.604
<v Speaker 2>Fiji or some nice country where they don't have to

0:16:13.844 --> 0:16:17.004
<v Speaker 2>blow up my Twitter mentions. We're upset with me as

0:16:17.004 --> 0:16:18.244
<v Speaker 2>a result, But we have to talk about that.

0:16:18.724 --> 0:16:21.084
<v Speaker 1>Yes we do, Nate, Yes we do. Because you had

0:16:21.204 --> 0:16:23.164
<v Speaker 1>such a great takedown all right, I'm going to read

0:16:23.204 --> 0:16:28.004
<v Speaker 1>a tweet from yesterday night. Hey bet, understand you may

0:16:28.044 --> 0:16:30.564
<v Speaker 1>still be frustrated. Silence of the Lambs came out the

0:16:30.604 --> 0:16:32.564
<v Speaker 1>same year as for the Boys, so you were pretty

0:16:32.604 --> 0:16:35.044
<v Speaker 1>much always going to lose best Actress to Jodie Foster

0:16:35.404 --> 0:16:37.684
<v Speaker 1>in poker. We'd call that a bad beat. But that's

0:16:37.724 --> 0:16:39.804
<v Speaker 1>no reason to tweet out conspiracy theories.

0:16:39.964 --> 0:16:44.804
<v Speaker 2>Please discuss no, so Bette Midler among other Democrats, you know,

0:16:44.884 --> 0:16:48.084
<v Speaker 2>Stuart Stevens, this guy at the Lincoln Project. Yeah, you

0:16:48.164 --> 0:16:51.084
<v Speaker 2>have certain people who are convinced that.

0:16:51.204 --> 0:16:52.964
<v Speaker 1>You've been bought.

0:16:54.004 --> 0:16:55.884
<v Speaker 2>If I've been I must have been bought. This is

0:16:55.924 --> 0:16:58.444
<v Speaker 2>like literally what Stuart Stevens and Bette Midler are implying.

0:16:58.884 --> 0:17:00.604
<v Speaker 2>And sometimes it comes up in the context of so

0:17:00.644 --> 0:17:05.404
<v Speaker 2>I consult. I'm an advisor to Pollymarket, and Polly Market

0:17:05.404 --> 0:17:09.884
<v Speaker 2>has been invested in by Founder's Fund, which is you know,

0:17:09.964 --> 0:17:12.764
<v Speaker 2>one of the principles is Peter Teal at Founder's Fund,

0:17:12.964 --> 0:17:16.004
<v Speaker 2>So it therefore gets twisted into Peter Teal is secretly

0:17:16.604 --> 0:17:19.284
<v Speaker 2>funding Nate, which is bizarre. I mean, Founder's Fund has

0:17:19.324 --> 0:17:23.484
<v Speaker 2>invested in in Lift and Airbnb and Facebook and and

0:17:24.004 --> 0:17:28.484
<v Speaker 2>you know all these all these startups eventually get invested

0:17:28.524 --> 0:17:30.684
<v Speaker 2>in by most of the big VC firms at some

0:17:30.804 --> 0:17:33.444
<v Speaker 2>stage of fundraising. I mean, if you work for open Ai.

0:17:33.644 --> 0:17:36.044
<v Speaker 2>Elon Musk co founded open Ai, are you on Elon

0:17:36.124 --> 0:17:41.844
<v Speaker 2>Musk's payroll? You know substack Mark Andreeson and recent Horror,

0:17:41.844 --> 0:17:44.084
<v Speaker 2>which is a big investor in substack. I think he

0:17:44.244 --> 0:17:46.564
<v Speaker 2>isn't as triggering for people as Elon or Peter Teal,

0:17:46.684 --> 0:17:49.724
<v Speaker 2>but like, but yeah, you know, you have to understand

0:17:49.804 --> 0:17:51.764
<v Speaker 2>how business works and how vet your capital works. But

0:17:51.804 --> 0:17:56.244
<v Speaker 2>people people cannot fathom because their brains are so poisoned

0:17:56.244 --> 0:18:00.884
<v Speaker 2>by politicscept Like, you know, it's not like I want Trump.

0:18:00.924 --> 0:18:02.724
<v Speaker 2>I mean, you know, I'm disclosed here. I'm trying to

0:18:02.724 --> 0:18:04.844
<v Speaker 2>be nonpartisan to our audience. You know, I'm gonna vote

0:18:04.844 --> 0:18:12.044
<v Speaker 2>for Harris if if I'm being super duper honest, I mean,

0:18:12.204 --> 0:18:15.564
<v Speaker 2>most of the audience for kind of high brow news

0:18:15.604 --> 0:18:19.684
<v Speaker 2>content are Democratic leaning voters. The audience at the newsletter

0:18:19.764 --> 0:18:24.924
<v Speaker 2>is very is very colle educated. You know, when when

0:18:24.964 --> 0:18:27.884
<v Speaker 2>Harris is doing well in the polls, then we probably

0:18:27.924 --> 0:18:31.604
<v Speaker 2>convert a little better from we get traffic either way,

0:18:31.644 --> 0:18:33.604
<v Speaker 2>we convert a little better to paid subscriptions when there's

0:18:33.604 --> 0:18:34.524
<v Speaker 2>good news for Harris.

0:18:34.404 --> 0:18:37.764
<v Speaker 1>Of course, of course, I mean confirmation bias, right, and

0:18:37.844 --> 0:18:40.404
<v Speaker 1>people people really when they when you're saying things that

0:18:40.444 --> 0:18:44.124
<v Speaker 1>they agree with and they like you, and then otherwise

0:18:44.164 --> 0:18:46.884
<v Speaker 1>you're you know, you're a paid shill, and I can't

0:18:46.924 --> 0:18:48.884
<v Speaker 1>I can't believe that I'm associated.

0:18:48.364 --> 0:18:51.324
<v Speaker 2>With you, but like people, I think people are. I

0:18:51.364 --> 0:18:55.564
<v Speaker 2>call it the uh. It's called the called the Bonyar

0:18:55.644 --> 0:19:00.884
<v Speaker 2>threshold after a particularly hackish online Democrat named Tom Bonyer,

0:19:00.924 --> 0:19:03.364
<v Speaker 2>who just cannot seem to understand that anybody could ever

0:19:03.724 --> 0:19:07.764
<v Speaker 2>try to want to be true seeking about anything. But

0:19:07.844 --> 0:19:11.444
<v Speaker 2>once you pass the Bonyar threshold, you're no longer capable

0:19:11.484 --> 0:19:14.004
<v Speaker 2>of assuming anyone else acts in good faith. This is

0:19:14.004 --> 0:19:16.604
<v Speaker 2>a mistake poker players make. Actually they assume that everybody

0:19:16.604 --> 0:19:20.204
<v Speaker 2>else plays the same way that they do, right that

0:19:20.284 --> 0:19:22.564
<v Speaker 2>if they'd be bluffing in a particular spot, and maybe

0:19:22.564 --> 0:19:25.484
<v Speaker 2>they have the wrong bluffing frequency, we call it that.

0:19:25.524 --> 0:19:27.444
<v Speaker 2>Therefore the other player must be also and they're mapping

0:19:27.484 --> 0:19:28.564
<v Speaker 2>themselves to the rest of the world.

0:19:28.924 --> 0:19:35.364
<v Speaker 3>So yeah, we'll be back in a minute with yet

0:19:35.404 --> 0:19:41.804
<v Speaker 3>more on the election, the debate, the polls, and the models.

0:19:53.204 --> 0:19:56.484
<v Speaker 2>Here's the guide to how to interpret the polls and

0:19:56.524 --> 0:19:59.844
<v Speaker 2>the models in the coming week or two. And this

0:19:59.924 --> 0:20:02.124
<v Speaker 2>is going to preview a post. It's actually the post

0:20:02.124 --> 0:20:03.724
<v Speaker 2>and silver builting will probably be up by the time

0:20:03.764 --> 0:20:06.044
<v Speaker 2>you listen to this, so go check that post out

0:20:06.044 --> 0:20:10.004
<v Speaker 2>too if you want, like a more precise version. The

0:20:10.004 --> 0:20:12.284
<v Speaker 2>first thing that will come out are poles that are

0:20:13.004 --> 0:20:17.524
<v Speaker 2>kind of crappy, the reason being that like poles that

0:20:17.604 --> 0:20:21.164
<v Speaker 2>you conduct in just today, are gonna have a harder

0:20:21.204 --> 0:20:26.004
<v Speaker 2>time capturing a representative sample electorate. And also the news

0:20:26.004 --> 0:20:28.804
<v Speaker 2>story itself. Part of the benefit of the debate is

0:20:28.804 --> 0:20:32.244
<v Speaker 2>people watching debate night, but also then these clips circulate

0:20:32.444 --> 0:20:36.644
<v Speaker 2>of Trump talking about immigrants eating dogs and cats, and

0:20:36.684 --> 0:20:40.684
<v Speaker 2>the abortion stuff circulates, and you get buzz and favorable

0:20:40.684 --> 0:20:43.884
<v Speaker 2>headlines for Harris. By the way, Taylor Swift, yeah, I.

0:20:44.204 --> 0:20:45.924
<v Speaker 1>Was gonna I was gonna bring that up for sure,

0:20:45.964 --> 0:20:48.324
<v Speaker 1>because that's also a little bounce. While we can talk

0:20:48.364 --> 0:20:49.604
<v Speaker 1>about whether it's a bounce or not.

0:20:50.644 --> 0:20:53.364
<v Speaker 2>It's interesting that she did that, whether they chose to.

0:20:53.844 --> 0:20:57.444
<v Speaker 2>I'm sure I'm sure Tat is coordinating this with her

0:20:57.444 --> 0:20:59.484
<v Speaker 2>friends and the Biden excuse me, not by her, the

0:20:59.484 --> 0:21:03.124
<v Speaker 2>Harris Walls campaign. So they really wanted to drive like

0:21:03.164 --> 0:21:06.284
<v Speaker 2>a big boom news cycle instead of like if it

0:21:06.364 --> 0:21:09.244
<v Speaker 2>were me, I would not have done that tonight. I

0:21:09.604 --> 0:21:11.684
<v Speaker 2>have said I think my debate was strong enough. We'll

0:21:11.684 --> 0:21:15.164
<v Speaker 2>tell Taylor, Hey, Taylor, just hold off. Let's save us

0:21:15.164 --> 0:21:17.444
<v Speaker 2>for a couple of weeks from now, when if there

0:21:17.484 --> 0:21:19.244
<v Speaker 2>is a debate bounce that it might fade in the

0:21:19.244 --> 0:21:21.444
<v Speaker 2>new cycle changes. But anyway, so first you get these

0:21:21.524 --> 0:21:24.404
<v Speaker 2>kind of either online polls that have these large panels,

0:21:24.444 --> 0:21:27.444
<v Speaker 2>that have very large samples, which can be fine poles,

0:21:27.444 --> 0:21:28.724
<v Speaker 2>but tend not to show a lot of movement for

0:21:28.764 --> 0:21:31.524
<v Speaker 2>reasons that aren't getting worth into or really crappy one

0:21:31.564 --> 0:21:35.724
<v Speaker 2>day IVR automated polls, So I wouldn't pay too mu

0:21:35.724 --> 0:21:41.764
<v Speaker 2>attention to anything until maybe this weekend. This weekend, the

0:21:41.844 --> 0:21:47.124
<v Speaker 2>first traditional polls that survey people Wednesday, Thursday, Wednesday, Thursday,

0:21:47.124 --> 0:21:50.204
<v Speaker 2>Friday will come out probably Saturday or Sunday. Those might

0:21:50.244 --> 0:21:52.644
<v Speaker 2>show more movement. If there is movement, those are a

0:21:52.644 --> 0:21:55.044
<v Speaker 2>bigger deal. And then in the following week you'll start

0:21:55.084 --> 0:21:57.724
<v Speaker 2>to see probably more state polling data. So by the

0:21:57.804 --> 0:21:59.684
<v Speaker 2>end of next week we'll have a pretty good idea

0:22:00.044 --> 0:22:02.124
<v Speaker 2>of where the race stands. Now, if I had to

0:22:02.164 --> 0:22:06.364
<v Speaker 2>guess you look at that number in the CNN poll

0:22:06.404 --> 0:22:09.164
<v Speaker 2>typically that does actually correlate with movement in the head

0:22:09.164 --> 0:22:12.484
<v Speaker 2>to have polls. You know, one of the biggest numbers

0:22:12.484 --> 0:22:14.244
<v Speaker 2>ever because gaps ever in the c and M pole

0:22:14.404 --> 0:22:18.284
<v Speaker 2>was in the first debate in twenty twelve when ntt Romney,

0:22:19.444 --> 0:22:23.524
<v Speaker 2>you know, kind of clean Barack Obama's clock and Rodney

0:22:23.564 --> 0:22:26.484
<v Speaker 2>gained about temporarily it faded, but gained about three points

0:22:26.484 --> 0:22:29.724
<v Speaker 2>in polls as a result. After the first debate with

0:22:29.844 --> 0:22:35.284
<v Speaker 2>Trump and and Biden, Trump only gained three points or so.

0:22:35.564 --> 0:22:38.044
<v Speaker 2>Right as disastrous that the bit was for Biden. Now,

0:22:38.044 --> 0:22:41.524
<v Speaker 2>maybe that Trump is like near his theoretical ceiling anyway, Right,

0:22:42.404 --> 0:22:44.244
<v Speaker 2>it's hard for Trump to get much more than fifty

0:22:44.244 --> 0:22:47.004
<v Speaker 2>percent of the electorate. He's a pretty unpopular guy. But

0:22:47.364 --> 0:22:49.364
<v Speaker 2>you know, so Beasonville, the guest might be that Harris

0:22:49.404 --> 0:22:52.684
<v Speaker 2>gets half that a point or a point and a half.

0:22:53.804 --> 0:22:56.404
<v Speaker 2>The question is kind of what the baseline is exactly.

0:22:56.444 --> 0:22:59.044
<v Speaker 2>If you look at the Silver bulletin pulling average, she

0:22:59.044 --> 0:23:02.244
<v Speaker 2>had been ahead by two point two points, I think

0:23:02.564 --> 0:23:05.004
<v Speaker 2>or something. So that gets her to three and a

0:23:05.044 --> 0:23:09.844
<v Speaker 2>half or so. On top of that, our model assumes

0:23:09.844 --> 0:23:11.604
<v Speaker 2>that we're no longer in this convention period, so it's

0:23:11.644 --> 0:23:14.924
<v Speaker 2>no longer penalizing Harris's polling. If she were to get

0:23:14.964 --> 0:23:17.404
<v Speaker 2>up to three and a half point lead, depending on

0:23:17.444 --> 0:23:19.364
<v Speaker 2>what happens in the swing stage, she would emerge out

0:23:19.404 --> 0:23:24.884
<v Speaker 2>of that as frankly a slight favorite in the model. Now.

0:23:25.724 --> 0:23:27.564
<v Speaker 2>I don't want to guarantee that, though, because there's a

0:23:27.564 --> 0:23:30.284
<v Speaker 2>little bit of ambiguity about where the race stood beforehand.

0:23:30.604 --> 0:23:32.844
<v Speaker 2>In some of the very recent national polling, The New

0:23:32.924 --> 0:23:34.524
<v Speaker 2>York Times has this very good poll to do with

0:23:34.564 --> 0:23:38.484
<v Speaker 2>Santa College, very large sample size, very rigorous methodology. Trump

0:23:38.524 --> 0:23:41.204
<v Speaker 2>had been ahead by a point in the popular vote,

0:23:41.284 --> 0:23:43.084
<v Speaker 2>and Trump's a head by a point nationally. He wins

0:23:43.084 --> 0:23:45.844
<v Speaker 2>electoral college like for sure. So there have been some

0:23:46.084 --> 0:23:48.644
<v Speaker 2>bad data for Harris recently. If you can get back

0:23:48.644 --> 0:23:50.164
<v Speaker 2>though to the three and a half point range three

0:23:50.244 --> 0:23:53.724
<v Speaker 2>four that you know, that would count as a as

0:23:53.764 --> 0:23:55.404
<v Speaker 2>a big tournament events.

0:23:55.924 --> 0:23:59.124
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but it's still it's still incredibly close, right and

0:23:59.164 --> 0:24:01.844
<v Speaker 1>we're still how many weeks out from the election, right?

0:24:01.924 --> 0:24:06.244
<v Speaker 1>Six weeks? We still have we still have quite some

0:24:06.404 --> 0:24:09.124
<v Speaker 1>time to go where things can change, which is why

0:24:09.204 --> 0:24:11.924
<v Speaker 1>I actually I totally agree with you. I thought it

0:24:11.964 --> 0:24:14.964
<v Speaker 1>was so strange that the Taylor Swift endorsement came right now,

0:24:15.004 --> 0:24:17.844
<v Speaker 1>because it kind of got buried right because it was

0:24:17.924 --> 0:24:21.124
<v Speaker 1>late at night, and obviously her her followers are gonna

0:24:21.164 --> 0:24:24.124
<v Speaker 1>are going to be looking at it. But I think

0:24:24.164 --> 0:24:26.284
<v Speaker 1>that you do need to have some of these things

0:24:26.324 --> 0:24:28.484
<v Speaker 1>that you can sprinkle in along the way because it's

0:24:28.484 --> 0:24:31.284
<v Speaker 1>a long road ahead, and as we've talked about before,

0:24:31.484 --> 0:24:33.884
<v Speaker 1>like for Harris, any little slip up is going to

0:24:34.004 --> 0:24:37.124
<v Speaker 1>really really matter. And she doesn't even have to mess up,

0:24:37.484 --> 0:24:40.604
<v Speaker 1>she just has to, you know, do something that's perceived

0:24:40.764 --> 0:24:44.204
<v Speaker 1>the wrong way. She's the one who has to prove,

0:24:44.324 --> 0:24:47.604
<v Speaker 1>I think, and to be kind of on she has

0:24:47.644 --> 0:24:50.204
<v Speaker 1>to be perfect, right, she has to be one hundred percent.

0:24:50.324 --> 0:24:52.884
<v Speaker 2>Although although I think that, you know, let's do another

0:24:52.924 --> 0:24:54.684
<v Speaker 2>poker term, I think they've been a little bit nitty,

0:24:55.164 --> 0:24:59.324
<v Speaker 2>meaning risk averse and neurotic about, for example, not doing

0:24:59.364 --> 0:25:01.124
<v Speaker 2>more media at sure.

0:25:01.284 --> 0:25:04.284
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, yeah that that actually I really do not understand.

0:25:05.484 --> 0:25:07.924
<v Speaker 2>She right now is at forty nine percent of the

0:25:08.004 --> 0:25:10.684
<v Speaker 2>vote in polls. To win, she has to get to

0:25:10.684 --> 0:25:14.284
<v Speaker 2>fifty one percent fifty one because she has a disadvantage

0:25:14.324 --> 0:25:15.964
<v Speaker 2>and all likely hid in the electoral college, so she

0:25:16.004 --> 0:25:19.484
<v Speaker 2>needs to find two percent of the electorate somewhere, which

0:25:19.484 --> 0:25:22.764
<v Speaker 2>seems easy, But there's only about six percent that's undecided

0:25:23.004 --> 0:25:26.004
<v Speaker 2>or voting third party at the moment. Probably one percent

0:25:26.004 --> 0:25:28.884
<v Speaker 2>of that will stay with Jill Stein or whatever else. Right,

0:25:28.884 --> 0:25:31.004
<v Speaker 2>but like, you know, maybe you have five percent of

0:25:31.044 --> 0:25:34.124
<v Speaker 2>the actual electorate in play or four percent or something

0:25:34.164 --> 0:25:36.324
<v Speaker 2>like that, right, you need to get probably half that.

0:25:37.324 --> 0:25:40.364
<v Speaker 2>It's non trivial problem, actually, And like so really reaching

0:25:40.404 --> 0:25:44.004
<v Speaker 2>into like the marginal constituencies, maybe not doing the mainstream

0:25:44.004 --> 0:25:47.324
<v Speaker 2>media hits, but doing some of the weird podcasts and find,

0:25:47.644 --> 0:25:50.404
<v Speaker 2>you know, profiling who are the undecided voters. Maybe it's

0:25:50.844 --> 0:25:56.764
<v Speaker 2>maybe it's men who just are a little uncomfortable with

0:25:58.084 --> 0:25:59.764
<v Speaker 2>voting for a woman. Don't like Trump, but maybe a

0:25:59.764 --> 0:26:02.084
<v Speaker 2>little uncomfortable voting for a woman or things like that.

0:26:02.204 --> 0:26:05.244
<v Speaker 2>I don't know, you know, I think they tend to

0:26:05.244 --> 0:26:08.244
<v Speaker 2>over index on like the Nikki Hayley, Liz Cheney voters.

0:26:08.244 --> 0:26:10.364
<v Speaker 2>They do fine with those. But maybe the more marginalized

0:26:10.364 --> 0:26:12.244
<v Speaker 2>it might be all you know, it might be younger

0:26:12.284 --> 0:26:15.924
<v Speaker 2>black voters and Hispanic voters who you know, do not

0:26:15.924 --> 0:26:17.764
<v Speaker 2>grow up with memories of the Civil rights era and

0:26:17.764 --> 0:26:20.004
<v Speaker 2>require a little bit more persuasion.

0:26:20.404 --> 0:26:23.844
<v Speaker 1>Well, we can invite her to come talk on our podcast,

0:26:23.964 --> 0:26:27.724
<v Speaker 1>right U, Kamala Harris, come on on and help convince

0:26:27.764 --> 0:26:28.364
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump.

0:26:29.124 --> 0:26:31.924
<v Speaker 2>Donald Trump, yept, what if we moderate a debate? That

0:26:31.964 --> 0:26:33.324
<v Speaker 2>would be funny, that would be amazing.

0:26:34.124 --> 0:26:36.924
<v Speaker 1>Okay, we will, we will host a debate on risky business.

0:26:37.324 --> 0:26:38.804
<v Speaker 1>Let's let's go, and.

0:26:39.484 --> 0:26:41.284
<v Speaker 2>Actually we were you know, some of us is even

0:26:41.404 --> 0:26:44.204
<v Speaker 2>like the area I describe as the river in the book,

0:26:44.204 --> 0:26:47.044
<v Speaker 2>it's like some of the Silicon Valley stuff. And she's

0:26:47.084 --> 0:26:49.644
<v Speaker 2>tried to moderate. I mean she's like, you know, reduced,

0:26:49.644 --> 0:26:50.924
<v Speaker 2>I have not paid all that much touch in this

0:26:50.924 --> 0:26:53.564
<v Speaker 2>policy stuff. She like has a less aggressive plan for

0:26:53.604 --> 0:26:59.084
<v Speaker 2>taxing capital gains then Biden has. You know, Silicon Valley

0:26:59.124 --> 0:27:02.564
<v Speaker 2>seems a little bit less opposed to Harris than they

0:27:02.564 --> 0:27:05.764
<v Speaker 2>were to Biden. I mean, it's a tiny constituency, but

0:27:05.884 --> 0:27:08.924
<v Speaker 2>like the crypto people are a group that, like Trump,

0:27:08.924 --> 0:27:12.124
<v Speaker 2>has gone out after bitcoin declined after debate last night

0:27:12.164 --> 0:27:16.244
<v Speaker 2>because they saw Trump as losing. For instance, areas like that,

0:27:16.524 --> 0:27:18.204
<v Speaker 2>perhaps she.

0:27:18.084 --> 0:27:20.644
<v Speaker 1>Does have some low hanging fruit where if she actually

0:27:20.684 --> 0:27:23.524
<v Speaker 1>comes out, you know, and says something that shows that

0:27:23.564 --> 0:27:25.964
<v Speaker 1>she's going to be supportive of crypto, which right now,

0:27:26.004 --> 0:27:28.924
<v Speaker 1>her actions are not showing right, given given who she

0:27:29.004 --> 0:27:31.524
<v Speaker 1>showsen for her administration, if she does a few key

0:27:31.564 --> 0:27:33.164
<v Speaker 1>things like that, I think she might be able to

0:27:33.204 --> 0:27:36.044
<v Speaker 1>pick up like one percent, right which, as we know,

0:27:36.164 --> 0:27:39.044
<v Speaker 1>like one percent matters, every single percent matters.

0:27:39.084 --> 0:27:44.484
<v Speaker 2>Or point or point one percent, which also matters. Kamala coin, Yes,

0:27:44.884 --> 0:27:46.244
<v Speaker 2>Kamala coin, Yep.

0:27:47.044 --> 0:27:49.404
<v Speaker 1>Absolutely, she can do a cat she can do a

0:27:49.444 --> 0:27:53.924
<v Speaker 1>cat coin for cat ladies, right. I think that that

0:27:54.044 --> 0:27:56.444
<v Speaker 1>would work. I mean, Taylor Swift's endorsement had a cat

0:27:56.484 --> 0:27:59.284
<v Speaker 1>in the picture. So lean into that, you know, show

0:27:59.324 --> 0:28:02.204
<v Speaker 1>that you understand the culture. Nate, I do have a question,

0:28:02.284 --> 0:28:04.764
<v Speaker 1>and you don't have to answer if you don't want to.

0:28:04.804 --> 0:28:08.684
<v Speaker 1>But I'm curious, how strongly do you believe kind of

0:28:08.804 --> 0:28:11.124
<v Speaker 1>in the current output of your model, Like, do you

0:28:11.324 --> 0:28:13.924
<v Speaker 1>do you think that Harris right now is kind of

0:28:14.164 --> 0:28:14.924
<v Speaker 1>poised to lose?

0:28:16.284 --> 0:28:20.484
<v Speaker 2>Not right now because now you have an absence of

0:28:20.524 --> 0:28:22.804
<v Speaker 2>post debate data that could move the numbers quite a bit,

0:28:23.004 --> 0:28:26.244
<v Speaker 2>but you know, as of like as of uh, Tuesday

0:28:26.324 --> 0:28:30.124
<v Speaker 2>morning or Tuesday night before the debate, when she's at

0:28:30.524 --> 0:28:34.324
<v Speaker 2>thirty eight percent, thirty eight and a half percent, yeah,

0:28:34.324 --> 0:28:36.164
<v Speaker 2>more or less. I mean, look, I'm aware that there

0:28:36.244 --> 0:28:38.644
<v Speaker 2>are other models out there, some of which are good,

0:28:38.644 --> 0:28:41.124
<v Speaker 2>some of which you are less good. I'm aware that

0:28:41.164 --> 0:28:45.124
<v Speaker 2>prediction markets are generally pretty smart, and those also Harris,

0:28:45.164 --> 0:28:48.084
<v Speaker 2>you know, Polly market her whatever, forty five is, forty

0:28:48.084 --> 0:28:50.764
<v Speaker 2>four is percent range instead of thirty eight. That's like

0:28:50.844 --> 0:28:55.164
<v Speaker 2>not a huge gap. But look, one reason to believe

0:28:55.204 --> 0:28:59.684
<v Speaker 2>the model is that like is that, you know, if

0:28:59.684 --> 0:29:03.804
<v Speaker 2>I were doing this subjectively, then I'd be rooting for Harris,

0:29:03.804 --> 0:29:06.004
<v Speaker 2>probably right. I am not a Trump fan, not a

0:29:06.124 --> 0:29:10.244
<v Speaker 2>huge fan of Harris's politics, frankly either, but I consider

0:29:10.684 --> 0:29:13.484
<v Speaker 2>after January sixth, there are lots of reasons why I

0:29:13.484 --> 0:29:17.004
<v Speaker 2>would never vote for Trump, and she's the alternative, you know,

0:29:17.324 --> 0:29:20.444
<v Speaker 2>for various reasons. I think. Probably also, if you were

0:29:20.484 --> 0:29:25.084
<v Speaker 2>somebody who was really agitating, as I was, for somebody,

0:29:25.764 --> 0:29:28.844
<v Speaker 2>not necessarily Harris, frankly, but somebody to replace Biden, then

0:29:28.884 --> 0:29:30.364
<v Speaker 2>you're gonna look really smart if you're one of the

0:29:30.364 --> 0:29:31.764
<v Speaker 2>people who said you gotta get rid of Biden, and

0:29:31.804 --> 0:29:34.484
<v Speaker 2>then that person wins and Harris is probably good for

0:29:35.324 --> 0:29:39.644
<v Speaker 2>site traffic and newsletter subscriptions. Frankly. So the fact that

0:29:39.804 --> 0:29:43.484
<v Speaker 2>I have all these incentives to root for Harris is

0:29:43.484 --> 0:29:45.964
<v Speaker 2>the reason to trust the process I set up ahead

0:29:45.964 --> 0:29:49.324
<v Speaker 2>of time, before I knew how this would affect anything,

0:29:49.604 --> 0:29:53.244
<v Speaker 2>and the same process yielded reliable model results since two

0:29:53.324 --> 0:29:56.124
<v Speaker 2>thousand and eight over many elections, And so I'm not

0:29:56.204 --> 0:30:00.364
<v Speaker 2>involving my emotions. So yeah, if I were, you know, look,

0:30:00.404 --> 0:30:03.244
<v Speaker 2>as a Bayesian, you'd kind of combine your forecast with

0:30:04.164 --> 0:30:06.804
<v Speaker 2>other information, other data. So probably realisticly would be like

0:30:07.364 --> 0:30:11.604
<v Speaker 2>forty two percent, taking the mid point of like polymarkets

0:30:11.644 --> 0:30:13.884
<v Speaker 2>forty six and our models thirty eight, and you get to,

0:30:13.964 --> 0:30:16.604
<v Speaker 2>like Harris forty two or forty three is probably my

0:30:16.644 --> 0:30:20.364
<v Speaker 2>subjective belief that seems not to go out on too

0:30:20.364 --> 0:30:21.044
<v Speaker 2>far of a limb.

0:30:21.444 --> 0:30:22.004
<v Speaker 1>That makes sense.

0:30:22.044 --> 0:30:23.924
<v Speaker 2>It would now be higher now she's gained, you know,

0:30:24.204 --> 0:30:25.844
<v Speaker 2>but now I think, you know, if I did predict

0:30:25.844 --> 0:30:28.084
<v Speaker 2>what our model will say in two weeks, it might

0:30:28.124 --> 0:30:30.404
<v Speaker 2>be fifty percent Harris fifty three or something like that.

0:30:30.764 --> 0:30:40.084
<v Speaker 1>Well, here's hoping after the break travel with us to Barcelona,

0:30:40.324 --> 0:30:44.124
<v Speaker 1>where I was just playing in EPT Barcelona, the European

0:30:44.244 --> 0:30:47.004
<v Speaker 1>Poker Tour, and we'll have a little poker for you.

0:31:00.324 --> 0:31:02.884
<v Speaker 2>So Maria, well, I've been bouncing back and forth between

0:31:02.924 --> 0:31:04.884
<v Speaker 2>the West coast and the East Coast and the UK

0:31:05.004 --> 0:31:08.164
<v Speaker 2>for a couple of days. You have been in fabulously

0:31:08.604 --> 0:31:14.044
<v Speaker 2>beautiful Barcelona, Spain playing poker. I see from the hand

0:31:14.084 --> 0:31:17.404
<v Speaker 2>and mom database that you cashed three times, including one

0:31:17.764 --> 0:31:21.044
<v Speaker 2>rather large cash. Do you want to tell us about that? Yeah?

0:31:21.084 --> 0:31:25.204
<v Speaker 1>Absolutely, I had a nice trip. This was the Poker

0:31:25.204 --> 0:31:28.444
<v Speaker 1>Star's twentieth anniversary of the European Poker Tour, so it

0:31:28.524 --> 0:31:31.804
<v Speaker 1>was a huge event with some record setting fields and

0:31:32.244 --> 0:31:35.324
<v Speaker 1>there was one event. So there's a new format that

0:31:35.444 --> 0:31:38.164
<v Speaker 1>was introduced a few years ago in poker. That's the

0:31:38.204 --> 0:31:42.964
<v Speaker 1>mystery bounty, which appeals to djens such as Nate. Because

0:31:43.004 --> 0:31:47.244
<v Speaker 1>I'm not a djen. Nate as a jen, right, I

0:31:47.244 --> 0:31:47.764
<v Speaker 1>mean it does.

0:31:47.964 --> 0:31:51.164
<v Speaker 2>I don't like mystery bounties that much. I mean, I

0:31:51.204 --> 0:31:54.404
<v Speaker 2>don't know KOs are more from. These are different, We're

0:31:54.444 --> 0:31:56.924
<v Speaker 2>not maybe a little above people's heads. But yeah, so

0:31:57.284 --> 0:32:01.284
<v Speaker 2>Wester go ahead. So the mystery bounty is that if

0:32:01.324 --> 0:32:03.484
<v Speaker 2>you knock out a player, usually after some threshold, if

0:32:03.524 --> 0:32:05.324
<v Speaker 2>you get to day two of a tournament, then you

0:32:05.364 --> 0:32:07.804
<v Speaker 2>knock out a player, you get like a little card

0:32:07.884 --> 0:32:10.484
<v Speaker 2>that says you get to draw from this like big

0:32:10.564 --> 0:32:15.764
<v Speaker 2>vat literally of envelopes, and some of the envelopes contain

0:32:16.524 --> 0:32:18.524
<v Speaker 2>very large amounts of money, such as what was top

0:32:18.524 --> 0:32:22.164
<v Speaker 2>prize here, like something one hundred thousand, one hundred thousand

0:32:22.204 --> 0:32:25.044
<v Speaker 2>euro Yes, one hundred thousand euros. It's one hundred and

0:32:25.084 --> 0:32:29.884
<v Speaker 2>ten whatever thousand American dollars. So yeah, it's a way

0:32:29.964 --> 0:32:32.004
<v Speaker 2>for a cheap entry to have. Like usually you can

0:32:32.044 --> 0:32:34.484
<v Speaker 2>only make these six figure sums if you like win

0:32:34.484 --> 0:32:37.364
<v Speaker 2>the tournament or finish in the top like two or three.

0:32:37.764 --> 0:32:40.924
<v Speaker 2>This is a way to have another opportunity without having

0:32:40.924 --> 0:32:43.004
<v Speaker 2>to win, without having to beat everybody, just knocking one

0:32:43.004 --> 0:32:45.284
<v Speaker 2>player out and you win one hundred thousand euros or

0:32:45.324 --> 0:32:47.524
<v Speaker 2>a million dollars and some of the worldsairs of poker ones.

0:32:48.204 --> 0:32:49.444
<v Speaker 2>So did you win a big bounty then.

0:32:49.404 --> 0:32:53.124
<v Speaker 1>Maria, Yeah, so well, first of all, you know, so

0:32:53.204 --> 0:32:55.684
<v Speaker 1>in this mystery bounty tournament, it was a three three

0:32:55.684 --> 0:32:58.964
<v Speaker 1>thousand euro buy in. I ended up coming in fifth,

0:32:59.244 --> 0:33:03.284
<v Speaker 1>which is huge. I beat out over eleven hundred players

0:33:03.804 --> 0:33:06.364
<v Speaker 1>in order to make the final table, so really nice,

0:33:06.364 --> 0:33:09.764
<v Speaker 1>deep run. I was very happy with the result. And

0:33:10.324 --> 0:33:14.124
<v Speaker 1>so I had ten bounties to pull, which is a lot, right,

0:33:15.204 --> 0:33:18.564
<v Speaker 1>ten bounties is a good amount and I have never

0:33:18.804 --> 0:33:24.084
<v Speaker 1>yet wow, and I have never pulled anything other than

0:33:24.164 --> 0:33:27.884
<v Speaker 1>a min bounty. So a min bounty is a minimum bounty.

0:33:28.124 --> 0:33:31.364
<v Speaker 1>In this particular tournament, that was one thousand euros, and

0:33:31.404 --> 0:33:34.364
<v Speaker 1>this was by far the most common bounty. So we

0:33:34.404 --> 0:33:37.684
<v Speaker 1>are going to now pivot to a very non risky

0:33:37.724 --> 0:33:41.164
<v Speaker 1>business way of thinking. So here I am with ten

0:33:41.204 --> 0:33:44.004
<v Speaker 1>bounties to draw. I draw the first one. It's a men.

0:33:44.644 --> 0:33:46.884
<v Speaker 1>I wait a while to draw another one. It's another men.

0:33:47.924 --> 0:33:51.164
<v Speaker 1>So at some point I've drawn five men bounties and

0:33:51.204 --> 0:33:53.764
<v Speaker 1>I have five left. Now the one hundred k's are gone.

0:33:54.884 --> 0:33:58.924
<v Speaker 1>And there is a player who everyone in the poker

0:33:58.964 --> 0:34:02.084
<v Speaker 1>world knows and anyone who was following the main event

0:34:02.124 --> 0:34:05.404
<v Speaker 1>this year knows as well. Nicholas Sausted, otherwise known as

0:34:05.524 --> 0:34:08.324
<v Speaker 1>Lena by his online screen name. He had a very

0:34:08.324 --> 0:34:10.604
<v Speaker 1>deep run in the main event, and a lot of

0:34:10.884 --> 0:34:13.164
<v Speaker 1>poker players, including me, were rooting for him to win

0:34:13.484 --> 0:34:16.244
<v Speaker 1>because he's a phenomenal player and a really really nice guy.

0:34:17.204 --> 0:34:21.644
<v Speaker 1>Lena is also someone who's quite lucky and runs incredibly well.

0:34:23.604 --> 0:34:25.844
<v Speaker 1>He plays well. But see this is why I said,

0:34:26.044 --> 0:34:28.324
<v Speaker 1>We're about to pivot into a non risky business way

0:34:28.364 --> 0:34:31.004
<v Speaker 1>of thinking. By this point, he had been knocked out

0:34:31.004 --> 0:34:33.644
<v Speaker 1>of the bounty event, and he had drawn two bounties.

0:34:33.684 --> 0:34:35.604
<v Speaker 1>He had drawn a twenty five K and a ten K.

0:34:36.124 --> 0:34:39.204
<v Speaker 1>So what I decided to do was send a text

0:34:39.204 --> 0:34:42.284
<v Speaker 1>message to Nicholas and ask him if he would draw

0:34:42.404 --> 0:34:47.804
<v Speaker 1>my remaining bounties. This is an incredibly non scientific, irrational

0:34:47.884 --> 0:34:49.924
<v Speaker 1>way of thinking. I was like, I am going to

0:34:50.004 --> 0:34:53.844
<v Speaker 1>get this very lucky player who's very good at drawing bounties.

0:34:54.004 --> 0:34:56.204
<v Speaker 1>By the way, we know, right, you cannot be good

0:34:56.284 --> 0:35:00.124
<v Speaker 1>or bad at drawing bounties. This is random. But I'm

0:35:00.164 --> 0:35:02.404
<v Speaker 1>going to get him to draw my remaining bounties. So

0:35:02.444 --> 0:35:03.724
<v Speaker 1>he said, sure, he would do it.

0:35:04.164 --> 0:35:05.004
<v Speaker 2>He charge a fee.

0:35:05.164 --> 0:35:06.684
<v Speaker 1>Now he did not charge a fee because he's a

0:35:06.764 --> 0:35:10.364
<v Speaker 1>nice guy. So here I am playing, did not even know,

0:35:10.804 --> 0:35:12.524
<v Speaker 1>you know, if he was actually going to show up.

0:35:12.844 --> 0:35:15.604
<v Speaker 1>So we're down to two tables. You know, Nicholas is

0:35:15.604 --> 0:35:17.844
<v Speaker 1>still not there. You know, I'm getting worried that I'm

0:35:17.844 --> 0:35:21.124
<v Speaker 1>gonna have to draw my other bounties. Tap on my shoulder,

0:35:21.324 --> 0:35:23.004
<v Speaker 1>there he is. He said, are you ready to draw?

0:35:23.164 --> 0:35:24.884
<v Speaker 1>He said, oh my god, yes, So I give him

0:35:24.884 --> 0:35:27.244
<v Speaker 1>the five bounties. We go up and he says what

0:35:27.324 --> 0:35:29.044
<v Speaker 1>are the top bounties left? And I said, well, there's

0:35:29.044 --> 0:35:30.884
<v Speaker 1>a twenty five K left and a ten K left.

0:35:31.004 --> 0:35:33.724
<v Speaker 1>And he said, okay, we got this. So he draws

0:35:33.924 --> 0:35:37.324
<v Speaker 1>and he draws, and you know, he draws my five

0:35:37.364 --> 0:35:38.844
<v Speaker 1>bounties and he said, do you want to open them?

0:35:38.924 --> 0:35:42.044
<v Speaker 1>Do I open them? I said, let's take turns. So

0:35:42.164 --> 0:35:43.884
<v Speaker 1>I opened the first one. It's a twenty five K.

0:35:44.364 --> 0:35:46.644
<v Speaker 1>He opens the second one it's a ten K, and

0:35:47.284 --> 0:35:49.324
<v Speaker 1>he's like, okay, I did it for you. He's like,

0:35:49.364 --> 0:35:51.124
<v Speaker 1>the only other ones left are the one case right,

0:35:51.124 --> 0:35:53.204
<v Speaker 1>And I was like, yep, so then the other three

0:35:53.244 --> 0:35:53.924
<v Speaker 1>were one case.

0:35:54.124 --> 0:35:58.444
<v Speaker 2>So my little bounties were there remaining at this point

0:35:58.644 --> 0:36:02.484
<v Speaker 2>about forty so there are two good ones out of forty.

0:36:02.244 --> 0:36:05.524
<v Speaker 1>Yep in the restaurant and he picks those ten picked five,

0:36:05.684 --> 0:36:06.324
<v Speaker 1>He picked five.

0:36:06.524 --> 0:36:09.004
<v Speaker 2>He picked five, yep, so five out of forty and

0:36:09.044 --> 0:36:12.244
<v Speaker 2>they have to I mean, do some combinatorics readers. I'm

0:36:12.244 --> 0:36:13.884
<v Speaker 2>sure we have readers who can do the math here,

0:36:13.924 --> 0:36:17.724
<v Speaker 2>but like, are you sure that? Because there are these

0:36:17.804 --> 0:36:22.324
<v Speaker 2>envelope politic conspiracies if you're an NBA fan. Supposedly, the

0:36:22.924 --> 0:36:25.244
<v Speaker 2>NBA lottery was rigged for New York Knicks to get

0:36:25.284 --> 0:36:27.764
<v Speaker 2>in Patrick Ewing out of Georgetown, for example, And like

0:36:28.084 --> 0:36:31.284
<v Speaker 2>one of the envelopes was like the others had like

0:36:31.284 --> 0:36:32.084
<v Speaker 2>a bet edge.

0:36:33.444 --> 0:36:36.084
<v Speaker 1>There were any no marked envelopes, and I saw him drawing.

0:36:37.004 --> 0:36:40.084
<v Speaker 1>He just he has the magic touch, which is the single.

0:36:40.844 --> 0:36:42.444
<v Speaker 2>Special contacts or glasses.

0:36:42.484 --> 0:36:45.844
<v Speaker 1>Maybe this is the single most irrational thing I will

0:36:45.884 --> 0:36:49.324
<v Speaker 1>ever say on this podcast. Thank you so much, Nicholas

0:36:49.324 --> 0:36:53.724
<v Speaker 1>for adding thirty five thousand euros to my life.

0:36:53.964 --> 0:36:57.284
<v Speaker 2>Let's be here. What if he had said I wanted

0:36:57.284 --> 0:37:01.484
<v Speaker 2>two percent feet? Uh huh? Would you have accepted that feet?

0:37:01.484 --> 0:37:03.844
<v Speaker 2>He gets two percent of whatever bounty you in above

0:37:03.884 --> 0:37:05.124
<v Speaker 2>the minimum.

0:37:05.684 --> 0:37:06.204
<v Speaker 1>I don't know.

0:37:06.644 --> 0:37:07.324
<v Speaker 2>We didn't.

0:37:07.444 --> 0:37:13.044
<v Speaker 1>We didn't have to go there. Okay, I did not

0:37:13.164 --> 0:37:16.924
<v Speaker 1>think he would ask. I think I would pay him

0:37:16.964 --> 0:37:20.324
<v Speaker 1>one percent too, but as a basi, and at the

0:37:20.404 --> 0:37:22.684
<v Speaker 1>end I said that I would buy him a nice

0:37:22.684 --> 0:37:25.084
<v Speaker 1>dinner wherever he wanted to go. But he did not

0:37:25.164 --> 0:37:27.684
<v Speaker 1>take it up on me. Take me up on it,

0:37:28.004 --> 0:37:32.124
<v Speaker 1>and I will reiterate the invitation, Nicholas, if you're listening

0:37:32.644 --> 0:37:36.524
<v Speaker 1>any stop anywhere, it's on me. Thank you so much.

0:37:36.804 --> 0:37:39.164
<v Speaker 1>And if we're ever playing a mystery bounty together, I

0:37:39.204 --> 0:37:41.764
<v Speaker 1>hope that you will draw my envelopes for me again,

0:37:42.004 --> 0:37:46.204
<v Speaker 1>because I'm a very rational person who does not aspire

0:37:46.564 --> 0:37:47.884
<v Speaker 1>to be superstitious ever.

0:37:58.164 --> 0:38:01.084
<v Speaker 2>Risky Business is hosted by me Nate Silver and me

0:38:01.204 --> 0:38:04.004
<v Speaker 2>Maria Kanakova. The show was a co production of Pushkin

0:38:04.044 --> 0:38:08.084
<v Speaker 2>Industries and iHeartMedia. This episode was produced by Isabel Carter.

0:38:08.564 --> 0:38:12.444
<v Speaker 2>Our associate produce is Gabriel Hunter Chang. Our engineer is

0:38:12.484 --> 0:38:15.644
<v Speaker 2>Sarah Bruger. Our executive producer is Jacob Goldstein.

0:38:16.364 --> 0:38:18.124
<v Speaker 1>If you want to listen to an ad free version,

0:38:18.164 --> 0:38:20.844
<v Speaker 1>sign up for Pushkin Plus for six ninety nine a month.

0:38:20.844 --> 0:38:23.484
<v Speaker 1>If you get access to ad free listening, Thanks for

0:38:23.524 --> 0:38:23.924
<v Speaker 1>tuning in.