WEBVTT - Can we really predict the U.S. election? 

0:00:00.600 --> 0:00:03.800
<v Speaker 1>Already and this this is the Daily This is the

0:00:03.880 --> 0:00:06.920
<v Speaker 1>Daily oas Oh, now it makes sense.

0:00:15.520 --> 0:00:17.919
<v Speaker 2>Good morning and welcome to the Daily OS. It's Monday,

0:00:17.960 --> 0:00:21.520
<v Speaker 2>the seventh of October. I'm Sam, I'm Zara. There are

0:00:21.560 --> 0:00:25.680
<v Speaker 2>only twenty eight days until the US presidential election, and

0:00:26.000 --> 0:00:29.080
<v Speaker 2>according to most major polls, it's almost neck and neck

0:00:29.160 --> 0:00:32.440
<v Speaker 2>between current Vice President Kamala Harris of the Democratic Party

0:00:32.760 --> 0:00:37.080
<v Speaker 2>and former Republican President Donald Trump. Whilst the polls don't

0:00:37.080 --> 0:00:40.159
<v Speaker 2>tell us too much about who's going to win, they

0:00:40.200 --> 0:00:43.160
<v Speaker 2>do tell us where to look for clues, and that's

0:00:43.200 --> 0:00:46.760
<v Speaker 2>the seven important swing states, and they're universally believed to

0:00:46.800 --> 0:00:50.280
<v Speaker 2>be crucial to whoever will eventually take the White House.

0:00:51.120 --> 0:00:54.320
<v Speaker 2>In today's podcast, I talk to Chaz Lichadello, he's the

0:00:54.360 --> 0:00:57.680
<v Speaker 2>host of ABC's Planet America, to go a bit deeper

0:00:57.720 --> 0:01:00.840
<v Speaker 2>into this idea of swing states. We also talk about

0:01:00.880 --> 0:01:04.800
<v Speaker 2>opinion polling and the art of trying to predict US politics.

0:01:05.440 --> 0:01:08.240
<v Speaker 2>This isn't necessarily an episode about the big players in

0:01:08.280 --> 0:01:11.480
<v Speaker 2>this year's election. Rather, it's about the mechanics of the

0:01:11.560 --> 0:01:14.319
<v Speaker 2>US political system and some of the key ideas that

0:01:14.400 --> 0:01:16.920
<v Speaker 2>helps the rest of the news make a bit more sense.

0:01:17.480 --> 0:01:19.480
<v Speaker 2>We're going to get into that chat in just a minute,

0:01:19.560 --> 0:01:21.600
<v Speaker 2>but first, Sarah, what is making headlines?

0:01:24.240 --> 0:01:27.560
<v Speaker 3>Today marks one year since the October seven attack by

0:01:27.640 --> 0:01:31.360
<v Speaker 3>Hamas on Israel, where twelve hundred people were killed and

0:01:31.480 --> 0:01:34.960
<v Speaker 3>two hundred and fifty one people were taken hostage. A

0:01:35.040 --> 0:01:39.600
<v Speaker 3>day later, Israel declared war on Hamas, and since that time,

0:01:39.800 --> 0:01:43.400
<v Speaker 3>over forty one thousand Palestinians have been killed in Gaza.

0:01:44.160 --> 0:01:47.960
<v Speaker 3>Australia's Jewish communities are holding a number of commemorations to

0:01:48.080 --> 0:01:51.880
<v Speaker 3>mark the anniversary of October seven. The weekend also saw

0:01:51.960 --> 0:01:56.960
<v Speaker 3>mass pro Palestinian protests across the country. Yesterday, TDA posted

0:01:57.000 --> 0:01:59.600
<v Speaker 3>an explainer on the salient moments of the Middle Eastern

0:01:59.640 --> 0:02:02.440
<v Speaker 3>conflence over the past twelve months. In the lead up

0:02:02.520 --> 0:02:04.160
<v Speaker 3>to the anniversary.

0:02:05.400 --> 0:02:08.400
<v Speaker 2>Hundreds of Australians have landed in Cyprus on flights from

0:02:08.400 --> 0:02:12.360
<v Speaker 2>the Lebanese capital of Beirute, after boarding Australian government charter

0:02:12.440 --> 0:02:16.040
<v Speaker 2>flights launched to assist citizens to flee the wartorn country.

0:02:16.639 --> 0:02:19.520
<v Speaker 2>Israel has launched a series of intense air strikes and

0:02:19.680 --> 0:02:22.640
<v Speaker 2>a ground operation on southern Lebanon, which it says is

0:02:22.680 --> 0:02:26.280
<v Speaker 2>aimed at destroying terror group hezbola. According to the Lebanese

0:02:26.320 --> 0:02:29.120
<v Speaker 2>Health Ministry, over twelve hundred people have been killed over

0:02:29.160 --> 0:02:30.040
<v Speaker 2>the past two weeks.

0:02:31.680 --> 0:02:34.640
<v Speaker 3>The federal government has reached out to states and territories

0:02:34.760 --> 0:02:38.400
<v Speaker 3>asking for help developing plans to ban social media for children.

0:02:38.919 --> 0:02:41.960
<v Speaker 3>PM Anthony Abernezi has written to leaders across the country

0:02:42.000 --> 0:02:45.120
<v Speaker 3>requesting a range of things, including details on what the

0:02:45.200 --> 0:02:48.440
<v Speaker 3>preferred age limit would be, how they can implement the plan,

0:02:48.560 --> 0:02:52.120
<v Speaker 3>and what sort of exemptions could be considered. Last month,

0:02:52.160 --> 0:02:55.240
<v Speaker 3>the Australian government announced it would legislate an age limit

0:02:55.280 --> 0:02:58.200
<v Speaker 3>by the end of this year. South Australia became the

0:02:58.240 --> 0:03:00.720
<v Speaker 3>first date to take steps towards in reducing a limit

0:03:00.720 --> 0:03:02.079
<v Speaker 3>for children under fourteen.

0:03:02.320 --> 0:03:07.080
<v Speaker 2>Earlier this year, and in today's good News, scientists have

0:03:07.160 --> 0:03:10.320
<v Speaker 2>discovered a plastic eating bacteria that could be used to

0:03:10.360 --> 0:03:14.480
<v Speaker 2>help break down waste. Researchers from Northwestern University in the

0:03:14.600 --> 0:03:17.600
<v Speaker 2>US have discovered a bacteria in waste water that can

0:03:17.639 --> 0:03:20.240
<v Speaker 2>break down the plastic used in common food and drink

0:03:20.280 --> 0:03:24.359
<v Speaker 2>packaging and consume it as a food source. Researchers said

0:03:24.360 --> 0:03:27.120
<v Speaker 2>the discovery opens up the potential for the bacteria to

0:03:27.160 --> 0:03:30.680
<v Speaker 2>be used at scale to reduce microplastic pollutants in the

0:03:30.680 --> 0:03:38.360
<v Speaker 2>world's oceans, which threaten drinking water supplies and biodiversity. As

0:03:38.400 --> 0:03:42.120
<v Speaker 2>we edge closer and closer to the upcoming US presidential election,

0:03:42.680 --> 0:03:45.720
<v Speaker 2>you might notice some terms getting thrown around not only

0:03:45.840 --> 0:03:49.080
<v Speaker 2>by The Daily Ohs, but by all national and international

0:03:49.120 --> 0:03:53.400
<v Speaker 2>media that are unique to US politics, things like the

0:03:53.400 --> 0:03:57.800
<v Speaker 2>electoral college, swing states, particular discussions that are happening around

0:03:57.800 --> 0:04:01.280
<v Speaker 2>abortion or gun control. I think a really important part

0:04:01.360 --> 0:04:03.640
<v Speaker 2>of being a news consumer in the lead up to

0:04:03.960 --> 0:04:07.000
<v Speaker 2>a US election is actually taking some time to understand

0:04:07.080 --> 0:04:11.520
<v Speaker 2>what some of these very US specific ideas are. Now.

0:04:11.520 --> 0:04:13.240
<v Speaker 2>One of the ideas that there's come up a lot

0:04:13.320 --> 0:04:16.560
<v Speaker 2>when talking about the election with people here at the

0:04:16.640 --> 0:04:20.080
<v Speaker 2>Daily Ohs but also just friends and family, is why

0:04:20.200 --> 0:04:24.200
<v Speaker 2>both presidential candidates are spending so much time in very

0:04:24.240 --> 0:04:28.360
<v Speaker 2>specific parts of the country. And the answer, of course,

0:04:28.560 --> 0:04:31.520
<v Speaker 2>is this idea of swing states, or as they're referred

0:04:31.520 --> 0:04:35.279
<v Speaker 2>to sometimes in US media, battleground states. I wanted to

0:04:35.320 --> 0:04:38.240
<v Speaker 2>go a bit deeper into this, and it kind of

0:04:38.320 --> 0:04:41.520
<v Speaker 2>leads into a conversation about polling because, as you're hear

0:04:41.600 --> 0:04:44.719
<v Speaker 2>in my discussion with the co host of Planet America,

0:04:44.880 --> 0:04:48.240
<v Speaker 2>Chas Lichadello. We often looked at polls for a bit

0:04:48.279 --> 0:04:50.600
<v Speaker 2>of a clue as to who is leading in these

0:04:50.640 --> 0:04:54.520
<v Speaker 2>swing states. So this is an interesting conversation. It's a

0:04:54.520 --> 0:04:57.600
<v Speaker 2>little bit more about how to understand the system rather

0:04:57.640 --> 0:05:00.760
<v Speaker 2>than the candidates themselves. We spend so much talking about

0:05:00.800 --> 0:05:03.840
<v Speaker 2>Kamala Harris and Donald Trump all linked to some episodes

0:05:03.960 --> 0:05:07.240
<v Speaker 2>where we can talk about their policies. But here's that

0:05:07.320 --> 0:05:11.320
<v Speaker 2>chat with Chas about all things swing states. Chas, thanks

0:05:11.320 --> 0:05:14.400
<v Speaker 2>so much for joining us today. I wanted to get

0:05:14.760 --> 0:05:18.840
<v Speaker 2>your temperature on how you're feeling about the election. You're

0:05:18.839 --> 0:05:21.240
<v Speaker 2>stuck with me in the lift. You've got thirty seconds.

0:05:21.760 --> 0:05:22.680
<v Speaker 2>Where are we at.

0:05:23.279 --> 0:05:26.440
<v Speaker 1>We have seven states they're going to determine this election,

0:05:26.560 --> 0:05:29.720
<v Speaker 1>and they are all within two points of the other

0:05:29.880 --> 0:05:33.640
<v Speaker 1>side winning those states. Two points is a magic number.

0:05:33.800 --> 0:05:36.600
<v Speaker 1>It's the margin of error of almost every poll that

0:05:36.640 --> 0:05:41.080
<v Speaker 1>you see. What that means is literally either side can

0:05:41.120 --> 0:05:43.640
<v Speaker 1>win any of seven states. And that's been the case

0:05:43.680 --> 0:05:45.960
<v Speaker 1>now for over a month. I bet that's not going

0:05:46.040 --> 0:05:49.360
<v Speaker 1>to change. I think we're looking at potentially the closest

0:05:49.400 --> 0:05:52.640
<v Speaker 1>election that's ever been run, and I reckon that. Anyone

0:05:52.680 --> 0:05:55.400
<v Speaker 1>who says they know who's going to win going up

0:05:55.400 --> 0:05:58.840
<v Speaker 1>to this election is full of shit. It's going to

0:05:58.880 --> 0:06:00.480
<v Speaker 1>be really, really close.

0:06:01.040 --> 0:06:03.080
<v Speaker 2>And so when you're talking about those seven states, you're

0:06:03.120 --> 0:06:07.320
<v Speaker 2>referring to swing states, you're referring to sometimes I've heard them,

0:06:07.360 --> 0:06:11.320
<v Speaker 2>particularly in US media, called battleground states, and those are

0:06:11.320 --> 0:06:13.320
<v Speaker 2>the seven that hold the key. So I might just

0:06:13.320 --> 0:06:15.400
<v Speaker 2>take a moment to actually take you through these seven

0:06:15.480 --> 0:06:18.200
<v Speaker 2>states that we are talking about so much and run

0:06:18.279 --> 0:06:20.560
<v Speaker 2>you through not only where they are in the country,

0:06:20.560 --> 0:06:23.880
<v Speaker 2>but also how many electoral votes they each hold. So

0:06:23.960 --> 0:06:27.120
<v Speaker 2>Pennsylvania is the big one of the seven. It has

0:06:27.360 --> 0:06:30.960
<v Speaker 2>nineteen electoral votes. Then we have North Carolina and Georgia

0:06:31.120 --> 0:06:35.320
<v Speaker 2>they've got sixteen each, Michigan has fifteen, Arizona has eleven,

0:06:35.440 --> 0:06:39.320
<v Speaker 2>Wisconsin has ten, and Nevada has six. Now, if we

0:06:39.320 --> 0:06:41.840
<v Speaker 2>were to look at the polls, it looks like at

0:06:41.880 --> 0:06:45.920
<v Speaker 2>the moment, Karmala Harris is leading in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin,

0:06:46.040 --> 0:06:49.719
<v Speaker 2>and Nevada. Trump is leading in North Carolina and Georgia.

0:06:50.040 --> 0:06:52.800
<v Speaker 2>And it's a bit of a lineball decision in Arizona.

0:06:52.880 --> 0:06:56.200
<v Speaker 2>Besides for the fact that they're very close contests, why

0:06:56.240 --> 0:06:57.280
<v Speaker 2>those seven.

0:06:57.360 --> 0:06:59.960
<v Speaker 1>There's nothing special that each of these states. They all

0:07:00.160 --> 0:07:02.640
<v Speaker 1>very different from each other. The only thing they have

0:07:02.680 --> 0:07:06.200
<v Speaker 1>in common is they happen to have about fifty percent

0:07:06.640 --> 0:07:09.720
<v Speaker 1>Republicans and fifty percent Democrats. Are the people who are

0:07:09.720 --> 0:07:13.400
<v Speaker 1>willing to vote. And that's an important emphasis that people

0:07:13.440 --> 0:07:16.120
<v Speaker 1>who are willing to vote, because I don't think people

0:07:16.200 --> 0:07:20.200
<v Speaker 1>realize how few people do vote in America, and if

0:07:20.240 --> 0:07:24.600
<v Speaker 1>one side can convince people who haven't voted before to

0:07:24.640 --> 0:07:27.920
<v Speaker 1>turn out to vote, we wouldn't know it until election day.

0:07:28.280 --> 0:07:30.800
<v Speaker 1>The reason why I say that is because one of

0:07:30.880 --> 0:07:34.239
<v Speaker 1>the keys with polls is what they call a likely

0:07:34.360 --> 0:07:37.640
<v Speaker 1>voter model. Because they don't just decide. They don't just

0:07:38.240 --> 0:07:42.280
<v Speaker 1>ask any rando in a poll. They ask people who

0:07:42.320 --> 0:07:46.280
<v Speaker 1>they think are likely to vote. Now, when you say

0:07:46.680 --> 0:07:49.000
<v Speaker 1>likely to vote, how do they know who's likely to vote?

0:07:49.040 --> 0:07:50.920
<v Speaker 1>You might think, Oh, they just ask them, are you

0:07:50.960 --> 0:07:53.400
<v Speaker 1>going to vote? And if they say yes, then they

0:07:53.440 --> 0:07:56.240
<v Speaker 1>say they're likely to vote. No, they don't do that

0:07:56.320 --> 0:07:59.720
<v Speaker 1>because people lie and people have no idea. In the past,

0:08:00.040 --> 0:08:02.440
<v Speaker 1>about twenty seven to twenty eight percent of people who

0:08:02.520 --> 0:08:06.040
<v Speaker 1>say they're definitely going to vote do not vote. So

0:08:06.360 --> 0:08:08.680
<v Speaker 1>the way they determine this is by looking at your

0:08:08.720 --> 0:08:13.000
<v Speaker 1>voting history. Because in America you can buy people's voting history,

0:08:12.560 --> 0:08:16.480
<v Speaker 1>and so if you haven't voted before, you're never going

0:08:16.560 --> 0:08:20.000
<v Speaker 1>to be in a poll, which means if one side

0:08:20.120 --> 0:08:23.520
<v Speaker 1>gets out an extra three or four percent of voters,

0:08:24.080 --> 0:08:26.559
<v Speaker 1>they won't turn up in any poll at all because

0:08:26.560 --> 0:08:29.480
<v Speaker 1>they're not likely voters, which is why when you have

0:08:29.520 --> 0:08:32.160
<v Speaker 1>a close election like this, could be a big surprise

0:08:32.280 --> 0:08:33.640
<v Speaker 1>who wins in a particular state.

0:08:34.000 --> 0:08:35.800
<v Speaker 2>And so is that the key dynamic at play in

0:08:35.920 --> 0:08:38.160
<v Speaker 2>terms of polling, because obviously here in Australia we have

0:08:38.240 --> 0:08:42.600
<v Speaker 2>compulsory polling, So if you did a census based example

0:08:42.760 --> 0:08:45.720
<v Speaker 2>of Australians, they have to vote, so you don't have

0:08:45.760 --> 0:08:49.400
<v Speaker 2>that extra layer of complexity. Is that why you think

0:08:49.440 --> 0:08:52.360
<v Speaker 2>there's this narrative that the polls have constantly gotten it wrong.

0:08:52.760 --> 0:08:55.640
<v Speaker 1>Yes. Yes, it is the hardest thing in the world

0:08:55.679 --> 0:08:58.040
<v Speaker 1>for a polster in America to try and work out

0:08:58.120 --> 0:08:59.960
<v Speaker 1>who is going to actually turn up to vote.

0:09:00.160 --> 0:09:02.080
<v Speaker 2>So why do we pay so much attention to them

0:09:02.160 --> 0:09:03.000
<v Speaker 2>in the media.

0:09:03.360 --> 0:09:06.040
<v Speaker 1>Because if we don't pay attention to them, we've got

0:09:06.200 --> 0:09:10.160
<v Speaker 1>no common frame of reference to talk about politics. Like

0:09:10.600 --> 0:09:13.280
<v Speaker 1>when I say to you, say, for instance, you asked

0:09:13.280 --> 0:09:16.480
<v Speaker 1>me about the debate and you say, who went well?

0:09:17.120 --> 0:09:19.120
<v Speaker 1>The first thing I would say is what the poll said.

0:09:19.400 --> 0:09:22.559
<v Speaker 1>If I said, oh, I thought Trump went well, then

0:09:22.559 --> 0:09:24.960
<v Speaker 1>you go, well, yeah, sure you thought that, but someone

0:09:24.960 --> 0:09:27.800
<v Speaker 1>else might think something else. And so the only way

0:09:28.400 --> 0:09:33.120
<v Speaker 1>in this world that we can evaluate anything that even

0:09:33.200 --> 0:09:36.920
<v Speaker 1>sounds objective is through some kind of referee, and that

0:09:37.160 --> 0:09:40.800
<v Speaker 1>is polling. So, even though polling is kind of fools gold,

0:09:41.480 --> 0:09:45.880
<v Speaker 1>it feels like objectivity, and so we, in our very

0:09:45.920 --> 0:09:49.920
<v Speaker 1>subjective existence, we reach for whatever objectivity we can find.

0:09:50.960 --> 0:09:53.840
<v Speaker 2>Explain to me, why then we're going to see the

0:09:53.880 --> 0:09:58.320
<v Speaker 2>candidates both candidates spend so much time in these states

0:09:58.360 --> 0:10:01.640
<v Speaker 2>when there might be other states. Let's take California, for example,

0:10:02.000 --> 0:10:05.040
<v Speaker 2>which Kamala Harris is going to win. I mean, we

0:10:05.080 --> 0:10:08.560
<v Speaker 2>can say that with almost perfect certainty. There's such a

0:10:08.559 --> 0:10:11.439
<v Speaker 2>bigger population in a place like California than one of

0:10:11.480 --> 0:10:15.080
<v Speaker 2>the swing states. Let's take Arizona or Pennsylvania. Why are

0:10:15.080 --> 0:10:17.920
<v Speaker 2>we going to see her campaign bus pull up so

0:10:18.000 --> 0:10:22.200
<v Speaker 2>many more times in Pennsylvania for let's say, sixty thousand

0:10:22.240 --> 0:10:25.680
<v Speaker 2>votes in one particular community than Los Angeles, where she

0:10:25.760 --> 0:10:26.760
<v Speaker 2>could have millions.

0:10:27.480 --> 0:10:30.120
<v Speaker 1>It's because the way the electoral college works in America

0:10:30.160 --> 0:10:32.480
<v Speaker 1>which is how they determine who wins the presidential election

0:10:32.880 --> 0:10:35.319
<v Speaker 1>is not by the number of votes. They don't care

0:10:35.520 --> 0:10:38.720
<v Speaker 1>about the number of votes. What they care about is

0:10:38.920 --> 0:10:41.640
<v Speaker 1>how many states you win or how many states you

0:10:41.640 --> 0:10:45.080
<v Speaker 1>get a majority in, and how much each state is worth.

0:10:45.320 --> 0:10:47.559
<v Speaker 1>And the way they determine how much each state is

0:10:47.600 --> 0:10:51.440
<v Speaker 1>worth it's quite a complicated formula, but essentially, the greater

0:10:51.520 --> 0:10:55.160
<v Speaker 1>the population, the more a state is worth. So say California,

0:10:55.240 --> 0:10:56.640
<v Speaker 1>off the top of my head, I think is worth

0:10:56.679 --> 0:11:00.240
<v Speaker 1>fifty five electoral college votes, whereas Nevada, of the top

0:11:00.280 --> 0:11:04.120
<v Speaker 1>of my head, is worth four I think electoral college votes.

0:11:04.480 --> 0:11:07.360
<v Speaker 1>So California is worth many more than the Vada. But

0:11:07.440 --> 0:11:10.640
<v Speaker 1>you get those fifty five electoral college votes from in

0:11:10.679 --> 0:11:14.200
<v Speaker 1>California just for getting fifty one percent of the vote

0:11:14.200 --> 0:11:18.960
<v Speaker 1>in California. In California, there's seventy percent of the voter

0:11:19.040 --> 0:11:22.080
<v Speaker 1>as a Democratic. There's no point for either side to

0:11:22.120 --> 0:11:26.960
<v Speaker 1>step one foot inside California because the fifty one percent

0:11:27.040 --> 0:11:29.959
<v Speaker 1>is already determined and the fifty five votes are going

0:11:30.000 --> 0:11:32.640
<v Speaker 1>to the Democrats. You're wasting your time. You might as

0:11:32.640 --> 0:11:36.200
<v Speaker 1>well spend time in states where it's really really close

0:11:36.240 --> 0:11:39.360
<v Speaker 1>and uncertain where those electoral College votes are going to go,

0:11:39.679 --> 0:11:41.960
<v Speaker 1>and they're the swing states, which is why everyone spends

0:11:41.960 --> 0:11:42.440
<v Speaker 1>time there.

0:11:42.880 --> 0:11:44.839
<v Speaker 2>I don't know if you've ever been in a swing

0:11:44.880 --> 0:11:47.640
<v Speaker 2>state in the lead up to an election, but is

0:11:47.679 --> 0:11:52.080
<v Speaker 2>it overwhelming? Like I imagine this huge political infrastructure of

0:11:52.080 --> 0:11:56.480
<v Speaker 2>both parties kind of cascading in on corners of America

0:11:56.559 --> 0:11:59.880
<v Speaker 2>that are largely quiet, you know, three years and eleven months,

0:12:00.440 --> 0:12:02.120
<v Speaker 2>and then they're just crazy for a month.

0:12:02.480 --> 0:12:04.920
<v Speaker 1>Look, I wish I could tell you personal experience, but

0:12:05.040 --> 0:12:07.360
<v Speaker 1>I've never even been in America during an election campaign,

0:12:07.400 --> 0:12:09.840
<v Speaker 1>let alone in the swing state during an election campaign,

0:12:09.880 --> 0:12:11.960
<v Speaker 1>So I can't tell you from my own personal experience. Yeah,

0:12:12.040 --> 0:12:14.240
<v Speaker 1>I can tell you this. I can't tell you that

0:12:14.280 --> 0:12:18.240
<v Speaker 1>not only do people get in physical fist fights over

0:12:18.679 --> 0:12:21.400
<v Speaker 1>yard signs, which is like the signs out the front

0:12:21.400 --> 0:12:24.640
<v Speaker 1>of their house saying vote vote for Trump, vote for

0:12:25.160 --> 0:12:27.840
<v Speaker 1>vote for Harris, but I can also tell you for

0:12:27.920 --> 0:12:31.880
<v Speaker 1>a fact that the primetime ad breaks in swing states

0:12:32.480 --> 0:12:36.880
<v Speaker 1>often have four to six ads about the election per

0:12:36.960 --> 0:12:40.000
<v Speaker 1>ad break for the entire three months leading up to

0:12:40.040 --> 0:12:42.960
<v Speaker 1>the election. So that would be quite overwhelming, I.

0:12:42.800 --> 0:12:45.640
<v Speaker 2>Imagine, and I'm sure the money being spent in those

0:12:45.640 --> 0:12:48.600
<v Speaker 2>particular states is quite overwhelming as well. Has there been

0:12:48.679 --> 0:12:51.600
<v Speaker 2>any sense that this electoral college model, where some states

0:12:51.600 --> 0:12:54.240
<v Speaker 2>are worth more than others, it's not a representative sample

0:12:54.720 --> 0:12:59.320
<v Speaker 2>of the US population. Has that been challenged? But like,

0:12:59.440 --> 0:13:00.960
<v Speaker 2>is that an election issue in itself?

0:13:02.120 --> 0:13:07.560
<v Speaker 1>It's like many things in America, when a system favors

0:13:07.720 --> 0:13:11.240
<v Speaker 1>one particular party over the other, well, it seems too

0:13:11.520 --> 0:13:15.120
<v Speaker 1>in an election, the people's opinions get filtered the long

0:13:15.160 --> 0:13:19.920
<v Speaker 1>party lines. So right now, Democrats despise the electoral college

0:13:19.920 --> 0:13:24.120
<v Speaker 1>system because Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but lost

0:13:24.120 --> 0:13:27.600
<v Speaker 1>the electoral college. Al Gore won the popular vote but

0:13:27.679 --> 0:13:30.800
<v Speaker 1>lost the electoral college in two thousand. So Democrats wish

0:13:30.880 --> 0:13:35.320
<v Speaker 1>it wasn't an election issue, but Republicans would never let

0:13:35.400 --> 0:13:37.480
<v Speaker 1>it be because they're very happy about the system at

0:13:37.480 --> 0:13:41.240
<v Speaker 1>the moment. Now. It's illogical in both cases, because there's

0:13:41.280 --> 0:13:44.640
<v Speaker 1>no reason why Republicans sometime in the future might not

0:13:44.760 --> 0:13:47.640
<v Speaker 1>win the popular vote but lose the electoral college. But

0:13:47.679 --> 0:13:49.400
<v Speaker 1>that's not how they think. They just look at the

0:13:49.480 --> 0:13:51.319
<v Speaker 1>last election when it mattered, and they go, who did

0:13:51.320 --> 0:13:54.240
<v Speaker 1>it help helped my side? Then I like it, and

0:13:54.320 --> 0:13:55.240
<v Speaker 1>so that's how it goes.

0:13:56.000 --> 0:13:59.240
<v Speaker 2>Cha's last question from me. You have the responsibility of

0:13:59.320 --> 0:14:02.520
<v Speaker 2>presenting a shit to Australia to update them on the

0:14:02.600 --> 0:14:05.360
<v Speaker 2>US in a really critical month. Where are you going

0:14:05.400 --> 0:14:07.840
<v Speaker 2>to be looking? I mean, we've talked in this conversation

0:14:07.920 --> 0:14:12.400
<v Speaker 2>about the polling, the issues that exist with polling, the

0:14:12.559 --> 0:14:15.400
<v Speaker 2>reasons why perhaps it's been wrong in the past. We

0:14:15.880 --> 0:14:17.920
<v Speaker 2>haven't talked about the media, of which you and I

0:14:17.960 --> 0:14:20.720
<v Speaker 2>are both proud members of, but there are obviously well

0:14:20.760 --> 0:14:23.560
<v Speaker 2>talked out issues with US media as well. Where are

0:14:23.560 --> 0:14:24.760
<v Speaker 2>you going to be looking for truth?

0:14:27.040 --> 0:14:31.480
<v Speaker 1>There's no one source in America of objective news. That's

0:14:31.520 --> 0:14:35.600
<v Speaker 1>certainly the case. And I mean, obviously I shouldn't just

0:14:35.600 --> 0:14:41.640
<v Speaker 1>say America. That's human nature, but America, particularly America, is

0:14:41.640 --> 0:14:45.040
<v Speaker 1>a very Parsian country, and there are very few people

0:14:45.120 --> 0:14:50.000
<v Speaker 1>who aren't extremely partisan, even by Australian standards. So I

0:14:50.000 --> 0:14:53.160
<v Speaker 1>certainly wouldn't recommend that particular source. What I would say is,

0:14:53.200 --> 0:14:57.080
<v Speaker 1>if you are someone who cares about what's going on

0:14:57.320 --> 0:15:00.520
<v Speaker 1>and you have a little bit of time, advise you

0:15:00.560 --> 0:15:05.160
<v Speaker 1>to read widely, to read outlets from different points of view.

0:15:05.160 --> 0:15:07.760
<v Speaker 1>That's certainly what I do. I mean, I wouldn't advise

0:15:07.800 --> 0:15:10.160
<v Speaker 1>you to read all I read because I spend forty

0:15:10.200 --> 0:15:13.360
<v Speaker 1>hours a day reading, but I would recommend if the

0:15:13.440 --> 0:15:16.120
<v Speaker 1>other time, spend an hour flick through a couple of

0:15:16.160 --> 0:15:19.520
<v Speaker 1>different different publications. Pick out a right wing one, pick

0:15:19.520 --> 0:15:22.600
<v Speaker 1>out a left wing one, because you're just you're never

0:15:22.680 --> 0:15:26.040
<v Speaker 1>going to get the whole story from one particular publication.

0:15:26.640 --> 0:15:29.920
<v Speaker 1>It just doesn't exist. They've all got their biases. Some

0:15:29.960 --> 0:15:32.360
<v Speaker 1>are more biased than others, but all are biased. So

0:15:32.400 --> 0:15:33.560
<v Speaker 1>you just need to read widely.

0:15:33.920 --> 0:15:35.960
<v Speaker 2>Something I've been saying to my friends as well is

0:15:36.040 --> 0:15:38.680
<v Speaker 2>if you have the time, watch a full speech, So watch.

0:15:38.760 --> 0:15:41.400
<v Speaker 2>You know, they're all uploaded by the Kamala Harris or

0:15:41.400 --> 0:15:44.760
<v Speaker 2>the Donald Trump channels to YouTube. We are guilty, all

0:15:44.800 --> 0:15:47.960
<v Speaker 2>of us, you know, ABC, TDA, everyone, of chopping these

0:15:47.960 --> 0:15:51.440
<v Speaker 2>speeches up into packages so that audiences can get around

0:15:51.440 --> 0:15:53.640
<v Speaker 2>it really quickly. But there is I think a benefit

0:15:53.640 --> 0:15:57.280
<v Speaker 2>in watching an entire rally and seeing how it plays out,

0:15:57.400 --> 0:16:02.480
<v Speaker 2>how audiences respond to particular issues, unedited versions of their messaging.

0:16:02.760 --> 0:16:04.800
<v Speaker 1>I think that's excellent. I think that's excellent advice. And

0:16:04.800 --> 0:16:08.480
<v Speaker 1>I would particularly say that with regards to probably the

0:16:08.520 --> 0:16:12.400
<v Speaker 1>question I get asked more than any by Australians is

0:16:12.800 --> 0:16:16.240
<v Speaker 1>how do people support Trump? Like Australians are really not

0:16:16.280 --> 0:16:19.720
<v Speaker 1>Trump fans generally speaking, and a lot of Austrainians don't

0:16:19.760 --> 0:16:21.680
<v Speaker 1>understand it at all. They just they go, well, the

0:16:21.680 --> 0:16:23.800
<v Speaker 1>on these Americans, they seem smart. Why they suppoint this

0:16:23.840 --> 0:16:27.000
<v Speaker 1>person who I have antipathy for? I say I not

0:16:27.200 --> 0:16:30.080
<v Speaker 1>me personally, but the person I'm speaking to and by

0:16:30.120 --> 0:16:31.880
<v Speaker 1>the ways say to them is just watch a rally.

0:16:32.360 --> 0:16:34.840
<v Speaker 1>Just watch a rally, and what you will find if

0:16:34.840 --> 0:16:37.360
<v Speaker 1>you watch a Trump rally. There's plenty of silliness, there,

0:16:37.840 --> 0:16:39.720
<v Speaker 1>no doubt about that, but at least you'll start to

0:16:39.760 --> 0:16:42.000
<v Speaker 1>understand why people like it. You need to watch a

0:16:42.000 --> 0:16:45.200
<v Speaker 1>whole rally. And if you can't understand why people like

0:16:45.200 --> 0:16:48.440
<v Speaker 1>a politician, forget Trump from now, just any politician, then

0:16:48.480 --> 0:16:51.160
<v Speaker 1>I definitely would recommend what you just said to pull

0:16:51.200 --> 0:16:53.280
<v Speaker 1>out one of their rallies and just just find out

0:16:53.320 --> 0:16:56.720
<v Speaker 1>what their supporters see. And if you can't work it out,

0:16:56.800 --> 0:16:57.840
<v Speaker 1>then you haven't watched enough.

0:16:58.440 --> 0:17:00.120
<v Speaker 2>It's only once every four years that we have to

0:17:00.120 --> 0:17:02.560
<v Speaker 2>slowly start building our literacy around the swing states, the

0:17:02.560 --> 0:17:05.719
<v Speaker 2>electoral college, the polling, the candidates chas. You've made that

0:17:05.760 --> 0:17:07.600
<v Speaker 2>a little bit easier today. Thank you so much for

0:17:07.640 --> 0:17:10.639
<v Speaker 2>your time, and we'll chat to you soon. That's how

0:17:10.640 --> 0:17:13.080
<v Speaker 2>we've got time for on today's edition of The Daily Odds.

0:17:13.080 --> 0:17:16.919
<v Speaker 2>It's certainly raised a couple more questions than answers that conversation,

0:17:17.040 --> 0:17:19.560
<v Speaker 2>and I think it's only good if we can have

0:17:19.600 --> 0:17:21.440
<v Speaker 2>these sorts of chats about the way that the US

0:17:21.520 --> 0:17:25.040
<v Speaker 2>presidential electoral system works. It's going to become more and

0:17:25.040 --> 0:17:27.720
<v Speaker 2>more important than the weeks ahead to understand the significance

0:17:27.800 --> 0:17:30.119
<v Speaker 2>of each states. And there was some really interesting stuff

0:17:30.160 --> 0:17:32.439
<v Speaker 2>from Chas there at the end about how to become

0:17:32.480 --> 0:17:34.840
<v Speaker 2>a better news consumer in what is one of the

0:17:34.840 --> 0:17:38.639
<v Speaker 2>most decisive and consequential elections in the world. We'll be

0:17:38.720 --> 0:17:41.520
<v Speaker 2>back again for another episode of The Daily Ods tomorrow,

0:17:41.520 --> 0:17:43.159
<v Speaker 2>but if you enjoyed that chat, I would love you

0:17:43.200 --> 0:17:46.040
<v Speaker 2>to check us out on YouTube. That's where we're trying

0:17:46.080 --> 0:17:49.200
<v Speaker 2>to grow this audience and engage more with the video

0:17:49.240 --> 0:17:51.440
<v Speaker 2>side of a podcast. Try and watching a podcast kind

0:17:51.440 --> 0:17:53.560
<v Speaker 2>of like watching a TV show. So if you could

0:17:53.600 --> 0:17:56.240
<v Speaker 2>jump on there and follow us, it really does send

0:17:56.280 --> 0:17:58.920
<v Speaker 2>a signal to YouTube that we're a channel worth paying

0:17:58.920 --> 0:18:02.439
<v Speaker 2>attention to helps us grow. Thanks so much for joining us.

0:18:02.440 --> 0:18:03.800
<v Speaker 2>We'll speak to you again tomorrow.

0:18:06.600 --> 0:18:08.919
<v Speaker 3>My name is Lily Maddon and I'm a proud Arunda

0:18:09.119 --> 0:18:13.919
<v Speaker 3>Bungelung Kalkutin woman from Gadighl country. The Daily oz acknowledges

0:18:14.000 --> 0:18:16.159
<v Speaker 3>that this podcast is recorded on the lands of the

0:18:16.200 --> 0:18:19.800
<v Speaker 3>Gadighl people and pays respect to all Aboriginal and torrest

0:18:19.840 --> 0:18:22.679
<v Speaker 3>Rate island and nations. We pay our respects to the

0:18:22.680 --> 0:18:25.479
<v Speaker 3>first peoples of these countries, both past and present.