¶ Mike Pesca joins the Chuck ToddCast
This episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought to you by Ethos and what Ethos does is it helps you find life insurance. Let me tell you why life insurance bailed me out. My father died when I was sixteen. We didn't have a lot of money when it happened, and we were in a pretty tough financial spot after it happened. I'm an only child. Suddenly my mother's single, single mother. She had a job, suddenly lost a job,
looking for another job, and we were struggling. You know, my dad didn't leave us in the best financial situation, but he did make one purchase. He bought a life insurance policy. Wasn't a huge chunk of change, but it was enough when we found it. And when I say we found it, meaning we went through his desk and we found, oh, look at this, let's see if there's anything here. And it helped us out at a time
that we really needed it. And that's why I think it's important that if you can, especially if you have young children, if you can get life insurance, you should get it. Life is full of unexpected emergencies, unexpected things happen. It is an extra bit of security, something you can leave and help out at a time when you're you're not there to help. So what does Ethos do well? Ethos makes getting life insurance fast and easy, and it's
one hundred percent online. You can get a quote in seconds, you can apply in minutes, and you can get same day coverage. They will find you the right fit. There's no medical exam. You just answer a few simple health questions online. You can get up to three million dollars in coverage and some policies are as low as thirty dollars a month, and you'll get your lowest rate from their network of trusted carriers. So take ten minutes to get covered today with life insurance through Ethos. Get your
free quote at ethos dot com slash chuck. That is ETOs dot com slash chuck. Application times may vary and rates may vary.
Well.
Coming back for a return engagement, as we'd like to do regularly, I think we're almost doing this quarterly. It's my my pal, Mike Pesca of the Just List and all sorts of his his world. We were just talking about each other's each other's digital world, and we like
¶ The emergence of the never Trump media
to have our worlds collide.
Mike, it's good to see.
You, Hey, thanks for having me. Speaking of quarterly what happened to the Trump proposal to do away with quarterly reports and only do by anyal I guess it would be Actually just so there's that's still moving its way.
Through the SEC. I think I actually just saw an update on that.
There is I think which I've talked.
Oh, it's a good idea. I talked to you.
You know, there was a so Jack Welch is considered the got the the sort of the godfather of that idea, right, the quarterly reports to goose stock prices. Back in his old ge days and towards the end of his life he started expressing like he admitted, I probably that the quarterly report idea.
Was it is past.
He wouldn't, you know, because no person of his ego will ever admit they were wrong. He just sort of admitted that they were. It was no longer useful and so was probably hurting companies. He was he was pre right, Yes, yeah, exactly, you.
¶ Both parties have become reactionary
Know the way somebody with a huge ego like his.
So the down yeah, the downside to that that I've heard is that back when Jack Welsh was pioneering that things were a little more stable and now quarterly reports at least give some visibility into possible meltdowns. But also the Ft. There's an FT podcast I know you like the Ft, and they were having a debate where I think they said, just financially good idea, but what you
don't want to do is give Donald Trump any wins. Ever, and these were FT journalists right now, but they were embracing I guess their activism, which is once he comes up with a good idea, that's the most dangerous thing of all. And I was contrasting that. I did a thing on the Gist my show with The Dispatch where viewed Emily Auster, who was saying, you know, some of this MAGA stuff, not the vaccines, but the meat and the food pyramid, that is a good idea. And then
she got blowback, how are you giving Trump credit? So even journalistically, it's interesting the Dispatch, you know, these former Republicans are maybe still identified conservatives. They're saying we have to be honest, that if we need to give Trump a win, we give them a win. And the Financial Times,
¶ Prior to the civil war, leaders just papered over the divides
which definitely sees themselves outside the activism continuum, said no, we can never give Donald Trump a win.
No, this.
Well, you know, this is at the core of the redistricting fight in Virginia. This is a bad idea, This is bad for democracy. But the but the counter argument from people that even admit, yeah, this is not a good idea long term, you got to fight fire with fire. And it's the whole, this whole mentality. And I just think, look what we've turned into is I think both parties
have become reactionary parties. Right, they don't really right, they define themselves right own the Libs and Trump resistance is really the same ideology, don't you think.
Yes, And all we're doing in Yvone, Levine writes about this, we're just in this era of going back and forth and to and fro, and I don't see how we get out of it now, as far as the redition, I.
Do, but we got out of this before. I obsessed
¶ Debate in both parties is full resistance vs. compromise
over this. This is actually the I'm going to pull a muscle padding my promoting something I'm doing here, but on my substack this week, I sort of go through I'm obsessed with the period between Jackson and Lincoln in American history because it was this we had technically eight presidents in twenty four years, because of deaths.
But it was really seven.
Presidencies in twenty four years because you had the thirty one day president and each one of them, and essentially it was like each president was elected claiming they were going to solve it, they were going to bring the country together, they were going to quote solve this problem, right, but not necessarily solve the problem, meaning.
At that time it's slavery.
But it would be all these papering over ideas, right, So you had whether it was the Democrats nominating a northern or at one point in Franklin Pierce, or the joint Tickets, which was Harrison and what's it the dough face, right, yeah, the few the signing of the Fugitive Slave Act that Millard Fillmore thought was going to finally, you know, to break some peace, right, it was, but it was a It was just a series of presidents that were trying to paper over, right. And then finally the Whigs were
¶ Virginia would go 8-3 Democrat without partisan redistricting
just too weak to deal with the issue. And then finally we got a new party in the Republican Party. So it led me to think, which party is going to be the Whigs, because I'm convinced one of them is going away in the next decade or so big out of frustration by there bye by like you can't, you're not you're not accomplishing. You know, there's going to be a moment, and I think, you know.
Trump won.
Everybody thought it'd be the Republicans. I'm not thinking, well, it could very easily be the Democrats, right, because they're in some ways performing like the Whigs. At the moment where there's a divide inside the party, do you go full resistance or do you try to persuade those, you know, a few more from the other side to try to have a more durable majoritarianism. And I think that, you know, bottom line is we're not We're not done yet with this back and forth we had. We went through six
presidencies between Jackson and Lincoln. Nobody got re elected, no party got reelected. Right, it was just a series of
¶ Competitive districts will create more reasonable candidates
this stuff. And we're we're in our third one right now, twenty eight yet going to resolve this. So I think we will eventually resolve it. The question is how many people have to get hurt before we sober up.
That's exactly what I was saying. So all it will take is six hundred thousand dead, Although normed for the current population now would be like what two million?
Great? I know we're not advocating civil war here, guys. No, the boat.
We're actually hoping we can resolve it with it, you know, just short of that. Yeah, there are different parties, systems. I wanted I heard your commentary on Virginia. So you think that even without this redistricting, it would go from now it's six Democrats, five Republicans.
You think we'd go to nine to two.
Eight three without it? Eighty three without it? You got the first and the second man.
You think, do you think ten to one with it or I don't know if they get the ten one ten one max. Yeah, but it could end up at nine to two. So if you end up at nine two, you basically did all this work. You sort of peed away political capital of Barack Obama and Abigail Spamberger for one seat.
Right, But do you think as a general principal Democrats who have always said we are better than redistricting for political gain, do you think that's what they should say or they should be recognizing the moment right now where the headwinds are that we don't need to do it right now. Because as a principle. I do not believe in unilateral disarmament.
Sure, I understand that concept.
Yeah, I just think the problem is, I guess I'm even more Pollyannish about it. I think having more swing basically you're taking away swing districts. But if you actually have Republicans in light red districts, then you have more possibility. Would we be better off if a third of the Republican caucus were Don Bacon people? Or do you create a situation where no, you're just gonna have a whole.
Bunch of James Comers. Is that what you want?
And then then there's no ability to sort of bridge any divides, so that I actually think that that's the other part of this is that what do you what do you are we really gaining in this other than
¶ Partisan primaries are the biggest driver of our hyperpartisanship
a fight just you know, a gavel And again I'm I'm.
This, Look, we've gone through this.
Anytime you want to temporarily suspend anything because you think no, no, no, First of all, how often have parties you know who said no, no, no, we'll come back to this have actually come back to this?
Right?
Yeah, I think that that's wise, but very specific to the moment, and I remember it was before we started seeing polls or knew much more than there's usually the swing back in the mid terms. But New York had the choice whether to really to throw out a fairly drawn electoral map, or the Democrats could try to force
¶ Mobile voting would be a game changer for voter participation
through their pro democratic map. And I remember thinking to myself, these are the Democrats right now kind of violating their own principles. And I don't know if they'll be punished by the voters for it, but they're showing themselves to be cynical, and it is I said, not a good look. Now, this was before I thought that they would win anyway, And in New York it doesn't really matter that My matter is a little bit. You know, Upstate New York elects repulsive valley.
There's a whole bunch of places where right now New York is Ohio without the New York City mean.
Well, Pennsylvania's Alabama with a tea in the middle. But as a principle, I don't think people really vote on it, especially because of the primacy of the primaries. And I think this is the biggest problem in American politics. You were talking about money. I think whatever can be done to make the because we're so polarized. I mean, if you want to go back to the EPI phenomenon, the primaries of the EPI phenomenon on, our polarization is the worst.
¶ All-party primaries are a better alternative
And I have a friend and a guy I know, Bradley Tusk, and he's tried to get essentially app voting, and I think that would be a real game changer if it could be done successfully. And he's convinced me it can be done, so I don't want to you know, a lot.
They're going to experiment in Alaska with this first.
Alaska and it's done in West Virginia and it's been done successfully, and he specifically tried to bring it to non Blue states. He tried to bring it to places where they might be suspicious of this online voting app and think about all the things that we do that need to be secure on an app, from you know, registering for a citizenship or for our IDs and everything else.
So it can be done. And once it's done, and once it's easy, it takes primaries from something with eleven percent participation, so you know, fifty And I think that's a huge game changer and it's the number one reform I think that really can change things look.
And I actually think state I think I think we've had this conversation before. I think taxpayer funded partisan primaries I think are unconstitutional because you're telling me I have to join a private organization in order to participate in a taxpayer funded event. I think that's a violation of equal protection. And now that I don't think they're you know, I'm I am pretty I would just call it supportive
of the folks over at open primaries. And I've like pushed this as as sort of I think there's a legal I think there's actually you can you can sue some of the states that had these that essentially bar independence and bar non registered voters from this. But looked all party primary, I mean, it is the better answer.
There's no you know.
The fact is, think about the office that is the
¶ Is there a viable path for independent candidates to win?
least partisan in America these days, it's mayor. And a majority of mayors are elected in all party primaries, where the top two candidates usually they don't even put parties. A lot of them are none are you don't put your party label on the ballot.
And top two play.
I mean, And the thing is is that I love to use the example of a congressman and Carlos Sumenez. He's a Republican congressman from Miami. When he was mayor of Miami Dade, I had no idea he was a conservative Republican because he didn't govern that way. He governed the whole county. He was elected in a county wide vote. He never put his party. You knew he leaned, right, Okay, And let's say you governed based on how the votes
¶ Dem brand is so toxic in Nebraska, only an independent can be viable
that get you in office. And then, of course he got elected in a partisan Republican primary where the Republican primaries everything, and he's voted a lot more concern even challenged that the elect didn't certify in January sixth, right, And I remember being surprised that he didn't because I knew what kind of marry was. But I'd actually chalk it up to I always say this, Our issue is incentives.
There are bad people can do good things with good incentives, and good people can do bad things with bad incentives. And our primary system is mostly a bad incentive.
Right.
And to be a mayor you have to deliver actual material benefits to your voters and you will be judged on that. And snow days matter, not in Miami, but definitely in the Northeast. And then when you were a part of an anonymous or by choice, a powerless organization
¶ Ranked choice voting is further down the list of good reforms
like the House of Representatives, then your incentives are all to be either a free agent who is a burr in the side of your party, or you know, a party apparatic. Absolutely, what do you.
What do you think of these independent candidacies and do you buy into them or are you one of those that just doesn't believe these are going to work?
Duverger's law we only have two parties, babe? Do you remember that from your political science training?
What was its law?
Duverger? It might be Duvage. This was the idea that in a first past the post system such as ours, you only ever get two parties. But it was one of these laws with so many exceptions. I don't know that being like a Tammany Hall law. Like look at India. They have first passed the post and they have vulgar parties.
¶ Ranked choice makes explaining results difficult on election night
Of course it's India. So I think in some of the cases, you know Nebraska, it's an imperative. It's the only the In that case, the brand of the of the Democrats are so toxic that it makes sense to run as an independent say, with McMullen in Utah. Not that he could win, but it makes sense to win to run that way. And I also think on the presidential level there's a real chance at a breakthrough of a third party candidate. I think it's so much harder
at the state level. I kind of support it. I like experimentation and mixing up, but you know, just because of all the incentives and all the everything that's in place, it makes it hard. It would be easier with that jungle primary. I think first past, not first past the post, but top two. Oh and one other thing I wanted to say, it's a light criticism. I think that the activists who were so behind ranked choice voting, they my rank choice of electoral reforms that would be way down
¶ Louisiana had the best version of the jungle primary
the list. I'm more for it than against it, but ninety somethings percent of the time it doesn't have a real impact. There is a certain percentage of the time where you could plausibly argue is the are the will of the people really being reflected? And they did put a lot of effort into that, as opposed to jungle primaries, which I think would have helped things a lot more.
Well.
Look, the concept of top four then you know, sort of top four advanced. You know, the Alaska law is everybody's on the same ballot and top four advance, then it becomes ranked choice for the general. I'd prefer it, I'm with My issue with ranked choice goes back to my days explaining what was explaining the vote count as it was coming in on election nights, and nobody can explain the black box that is ranked choice voting. There is no way for me to be able to open
up on election night. Okay, here's the initial run and you know, here's what we know about the second choices. There appears to be this Canada has more second choices
¶ Louisiana changed their system just to beat Bill Cassidy
off of this, And you know, do I think we could get there with states and local officials getting better at figuring out how to report these things out?
Yeah?
But are we better off not trying to have them do two or three different counts on election night and just focus on the main thing being the main thing, the actual the first count, and then you have a runoff, you know, I mean, look, I'm for Louisiana had the of all the jump primary systems, it was Louisiana was my favorite jungle system because they did it where the all party primary actually was like in October or September, was late, and then top if nobody got fifty, top
two met in the general election itself. So that way you had because the fear is that if you have a runoff after the general election, you get fewer, lesser turnout, and it's less will of the people. That's why the timing of the of the Louisiana system made the most sense of how he did it. And then you don't have to worry about rank choice voting, but you get all the but you get the you get exactly what rank choice voting wants to deliver.
Yes, And I think that I still think it's true that ninety something percent of the vote would be the same,
¶ If jungle primary in CA produces a Republican, reforms come in a year
and that's why these other reforms I think would deliver. I think that Louisiana system has the potential to deliver vastly different and more in line with the will of the people results unlike astall.
Look, I think that by the way, look at the last you know, Louisiana's basically created a Republican primary system for this cycle just to beat Bill Cassidy. Right, it became a but they got there getting rid of their they got rid of the system just to defeat Bill Cassidy, because in.
The old system, Cassidy would have won.
Yeah.
And the point being, if you actually look at Louisiana election results over the past twenty five years, before you know, they put this system in, you had a competitive two party system. You had, Yeah, the land Drew dynasty was that's right. And you also had you know, John Bell Edwards. By the way, Washington State, which has a version of this system too, also has had even though it's a very blue state, it's been a very competitive Republican party
for some time up there because of this system. And so I just think it actually gives minority voices more
¶ One of the Democratic CA governor candidates has to go
of an opportunity.
To have to get their say.
And I look at Washington, Louisiana, who have Now you know, again we're in this era where each party feels like they have to do everything they can to maximize their ability to win. In fact, so a buddy of mine who's a big consultant in California, I asked him, so, what happens if the two Republicans end up in the top two and that's the general election, right, Steve Hilton
and Bianca? And he said Hilton would win and in less than a year there'd be a recall, right, and the top two and then the legislature would he and then there'd be a ballot prop to get rid of the all party primaries and California would return to this old system, basically eradicate all the Arnold Schwarzenegger election reforms within essentially eighteen months, if that is, If that's the scenario and the way he at I said, you know what,
he's probably right. There would probably be a successful recall. Hilton probably would get recalled pretty quickly. And you know, you could just see that because we're so partisan right now, particularly on the coasts, that would happen pretty quick.
¶ Surprising how many big name candidates passed on CA gov race
So there's a classic conundrum there where Styer and Porter and Swalwell looking at each other, and the mayor of San Jose McMahon, who you had on the show the other day. You know, he thinks it's a fairy is at four percent or whatever? I guess you could say, who blinks first? But is it? If someone has to it? You know, it's the classic conundrum of they're all incentivized not to go, but but some of them, one of them has to go for the good of the trust.
Don't you trust the voters to figure it out? And I just think they'll tune in. I don't know.
I think that if Stier or Porter or swollwell, if one of them doesn't go, the risk is so far outweighs their individual choice of a chance of becoming governor. It could even ruin all of their careers, right, That's maybe how they should think about it. But they were so selfish that none of them would step down. This episode of the Check podcast is brought to you by Soul.
¶ Kash Patel might hand Eric Swalwell the nomination by leaking file
So if you love that end of the day unwined but hate the hangover, Soul's out of Office is for you. These sparkling THCHC drinks and gummies give you the same relaxed social feeling without the alcohol, without the calories, and without the crash. Soul is a wellness brand that believes feeling good should be fun and easy. Soul specializes in delicious hemp derived THCHC and CBD products designed to boost
your mood and help you unwind. Their best selling out of Office gummies were designed to provide a mild, relaxing buzz, boost your mood, and enhance creativity and relaxation with five different strengths.
You can tailor the dose to fit your vibe.
So also has a variety of products specifically designed to help you get a better night's rest, including their top
¶ Gavin Newsom doesn't have an heir apparent
selling Sleepy Gummies, a fan favored for deep restorous sleep. Look, I have made no secret I am a believer in this stuff, in cannabis and hemp derived. I do not partake in alcohol. For the most part, I think this stuff is a lot safer them alcohol, a lot less addictive than alcohol. And yes, I have to say I love these drinks. It is the glass of wine and you know after work, that's what this is. So no hangover and no excess calories like this.
I'm a big fan. So bring on the.
Good vibes and treat yourself to sold today right now, Soul is offering my audience thirty percent off your entire order. Go to getsoul dot com and use the word toodcast that's getsol dot com promo code podcast for thirty percent off.
And yes, I too, am a customer. I can look at it another way.
Isn't this isn't the fact that no Democrat has jumped out and indictment of the candidates themselves who are running. I mean, you know, you do have a lot of I remember remember the since you're your you and I are pretty close in age. You remember the nineteen ninety two presidential field when it was in nineteen ninety one and called the seven Dwarfs, yep, I remember that it becomes none of them over, none of the major Democrats
¶ With control of congress, should Dems try to pass legislation with Trump?
that everybody thought were going to be the front runners. They thought, oh, Bush is unbeatable, I'm not running. I'm going to wait till ninety six. Right, you're Bill Bradley's you're out, Gorge, your dicktep parts, all these Jay Rockefeller, all these say I'm none. There were all these people that said I'm waiting, and you know, so there were those that said, well, every nomination's worth having, so why not. And it does feel like the California right that the
mayor of San Francis. I've talked to so many Democrats whore like, I wish the mayor of San Francisco were running, Lurry or you have those in southern California. I wish Rick Caruso were running, but he's not. I've heard others say I wish Kamala Harrison running, I wish Alex Padilla were running, there's a lot of It is amazing when you look at the number of high profile people that
don't want to lead the world's fourth largest economy. It's surprising how many people have taken a pass on that seat.
Well, you know, maybe some of those names you listed have more of an accurate sense of their chances of winning. I mean, if Kamala Harris ran for that and lost,
¶ Child tax credit is something Dems & JD Vance could agree on
I think she'd be forever done in politics in any way. I mean, it helps her to.
Be Richard Nixon.
Richard Nixon lost to California governor's racing, became president within six years.
I know we didn't. So you're saying we won't have Kamala Harris to kick around anymore with, are you good Democratic cloth code? Yeah? I do think that it's going to shake out, and I think that one of them will leave, And I don't know if it'll be pressure or polling or Tom Steyer really thinks he's going to be governor.
I think Cash Patel is going to get Eric Swawall the nomination if they go and leak that file about his in a weird way, that will you know, if he becomes a quote target of the Trump administration, right, it probably helps him in that primary.
Yeah. Also, but also the voters aren't paying attention and they're turned off by it. I mean, I think I don't sense that the voters are paying attention.
How about the fact that Gavin Newsom doesn't seem to have an heir apparent and has no in Tristan. And I don't know if any of them would want Gavin's endorsement out.
There, which is odd republic I mean, Democratic front runner, but wouldn't even have a positive effect in the race. Right now, you know this gets too I know it's your show, but let me segue here. So if the
¶ Democrats can't be an alternative to "do nothing GOP", then do nothing
Democrats gained power of this.
Is like being back in the days when I used to have Tom Broke on Meet the Press. It would be like, are you going to anchor meet the press? You know? You know I always said, you know, Tom was a okay passenger, that he always be instinctively wanting to grab the wheel, right, But go ahead, go ahead.
Well, I could ask you how to question to plug my later show. How to know what I wanted to ask you was interesting and important for them and everyone. Should the Democrats gain power, but what are the things they want to do. I know, on the national scene, it's save our democracy. But what are the things in the Senate. There've been a couple of gigantic bills. Corey Booker wants spend seven trillion dollars to give tax cuts to everyone except the rich.
That would be.
A rather bad program. Chris van Holland has a similar, smaller program, but a thing that has gain steam because we're told, and I think it's true that this is the affordability moment and election is There are different words for it, surveillance pricing, predatory pricing, predictive pricing. This is the technology, very simple technology that you could change the price based on a lot of different things.
Look, I want to get into this a minute, but
¶ Dems will do investigations, but not much else will get done
I actually want to get at the at this specific So if Democrats get Congress and they have a Donald Trump as president for two years, and this is a question that I've had a lot of Democrats freeze up on me when I ask them this question, do you try to pass legislation with Donald Trump?
How can you answer?
There is a real the base won't be excited if you know they negotiate with Donald Trump. You know, and yet I'll give you an I'll give you an item that I think you could get Jade Vanson to support, but I don't know if they would want to help jd Vance potentially help his presidential campaign, and that is
¶ Trump officials won't answer subpoenas, business leaders will have to
the childcare tax credit.
Right, that is.
Something that Vance and could get Trump to support. That a lot of a lot of sort of main you know, sort of the There was plenty of Republican opposition to it, right, But this is one of the areas where there is some there is some agreement between sort of one wing of the Democratic Party and one wing of the Republican Party. But to me, I think that's the hardest. I think that's the hardest thing. Forget what they're going to do when in office. Do you want your bill signed by
Donald Trump? And are you going to be comfortable if you pass things that Donald Trump likes?
Hey, listen, I don't want my money signed by Donald Trump, but I'll still spend it, you know what I'm saying. How can you get into office and say so, we
¶ With power in congress, Democrats will likely target big tech
are such an alternative to the do nothing Republicans and we're going to prove it by doing nothing. So there's a number of people in their constituency who really want to do something there's some who look at they know that the map's not going to be as good as it was in twenty six and actually working with Republicans and being bipartisan will be rewarded. There's a bunch that, you know, Democrats tend to be more policy wonks. They actually are excited to get some things done. You add
that all up. I think that the we need to do nothing to make a point or to not give JD or Donald a win. I think that's a small caucus. Of course, you know, just a small faction can have devastating, outsized impacts.
I was just going to say, I don't disagree that it's a small faction, but I think the loudest voices in the world we occupy right in new media are going to be one. And don't forget you're going to have presidential candidates on the trail. That's the other thing. You're going to have presidential candidates who are going to do nothing but piss on Washington, right, and they're going to look for opportunities to run against those that establishment
crowd whatever it is. So I think we are absolutely going to see nothing get done if there's a democratic Now some might argue that's what they want, right, just paralysis is better than giving anything.
They'll two investigations, they'll count that as the thing.
But I think that will be the highest profile stuff, and it won't be It won't be Trump administration officials
who will all hide under executive privilege. But I'll tell you, and I've told this to my friends in the business community when they ask me, what should we be telling our business that the you know, corporations who are trying to figure out what's happening, why, I said, be prepared for lots of subpoenas, because because congressional Democrats aren't going to be able to get these Trump officials to answer subpoenas because they'll all hide behind executive privilege and finding
¶ Surveillance pricing needs to be regulated
out what these deals were that were cut with the administration and all this stuff. But the private sector doesn't get to hide behind executive privilege. And I have a feeling that the most high profile impact of a Democratic Congress is going to be that.
Yeah, I would think that there are a number of Democrats who would say, we'll have done our job if our investigations by the time we're done lead in two years to subpoena's credible subpoenas of Elon Musk. That's a big target. He's subpoenable based on his.
Beach entire AI all the Tech I mean, I think they're coming after Tech in a big way.
Well, this is with them. I don't know that Tech has committed crimes, but you know, there's a plausible case that Musk has with how he you know, his website which would only register, which would crash if you wanted to register as a Democrat. And even guys like Stephen Miller I think are subpoenable, Not that he'll answer.
I think he's not that act privilege. He's in the West Wing. Yeah, I think he absolutely hides behind executive privilege.
But investigations that show that. You know, he went to California officials and said, forget due process and forget reasonableok cause just go to parking lots of home depots. I mean he did say that, or he allegedly or has been reported to have said that.
Now surveillance price. Okay, I know you're you're obsessed about this. Let me tell you a fun Let me tell you a fun little nugget I got on this. I had interviewed Brad Carson, former Democratic congressman from Oklahoma who's essentially the front person for the anthropic AI super Pac, meaning the AI super pac that is pro regulation versus the open AI superPAC. Right, you know, there's all this money flowing around. So we were I threw this in there and he told me. He says, well, I thank good.
Now we were talking about AI regulation and I said why you're pro and he says, yes, and I want to see the states regulate. And he gave me an example. He goes, I'm a subscriber to the Washington Post and thanks to the law New York, you know, I really
¶ Bills in many legislatures to ban digital price tags in stores
you know, which said that you know this has been done with surveillance pricing. You know essentially that he was being and that was his way of using an example why it's good if the state's way in and in one state law could actually help people living in other states. In one regulatory decision by New York to force disclosure on surveillance pricing at least gave a consumer in Oklahoma an opportunity to find out what this was all about.
So yeah, I like Brek Carson. By the way, I think his heart is actually in it. He's not just taking a gig he's a former secret under Secretary of the Army and ran University of Tulsa for a while. I've had him on my show, not even mad. I
¶ There are upsides to dynamic pricing, it's not all bad
think he's a straight shooter. And you know, back back in a time when you could get elected as a Democrat from Oklahoma, maybe that time will come again. So the deal with surveillance pricing, which, depending on how much you like it or hate it, is called dynamic pricing. That seems good the stores, the retailers call it dynamic pricing. And I think the.
Remember dynamic scoring. Remember that phenomenon in Congressional Budget Office.
Oh right, yes, yes, no no no.
So tax cuts, no, no, no, dynamic scoring. The debt doesn't go up, it goes down with dynamic scoring.
For the first time ever, an accountant gets accused of dynamism worth a dynamic duo, meaning he has the pencil and I have the ice shade.
Anyway, dynamic scoring, dynamic price pricing.
Surveillance pricing, predatory pricing, you could change that's if you hate it, you call it predatory pricing. And if you adopt a bill or propose a bill like Letitia James in New York and McMorrow is campaigning on this in Michigan. You talk about the egregious example. So McMorrow always talks
¶ Airlines using your data against you to gouge you is gross
about if you go to book an uber but your phone shows that it's under five percent battery, it boosts the price because it knows you're desperate. No one likes that. That's pretty bad. But another aspect of dynamic pricing, and this made the front page of the New York Post, is Wendy's was charging more for hamburgers at noon than they were at eleven. And I got to say, all this to me is is a discount for the eleven o'clock hamburg.
Yeah, that doesn't bother me. That's not to me.
That's different because in theory everybody's eligible for the discount.
But what about the prices. Here's another one, the prices on store shelves. That there are a lot of bills in different legislators that would illegalize electronic price tags, like
¶ Floating price based on supply vs. demand is fine
what is this nineteen seventy eight because the idea is you could use dynamic pricing. And what they always say is charge two people different things. And I guess the people who are against this all Democrats, think that it is just inherently bad to charge two people different things. But this is what the circulars and discounts and even be longing to Sam's Club gives you. Right, different people
have different things. The classic example that the retailers use is if the bananas are going bad, we could price them at ten cents a pound instead of thirty five cents a pound, and essentially we might even be taking a loss. But what we're really doing is incentivizing the shopper to take the bananas home with them instead of us putting it in a compost team. So there's so much about dynamic pricing that's just modern and that actually just helps everyone and is being thought of as a boogeyman.
And there are bills, literally bills in front of Congress that would eliminate the banana pricing scheme. And I identify this as though the outrageous examples concentrate the mind. I think that if you just publicize them, my libertarian instincts would say that the companies wouldn't want to be associated with them. I think of it as so if affordability is the issue, it's very hard for Democrats not to jump on this trend. But are they really improving things for the media and voter and consumer.
That's a look.
I think it all depends and what you're putting your
¶ Being seen as being on the side of the consumer is good politics
throwing into this bucket of what we're going to call
surveillance pricing or whatever. I think the where I the problem I have is what the airlines want to do, which is use the data, use the data that I have voluntarily given them against me to price some things, right, and that is wait a minute, you know, so now it looks like now I'm almost regretting ever becoming a frequent flyer because I've given them so much information that you know, they now every time I book, they know certain things and I'm going to get quoted a price.
You know, they know where I'm They can look at my history to know how price sensitive I am on various things and various routes and how and so the I think it's how the how the data you've handed over to them, if that's being used to inform your individual price. I think when you're saying floating price based on supply and demand, that seems very normal, fair part
¶ Consumer advocacy gave news media credibility and trust
of the free market economy. When you're changing price based on what you think an individual will do, that feels a little bit.
That feels like you're bordering on discrimination. Well, if you.
Write the bill narrowly so it doesn't go through broad I guess I support it, but't I listen to the rhetoric of Greg Caesar and Luhan of New Mexico and the and Letitia James, and this is not what they're saying. They're not allowing I never hear the clause, and I listen of now. Of course we understand that businesses it's not just in their ability, but helps the business stay afloat and also helps the consumer dev different prices at
different times. They're just all seen as a boogeyman, and in this moment of affordability above all else, it's tantalizing to reach for. I also don't know do voters really reward you for these small, bore quality of life improvements. When Biden tried maybe this was messaging jump.
Fees, it was weirdly popular. Though it pulls well.
It does ask people the question flat out, you want to pay more or less? They'll say less. But does it really accrue to the statesman who is there and trying to fight for you in a big way. Maybe on the smaller level it will. I don't think this is I am suspicious. I understand why Democrats are reaching for I don't think that it is the killer blow
¶ The public feels like big tech has too much control of everything
that some think it is.
I don't think it's a killer blow, but I do believe if you're always seen on the side of the consumer right, not thinking of this as voter, and if you want to have a conversation with people that are just not in your tribe but are actually members of other tribes, then I think.
It's a way in. Again.
Look, I believe this. I think part of the news media's trust issue is on the national level, we don't think of ourselves as consumer advocates very often. Local news
actually used to be. That was the differentiator. Your local news operation was much more of a consumer advocate than and I think gutting And I've always said when we gutted local news, we actually gutted the first line of trust defense, meaning because the local news operators were the consumer advocates finding out who was getting scammed and hey there's some bad phone calls right, always section on you that it gave actually media a little bit more trust generally.
So I agree it's not a single killer app issue, but I actually think anytime you're caught being a consumer advocate.
You're gaining trust.
Yeah, and if you agree with us, we'll also send you a copy of the fight back theme song that was the other David Horowitz show from the eighties. True, then again, and.
Then David Horowitz became a a huge right winger.
¶ Creating a caucus of independents could be a fulcrum in the senate
Remember different guy?
Was it a different There were two, there, weren't I remember being very confused, Wait a minute, right.
What are we fighting back?
In fact, I think the right wing David Horrowitz became more prominent.
Oh yeah, and he the right wing David Horror or Whitz started off as an extreme left wing you know, smashed the state guy, as is often the arc. I also, I do wonder, though, if the idea of the local news and the tip off to a ripoff is of a piece with an older era where Chuck Schumer would have a press conference every week at a gas station and talk about exactly these issues, but he also knew that he could get coverage of it. And now what are we really paying attention to? Do you think there's
going to be a ripoff talk? A shame on you talk? Do you think this is going to be a predatory pricing talk? I don't know that these are the issues that are grabbing our attention these days.
No, but it is a piece of the larger issue that we have less control and that somehow we've given tech too much control of things in general. So I think it's a piece of something bigger. That's why I think it resonates.
Yeah, and I think MGP. I think Marie lucikan Perez is the ultimate example of someone who's very much on
¶ Independents shouldn't have to choose between Trump & Schumer
the side of consumer and she's mostly associated with the ability to fix your own washing machine, and that's her brand and it helps her. So yeah, that would be an example of where some of it does break through. I wonder, I mean, if the Republican Party didn't go as crazy as it did, I had wondered for a long time, might she defect because she seems very very upset with the Democrats and often is. If you hear three Democrats voted against the bill and she's.
Of from one.
This episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought to you by Wild Grain.
Wild Grain is the.
First bake from Frozen subscription box for sour dough breads, arteasonal pastries, and fresh pastas, plus all the items conveniently baked in twenty five minutes or less. Unlike many store brought options. While Grain uses some simple ingredients you can pronounce and a slow fermentation process that can be a lot easier on your belly little gut health there right and richer in nutrients and oxidants. There's also no preservatives and no shortcuts. The Wild Grain boxes are fully customizable.
In addition to their variety box, they have a gluten free box, a vegan box, and a new protein box. I will tell you I have done the gluten free box. I have done it a second time. I have also used the code, the todcast code. If you use the promo code podcast at check out, you get thirty dollars off. I've already used it as a gift to somebody else who loves this bread. It is hard to find good gluten free bread. It is fantastic. They give you step
by step instructions. I really dig this. There is nothing like having an artesian bakery in your freezer to chase away the winter chill. Now is the best time to stay in and enjoy some comforting homemade meals.
With Wild Grain.
I obviously highly recooned me it. It is worth giving Wildgreen to try right now. Wildgrain is offering my listeners thirty dollars off your first box plus free croissance for life. Come on when you go to wildgrain dot com slash podcast to start your subscription today. That's thirty dollars off
¶ We are in desperate need of reform, and the constitution is difficult to amend
your first box and free croissants for life when you visit wildgrain dot com slash podcast, or simply use the promo code podcast at checkout. This is a sponsor I absolutely embrace, so use that code.
I am and maybe this is the poly in me.
I am hopeful that what Kevin Kylie did when he decided to put an eye next to his name and leave the Republican Party. You know, I think that if you told me MGP decided to become an I and then you know, look, I'm pretty fluent and certainly I converse a lot with the folks in the Forward space, the Andrew Yang World, Christy Weapons involved, and and you know, they're they're trying they're sort of fighting a two front war, right one is they're trying to improve batlet access for
independent candidates. And you know, and that's a that's the thing you kind of have, that's almost like a that's
the long game. The short game is they're looking to do a better version of what problem Solvers and no Labels tried to do and didn't do it very well, which is create a caucus of independent thinkers whatever that is independent Dems, independent ours, independent independence, right that collectively vote together on leadership elections and and become the folkrum like in the Senate if you just got you know, take Dan Osborne, right, the thing that's keeping him from
winning that Senate race is the fact that he you know, it's you know, it's he's going to be a vote for Schumer.
He's going to be a vote for Democrats.
So how does he convince the voters that he's not a vote for Schumer and that he's not a vote for Democrats?
Right?
You know, if he's working with you know, if his
¶ March Madness reminds you that the NBA regular season sucks
answer is I'm going to work with Lisa, I'm going to Lisa Murkowski, and I'm going to you know, Bernie Sanders and Lisa Murkowski and Angus King and you know, and John Curtis in Utah, you know, you sort of and I'm you know, I'm going to try to forge an independ I refuse to have to pick between Donald
Trump and Chuck Schumer. You're not going to make me pick here because I actually think my election is going to create an opening with to work with a whole bunch of independence and will make the two parties court us to decide who should get the majority. But until we have that breakthrough, that's what makes it I think tough in these independent Senate campaigns.
Yeah, I think that the the structure of it. Yeah, I think that it's structurally tough. I think that our politics is sclerotic and it doesn't it doesn't at all comport with our media and our attention. And I think that there's been a bigger there hasn't ever been a bigger mismatch in our lifetime. It's like we're running analog politics with next gen digital. Not just this goes to how we think about the world.
¶ NBA players don't try hard in the regular season & tanking is terrible
Well, this goes to whether it's it's infrastructure right to improve the small de democratic infrastructure like online voting or you know, doing things like this, like we haven't modernized the infrastructure of politics to match the needs of today. Just like you know, i'd argue our constitution needs updated, doesn't need we don't need to redo it. But there are a few things that like, Okay, that's sort of that doesn't work anymore, and we kind of need this,
like the pardon power. I'm really into this constitutional amendment that's been introduced in the House that gives Congress the ability to essentially overturn a part presidential pardon using sort of but realizing it has to be a constitutional amendment. And I actually think the parameters they created, which was it has to be a super majority to do it.
This stuff feels very founding fatherlike oh, sort of like okay, and the type of modernization that probably is necessary out of you know, for the life of me, I don't know why there's soul why an individual was given pardon power by a bunch of people who were afraid of a king. But needless to say that I did happen.
You know from reading the history. It was a huge compromise and didn't really conceptualize what the president would be. I give them a lot of leeway. Those guys in those wigs, drinking the weak beer they were made.
It was pretty good.
What they did come up with has been yes, right, they were reinfected. They didn't think you know, remember our first constitution didn't even last a decade, so so pretty good.
Thing is the moment it's so hard to amend the Constitution, and the moment to amend the Constitution is a post Watergate moment when everyone realizes, oh my god, that went horribly wrong. And I don't think we're going to have that. I don't think we're going to have that in twenty twenty eight. I don't think we're going to have But I.
Think by twenty four.
You know, if you look at the eras when we have done multiple constitutional amendments in a ten year period, they have happened after huge moments.
Right.
We had a period around the Civil War. We had a period essentially in the industrial right, the Industrial Revolution and the pushback on that. That's why we got direct election of senators when suffrage the ability to tax.
Right.
So, you know, do I think it's twenty twenty eight? No,
¶ Long playoff series in the NBA are great
But do I think remember all of those constitutional amendments that passed.
Were like introduced twenty years earlier. Right.
It is one of those things that it does take. You know, it takes time to do it, and you know, I think we will eventually get there. Hey, let me, are you an MBA fan?
I am, in fact.
Okay, because I thought this would be a good way for us to close.
We're buttoning up here in.
The forty five close seven times during the interview shop.
Yeah you have you keep trying to get out. That's really the sneaky little thing. I have this annual conversation with a whole group of friends of mine, and it always happens at the same time a year. Why Why during March madness do I end up realizing how much I hate the NBA sucks.
NBA regular season sucks, and.
It's like it like it always just it's a stark reminder that like the NBA has a massive regular season problem. I'll say this both as a fan of basketball and as a gambler. Okay, I enjoy gambling. I know that's not popular to say that, but I.
It's not popular to say that it's popular to do it, that is exactly.
But I also want I also believe in honest I want to gamble honestly, meaning if you know, I don't gamble on the NBA because I don't believe every team is trying every night, and if I know that people aren't trying, then I don't want to. I'm not risking my money on something that is that is that is not going to be that is not going to match with the DA indicates generally it should match right. And
¶ A shorter 1st round 5 game series injects some randomness into the playoffs
I don't know, but I think the NBA has a massive regular season problem. And I don't know how they should, how they're going to fix it, but I think they've got to fix it. I'm embarrassed about the Wizards, you know, but if they're not alone here with this tanking mess, but it really has made the NBA is useless to watch. When a tanking team is playing anybody, it doesn't matter if they're playing Wenby or if they're playing you know,
it is baseball. Yeah, think about baseball, baseball, whatever you think of baseball in September, of the teams that are eliminated, those players try hard because they.
Want to call up and it's their slot.
Yeah right.
And somehow in the NBA, I mean literally, you have the Wizards. As soon as a player does well that he gets benched. Yes, I mean literally, the coaches get involved to do this, and I do think it's screwed up the product. And I do think the NCAA Tournament always becomes this moment to remind people, oh yeah, boy time. I can't wait for the NBA playoffs because We're literally at the crappiest time of year to watch the NBA.
Right so my counters, I don't know if they're counters. And by the way, this would make a great how to. You should come on my new show how to Fix the NBA. And I don't have a good answer that this. We need question askers, so you would ask, how how do I fix the How do I gamble correctly and do this?
And I want to get I enjoy? Well, put it this way, the NCAA Tournament's been great. This has been great college basketball. By the way, a reminder, money can't improve things creating financial incentives to you know, we have some of the most competitive basketball and improved quality that we've had in thirty years. This feels like the eighties again, how good college basketball is right now.
So I'm a huge Saint John's fan. Without Mike Ropole of vitamin water and some horses injecting tens of million dollars into that franchise to get Patino in to pay players, they'd be regular old, probably not even going to make the tournament. Saint John's. I agree with you on an il. I definitely think they need a bunch of reforms, like you need to know how much the players will play.
You need to know that everybody's following the same rules.
Yes, we need to We need to know what the market is. It screws of the players. It's opaque, it's not working for anyone except the agents. Would you rather have It's almost unfair because the NBA is a one
¶ DC could be a great NBA market, but the Wizards are awful
and done situation. So that's unbelievably exciting. But it's a six yes, sorry, March madness is that's a six game tournament, and not only for money and attention, but even for the actual the actual pace of play and how sophisticated these guys are. You want longer series in the NBA, not by being selfish and trying to milk the fans. Long series where teams get to know each other and get to know each other's every move are amazing. They're great.
So I'd rather have an NBA where people are trying, where teams are trying, than an NCAAA which gins up this March madness excitement because of the one and done nature of the tournament. In fact, I think the tournament itself is this great product and people don't view ANDCAA basketball is this great product they do a little bit lately, people are interested in the freshitt better.
Oh, I think it's quality of play. Look, March Madness kept the conversation about the crappiness of college basketball over the last twenty years at Bay because the tournament was still good, right, even if the team, even if we saw a lot of just crappy games.
The tournament is a great product. Absolutely, it's great marketing. Gambling helps and one and done in Jack says Trauma into it.
I would argue that the improved the fact that you have players now staying longer. Right, anybody under six to six isn't isn't leaving to go play in Europe anymore. They're staying here because they can make the same money here that they could make playing in Turkey or France or whatever. So you've got you know, you've got these veteran teams, right, So you've got just in the same way four year point guards were the key to winning the tournament in the eighties. Four year point guards again
¶ NBA draft lottery needs some modification to address tanking
become important in the NCBA. So I think that in that sense, let me throw an idea at you.
It at the NBA.
So look, I hear you on a seven game series there's nothing like it for the NBA Finals and for the conference finals. But you know, baseball would have a bigger problem about the Dodgers if it wasn't for the fact that they have a five game series in their playoffs.
Because it introduces randomness, correct, and if you had a little bit more randomness in the NBA in that first round.
Now, remember they used to have it two out of
¶ "Load management" also needs to be addressed
three was a bad idea. They tried that once and eliminated the Lakers in the first round. That was a disaster for them, so they quickly got rid of that. I remember this back in bream was heard. But like they loose to the Rockets at are two out of three the year after they win the title, it.
Was just screw it.
Eighties.
Yeah, but a five game series in the first round and allowing some randomness in the first round. My thesis is those nine, ten to eleven teams. You know, I'm not a big fan of the play in as much I get why they tried it, But instead of doing the play in, I'd rather see the five game first round series because it then makes the eighth seed and seven seed worth having as it is, and you might get more nine through twelve teams who are deciding do
I tank or not. You're not beating You're not going to win a one You're not going to beat a one seed in a seven game series. It's happened once or twice, but it mostly doesn't. But you could do it in a five game and then suddenly that's an incentive to get.
Into the playoffs.
Just like in baseball, the eighty eight win team that sneaks in with a great pitcher can knock off the one seed in a five game series because that pitcher can pitch twice.
And I know that's exciting, but I don't know that that's fair. Just on the baseball side of things. I used to analogize it too. There was a lot of there was a lot of discussion about if college admissions were fair or not fair, and I said, well, what you could do is inject a lot of random, which is your SAT score would just correlate to the number of spots you had on a big prize wheel, and that would be if you got into college. So that would be more I guess fair or random, or it
would deprioritize the SATs. But I don't think that would be a fairer system. But what we want in sports is entertainment. So I definitely want to say this one thing. I have a solution, and I have a critique of something you said, you don't bet because you don't know if the teams are trying. That is true. I think you're probably over indexing for the Wizards, who are horrendous on this score, absolutely shameful.
I've had to deal with this for three years now. I mean, your best DC could be a great basketball market. It's the NBA, and the Wizards have just been you know, made, they screwed it up.
The players, of course always try, but like you say, the management doesn't give you the good players, or they shut you down, or the coaches will pull you out if you weren't you bet. I mean on the Nuggets are playing the Rockets, or the Knicks are playing the Rockets, or the Nuggets are playing the Lakers. These guys are going at it. Let's right, Luca is going at it as hard as he could. I'm seeing Jamal Murray with
facial lacerations as he drives down the lane. There is a lot of effort and the way to stop the tanking. It's very interesting because they thought that, well, instead of giving teams the guaranteed number one pick, we'll just give them the highest odds at the number one pick. And I think a behavioral economists will say that will never change behavior. If all you're doing is saying, well, do I have any chance of it? Is it a better chance than everyone else, I'm still going to do it.
The downside of tanking isn't that bad what you do.
¶ Urgency is what creates great competitive sports
It's a fundamental change. But really, if you think about it, it's fine. It works. It solves a lot of problems. Rotate the number one pick among all thirty two teams in the league, or when we expand thirty five thirty eight, So that's fine. I mean one year Oklahoma City will have it after winning the National Championship and or the NBA Championship, and one year the Spurs will have it after being in last place, as they did when you know,
when they picked David Robinson. So if you just do a rotation and then some modification, I don't think teams are jockeying so much to get the three or four or five pick. I think it's a lot better than what we have now. You have to address tanking. Silver I think could lose a job over how bad the tanking issue has become.
Well, and the other thing is I think more transparency. I mean, look, it is true. Am I going to see certain players when they come to my city once?
Right?
When they come to my city once? And then I spend all this money, you know, and then you don't get to see that one star playery you kind of wanted.
To see right there. And that's the fact. I mean.
They try to mess around with load management by having a mandatory number of games to qualify for rewards and stuff. I don't think that's worked, right. I think we still we still have it, and part of the load management gets it too. This is why I think tinkering with the playoffs, where you incentivize making the regular season matter more, you've got and I think ultimately, if the regular season
matters more, you will over time have less handing. And I don't know how you do when you allow twenty of the thirty teams to make the playoffs, Have you made the regular season matter anymore?
No, it doesn't matter that much. But you know, I'm sure you've been watching it for a while. If you compare a random second quarter of an NBA game now, just the defense that's being pit played to the eighties or nineties. I used to think, are they even really trying? And they weren't and just go to a quarter defense.
We know, and I get it, but again I go back, baseball doesn't have this problem.
Well, baseball has a lot of other problems.
They have other problems. I'm not going to sit there and say they don't, but they don't have this problem. And they have, you know, even fewer teams that make the playoffs in a given year by the way they've They have a rule that seems like a pretty simple rule on their lottery. If you got the number one pick.
This year.
I remember the Nats one year they got the first overall pick, and they were ineligible to get the first overall the next year. The highest they could get was eleven. Yeah, so you know that seemed like a pretty so that way, you're not doing the process i e. The sixers where you're tanking three years in a row or what the Astros did, right that was that was what happened in baseball.
The Astros did a huge tank job in twenty ten, twenty eleven, twenty twelve, which got them to a Correa Bregman, you know, and then they ended up, you know, having this great run.
And the Rays were sort of doing a tank job except when they weren't. They just didn't want to spend any money. But the baseball draft matters a lot less than the NBA draft, just for in terms of predictability, but also in terms of development. The guys making the picks probably if they screw it up too often, won't be in the front office years later, whereas in the NBA, you know, those are your picks that are that you hang on. The GM.
Well, it's just it's funny. I can't tell you.
It feels like every April there's this group of friends of mine and I we have this argument about God, what's wrong with the NBA. And I think part of it is, again, it's recency bias. The tournament is so much fun, right, and you're just sitting there going, oh, there's no urgency and we're at the tail end of the season, right, We're at this and so you do have that, you know, there's a little bit of let's
save people a little bit for the playoffs. So it is and it's a if I'm the NBA, it's a bummer. You've got a whole bunch of people excited about basketball, they tune into the pros, and you're not giving them nearly the same urgency. And you know, I think it's a missed opportunity for the NBA as well.
I've always thought on that first Thursday of the NCAA tournament, which is one of the best days in sports structurally the same as the next day, but just wall to all games, that the NBA even plays a game or two is kind of laughable. It's just sitting itself. Get out of the way, paradia failure.
More importantly, make these Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday of the following week some of the best matchups you you know, make sure Lakers Celtics, make sure Thunderspurs, make sure, you know, have a big prime time, you know, something like counter. You know, take advantage of this moment that you have on those days.
Yeah, I think that the NBA just has too many games in the season, and of course they do, but this is what you're going to get. The last ten games of the NBA season is always going to be boring. If there are more than fifty games in the NBA season, Hey, if you want to balm for all of this WNBA. They've gone to a forty four game season, but they have three game series and it's all tight and taut.
And though again with the new deal, which I congratulate the players for, as more money comes into the league, they're gonna want to if they can fill an arena, as they will. And that's what's going to happen with the WNBA, and they will be grousing about this. We'll be saying, oh, the Links always get the number one pick.
Well, it seemed like in the eighties, don't you remember it, like the Lakers and Celtics always ended up with the number one pick.
Yeah, it was.
It was just like but somehow the Clippers traded the Lakers the number one pick, and you're like.
How did I mean it was?
I mean, that's why they had to create the lottery, because too many teams were dumping their picks to the to the better teams.
But if there were, if there's ever a counter argument to good old days with the sport of basketball in the fifties, they had the regional picks, so that the this is why, this is why the Celtics got everyone who went to a new England Institution, and the draft went like fifteen rounds. I don't understand. There were ten teams in the league. How are they picking fifteen players? Although you know you always hear Dave Debusha a thirteenth round pack.
I know, well, but that NFL was that way. Bart Star famously was a seventeenth round pick.
But seventeen on a roster fifty two versus fifteen on a rock.
Now you only had like twelve, But back then you only had like twelve teams, right, right, so it made sense that you had you had all these rounds. But then again, remember Mike Piazza was famously drafted in like the twenty ninth round, and you're like as a favorite.
Of Tommy Lasorda because their dads were friends or maybe just Italian.
I don't know, that's exactly.
Well, you've got some technical issues that you're gonna mess.
With, huh.
It's just the camera. Somebody like microphone sound great?
They do, And of my audience, I think I think the interviews are more audio. Do you do you know the distinction between your audio and your video?
Yes, it's uni yeah, yeah, And so.
That it seems like if you don't offer video that's an important five. You're you're missing out.
It is true. It's the cutting edge five, and they're gonna I'm gonna lose them to call your daddy.
I fear.
Cat plug a couple shows, please, Okay.
I think I think I'm due to be in our Home and Away series. I think I'm due on.
Your soon and you can't wait. I've got more to plug there. I've got a new sports show.
I do have this show how to I said, we can pair you with how to Bet Better, the episode that is up right now. So every week we someone asks how to question, we get an expert, my friend Nate Silver, who I'm sure I don't know if you've interviewed him. He's a brilliant thinker and he's a good talker, but he uses these filler words like wright and um. So this week's episode is how not to say um with Nate Silver, and he's not embarrassed about he gets
created it by the end. Let me tell you. So, we've had how to Immigrate as a throut ble to Europe. We've had how to be a Ghostbuster. We're doing next week how to Talk to My Cats. Some good practical advice there I do have cats, so tune into how To for You please, aclectic and practical pieces of advice. And I thought you want to ask a question?
Seriously, I love the series and I do hope how to fix the NBA? Count me in?
All right, count me in for that. But by the way, the cat, I mean, that's play into algorithms, aren't you? That's play into the algorithm? How to talk to cats?
Except my experts like don't don't try, just operate in their world. She's a very good cat expert. The guy asking the question said, am I doing it right? My cat named mister Bad wakes me up at four thirty in the morning and I lock them in the closet. Then at six I show them my watch and say now it's time for feeding. And it turns out that wasn't how to talk to a cat.
By the way, how do people get your daily newsletter? I love it and I find so many fun little stories from it.
Tell people how to get it.
The gist list is at Mike Pesca dot substack dot com and they also have some uh I've been doing going some deep diving information on the pit and their background, character and.
Why you're obsessed with all the A holes on pity. That's just been a running gag of yours, hasn't it.
Yes, well I'm keeping the official tracker. You know, you gotta have someone doing it.
I have a I have a submission for the just List. You know there's a pencil running for governor of Oregon. Oh really a pencil, Yes, a pencil and it actually is a series.
Of running as a writing candidate.
Hey, there you go. See it just writes itself.
Is he hoping to come in number two?
Well?
Does he believe in carbonas.
Man?
This is I had. We did not plan this. I just threw it up there and and there it is. You know you dad pund it out of the ballpark.
Make a good point.
Guess who's lasting reading on K through three the state of Oregon?
Is it?
Really? Yeah?
So that's the ire that the Mississippi miracle. Someone has to It's.
Exactly what needs to happen is go learn about you know, get hooked on phonics.
I think we learned. Go get hooked on phonics. It works.
Found it out people. I love that pencil all.
Right, anyway, go check out governor pencil. We need that's you know, I think people would be happier with inanimate objects as our political leaders as it is. So, you know, the stapler is next.
I hope a red stapler that I think has niche appeal.
Well, the red staples. You have the red staples and the blue staples. They don't know what, you know, it gets a little fularizing.
And that's like.
Third party paper fastener.
Yeah.
Yeah, you know the big bulky clip people. You know, Mike Paska.
It's always a pleasure.
Oh, thank you, Chuck. Pleasure for me too.