E138: Presidential Candidate Vivek Ramaswamy in conversation with the Besties
02:10:17 Share

Sexy, can you can you come outside your window and and i'm going to start waiting and you see me.

you wanted see me. Jack, have two of your Butlers hold you up on their shoulders.

I hope this is being taped and part of the show.

because this is great. David, you in blue shorts, right?

Yeah.

yeah. I saw you. You did.

You see me? I didn't see you.

Where are you when you look out on the first house, the pink house, look at this house. You see.

I heard you. I can see you though.

Yeah.

your .

cows .

look.

I like.

no, i'm like to your right if you're looking out, I met your right, your first house on the right. Oh, there.

Oh, I see you, see you. I see you.

I see you guys like twelve year .

old come over after .

we have A O i'm going to come over first.

Did the hard stop we go.

We open sources to the fans .

and got this.

Or the vagrom wami is finally on the program. He is an entrepreneur, dual harvard. Yeah, all that kind of stuff.

He was an entrepreneur, then a capital allocators. I think broad jokes. Everybody knows he is a conservative or running as a republican. His entire work is provides entire form of action, proper speech, and he wants federal government term limits. And a his fans are lunch. S they've been asking for him to be on the all in podcast every day of garden, about three hundred emails from your fans walk to the program.

They sound like your fans, actually, because I hear you at all the time is like blaming me for why I have not been on this programme. And so you guys, this has been like some sort of idealized experience for me. Look forward. IT.

Okay, great. So what we try to do here is have a real conversation, try to get these candidates off their talking points. So this isn't meet the obviously wants to talk you like a human being. So the extent that, you know, as a politician now you can talk like a human being, the audience, and we would appreciate, meet David sax to a py hopeth a and David freedman g however, they one of you explain maybe your background as a capital alligator and as an entrepreneur why you chose to run for president at this time.

Yeah, sure. I mean, my parents, like many people you probably also know, who've had similar success stories. They came to this country with almost no money.

I went on to actually found successful companies. And so I started my career as a biotech investor. I worked at a hedged fund in new york when I graduated in two thousand and seven.

I thought I was going to be a scientist. I started molecular biology, ended up enjoying my time as an an internship. I had a hitch fund a lot more than that. So I did that for seven years.

Three of those years I spent law school at the same time, but then when I finish law school, I had, I think, felt like my learning curve flattened from DNA pure capital lictor. So I stepped down and founded a new kind of biotech company that I can, if you guys might be more interested than in than most, have my pico audiences. But the basic premise was give scientists skin in the game, in the projects they actually work on.

So if you're gsk or adviser or whatever, mark, you discover a drug or you develop IT, you don't have personal upside in the individual drug that you develop. You do have various forms of asy metric downside. And so people don't take risks unless they're the same risks that the other farmer companies are taking. Because if you take the same risk and fail that everybody else is fAiling in a the reputed category the same time you're save.

But if you take a rist that other people aren't willing to take and you fail, then you experience budget cuts, maybe job security risks, social embarrassment, which is a big factor, and big farmers as well, which in turn created an opportunity that I took a vantage of, which was that there were systematically categories of drugs that went undeveloped, even after big farm ahead for a long time. Spend a lot of money developing those drugs up to a certain point. So I build business called roy van, basically in licensed some of those drugs in their early stages of development, face one or face two, often for pennies on the dollar relative to what had gone into them.

Often we would have scientists for drug developers who are passionate about that very project inside the companies who would come with those drugs because they wanted to develop them. The big farmer company said that they weren't in that area anymore, and we built a pipeline of such drugs. The whole plan was, some of them would work, some of them wouldn't.

The successes would make up for the failures, and is now a ten million dollar public company. And IT returned, unlike many private companies, return a billion dollars plus to shareholders before going public. And IT is is doing, continue to do well.

To this day, I let the company as CEO for seven years, five of the drugs I worked on or approved today and want probably most proud of is, is a drug that sexual ologies, that is lifesaving therapy kids, another ones in approved drug for prostate cancer. But that was my world. He is the point.

Very different world, maybe more similar to your guys as world now than the world. I in now, something that funny happened in twenty twenty, which was that in my own company, there were demands that I make a statement on behalf of black lives matter after the George floy IT was tragic death in may of twenty twenty. By june, there were demands that I start making statements on behalf of b alone.

And IT was a funny time, because only starting that february, I had ventured into actually exercising my voice as a citizen while being a CEO at my own peril, criticizing what was then the still new shiny, objective stakeholder capitalism. So I publish peace, the state journal, and generated and waves that february, few months later in may, this door for the controversy comes up in the log story. Sure, I can go into if you guys are interested.

But over the next six months, a series serve escalating events. Let me to face a choice the following january of know there are three advisors to my company that step down after I rode. Rather, I didn't intended to be, but a rather controversial piece in the wall street journal at the time, in the twenty twenty one.

Yes, the premise of the piece was that IT IT was controversial on numerous counts. But the basic premise was IT was the first legal argument anybody had made that if the government is pressuring a private actor to do something that the government couldn't do directly, that that was still state action. Now the subject is, this was in the wake of january six, when there was widespread, systematic censorship of political speech in this country, at least I believe there was.

And so the time I made that argument, IT was dismissed as a conspiracy theory on the fact, no, that sound happening. He was also dismissed as a legal theory. You know, this rube who going to happen to go to law school forgot this first year where first amendment only applies to state actors.

Now, fast for three years, do have years. We now know those facts were far worse than even I envision at the time. And actually, the legal argument that I made is now popularized by clearance, Thomas and others that are finding its way you are jurisprudence.

But anyway, three advisors to the company found IT so offensive that I would make this argument in public that within forty hours of that peace, they resigned. And that was definitely a post jan six mood and reaction that I had to then make a choice, right? Because now this is having potentially in adverse impact on the company.

I could either call IT a year where I experimented with expressing myself and you know wearing my legal academic cat and call that a day and continue with biotech or legitimately be if I didn't want to have an adverse impact on my company, I could step down and really speak freely. I choose, I chose to step down, not small part, because the company was doing great. You know, I had a successor lined up.

So there was a fortunate set of circumstances that happened to be the right time. I just had my first son. My son, carpio, was born in february of twenty twenty.

He was about to turn a year old. We were the transitional face of our life cover. You know, we were. We had a year away from the office. My wife was filling a fellowship. There was just a lot going on our life that I felt like this was a moment for a life transition to focus on, you know, a lot of people talent, people developing medicines, maybe some of them more talented, they, me, you know, what is successful company?

Did you feel like you were being bullied into making a statement of a black maths matter by your own employees and you what what you thought, generally speaking, on companies being politically active and companies having a political voice because he has come up in our industry over and over again. You might know brian armstrong from coin base said, hey, we're here to do cyp to nothing else. Please don't talk about anything political.

So where are your thoughts? General te, a whole book on this, right? I mean I I read your book and keeps a lot about the distinction between what the intention is uh, in optimizing for shareholders versus the personal interests of the executives and those in charge expressing their personal point of view through the the corporation um and I think you you had some point of view on where that should all go. But was that in part motivating for you to run for public office? And why president and set up running for a senate C2Congressional sea t or som ething els e?

yes. So I I turns out written, I wrote three books in the last two years, and two of them about this topic. The first one was woke in, which was for general audience. And then there was a second one called capitalist punishment, which was specifically about the esg strand of this and capital markets. And just for people are aware, my general view is that companies should focus on making products and services for people who need them without apologizing for IT.

And yes, that's how you maximize profit for shareholders by having a worthy mission in sticking to IT, without taking on social missions that are best Carried out by institutions outside of corporate america. I so much believe this, that even before I ran for president, this actually does answer a question, David. I actually thought the way I was going to have impact based on this.

I enjoy being an author, but i'm not, by nature, just an academic. I like to do things. I, I started a company called strive.

It's an national management firm that directly competes against the likes of black crock and state street and vann guard. That's what I thought my next leap was going to be. Strip's first fund launched last August and less than a year, and him is close to a billion dollars and acts and management.

I think he took jacky Morgan two years to get to a billion when they got into the etf business. That was what my journey was gonna within corporate america, restore the unapologetic pursuit of excEllence over distracting and dilutive political, environmental and social agendas. But the thing that struck me, I think late last year and last december, in last year, we had our second sun, got a new company off the ground.

You all know what that in tails, you know, was very much in all in experience doing that. December, we had some time to take a step back, and you know, my wife and I, we go to take a moment, ask yourself, why are you do? What you do is not a conversation you often have or take time to do, but.

In the question of the why and and IT reminded me back of that experience, I had a work, and you ask me, did I feel bullied? I didn't actually feel bullet. I think I can imagine someone in my shoes feeling that way, but I didn't feel like I was somebody cornering me to do something I didn't want to do IT.

Others had that experiences that wasn't quite how I felt for me, felt there's a group of people who followed me on this mission, who look up to me, who were disappointed in me, actually, and I think that was much harder than feeling like I was being bullied, was to have a group of people who followed me on this worthy mission of developing medicine, that farmers, companies weren't that felt proud of that mission, that now felt disappointed in me. And that was much harder to deal with the bullying, but that also opened my eyes to the fact that i'm here stridently fighting against crock and the the S G. Industrial complex, which is a little bit of a deflection from the essence of what I actually think is going on at.

The real root cause is especially amongst Young people in the country, what is which is the and is what? I saw my employees in the experience, I winter red, so that was formated for me. These are good people.

These are honest people. Many of whom came is in may with is my fall because the pitch that we made in recruiting, we recruit from harvard and M. I, T.

And everywhere else big farm of companies didn't recruit out of underground did. Part of my pitch was, hey, you want to go, you know, to a quant hedge fund and turn that pilot tion to bigger pilot. He, do you want to actually make medicines that impact people's lives and do well that way? So that was part of you in my pitch going in.

So we select for a certain kind of person, and then they come back and say, they disappointed me for not adapting unrelated social agendas. That is, Young people in this country. Ama eleni USA Young, we're hungry for a cause, was so hungry for purpose and meaning and identity.

And yet we're starving for that. At a time in our history when the things that used to fill that void and we can, there's a lot of things I can feel that blank. I talk about IT today, this constitution, campus, new empt, faith, patriotism, hard work, family.

But I think there's there's some truth to a bright and stronghold employees, a corporation with a worth emission can help fill that void to. And that's one of the roles that CEO who feel like they are being bullied might miss as you. You don't have people who are bulling you. You have people who are lost, who are looking to you for direction and purpose.

You're saying IT quickly, but I think that family and religion are very, very big drivers of them.

Oh, you yeah. I'm just saying IT quickly because I talk about that all the time. But I think the family and faith is, mean, these are foundational building .

black or foundation. I think that when you look specifically at, like, the decay in the number of Young people who are religious, or the decay in the number of Young people who actually have, you know, two parent families, all of this speaks to the fact that the social norms that gave people purpose have actually gone but they haven't been replaced with anything else and I think that's the vacuum that you're seeing that many of these Young people fall win to and so they're looking for something to your point.

And um the problem with that is not the causes themselves, but the fact that they're short live. And then what's leftover is the need for more and more and more. And that escalation, I think, is very dangerous if you think about where society goes to premiere.

Yeah I agree with you on that and that's why I I have been characterized and Jason induced me that way to as anti woke. I don't actually think of my I don't I don't like that label because it's it's not inaccurate. I don't like IT because it's false.

I think I misses the point where I think the way we actually combat fill in your favorite black and vocational m climatically m covers m final usage, anxiety, depression, loss of self confidence, these things are symptoms of a deep avoided of purpose and meaning. And so I don't think you help the matter much. But and i've done some of this, I will admit this right. I'm not blame other people well, I mean but the the book the book I have you read the book jasper.

I have yeah but I okay.

The book is IT was was titled in, written before the word of weapon woke took on its current political valence. Yeah, I will say that actually OK many people didn't know what the word work was at the time.

I title was early revelatory. When you came out and use that word in your in your title, IT was like, let me reveal to you a little bit about what this thing that i'm calling woke is turning into, which is a more broader kind of social psychological issue that we're all grappling with, right, how it's now leached its way into politics.

It's leach its weight and on profits, its leaches, its way into corporate america, into four profits, into the military, into government. Sa, obviously, since that was published, IT has now become this hot term that has different meaning for different people. And IT can be pretty exciting in terms of how .

people appreciate. You see, in the day, you appreciate, see that day, because my net prescription is actually dilute, not just vocabulary, that is part of the story. We dilute secular religions, the rise of secular religions.

And I don't call them me religions, because religion is, would do the test of time. A cold has not, but the rise of modern secular codes. We dye ute them to irrelevance by filling that void with an alternative vision. And so if one political camp might offer race and gender and sexuality and climate as a prescription for the void, I think where conservatives fall badly short is by simply being entire those things without actually offering an alternative vision of our own. And I aiming certainly to do that in the campaign via family.

gender and these kind of things, what would be your, uh, you know, qualities or things to focus on?

So so let's do like a little face off, right, india, about raised inder sexuality, climate. I pair them up against individual, family, nation. God, okay.

And I think that there's a substantive vision here. I think amErica happened to have been founded on the latter vision, not the former. So if i'm running for U.

S. President, I think that that already killed the scales in favor of this vision, because IT so happens as a historical matter amErica was grounded on. Some people will contest this, but I think on that vision, rather than the genetic and climate based one. But I think that that's something where the republican party and conservative have fAllen short. That's part of what the question pulled me into this is I saw the emergence of what was likely to be a biographical braw between two guys who are the in front runners or whatever you know, that's not productive.

But I think more importantly than a biographical bw, even the question about who we are, I think the republic lan party in the conservative movement was, in many ways, defined in itself in opposition to that alternative vision of identity, what I want to do, what i'm striving to do, I hope, are doing, is actually offering an affirmative vision of our own that go to the heart of what that means to be an american. And, you know, I don't think that national identity alone is gna fill that vacuum fully, but I think that makes a pretty good darn stride forward. And I think those rules for pastors and others, that's beyond my pay grade.

And so i'm not i'm not reporting to do that in this camion N I speak to IT, but that's that's going to be the role of people in a higher calling than being U. S. president.

But I think the next U. S. President can play a meaningful role in filling that vacuum, at least when IT comes to national identity. And so that's really what this campaign not it's not entire week. IT is unapologetically nationalist in a certain sense of that word, national incense of embracing those ideals that sent this nation and emotion that still unite us a across those genetically inherit attributes that we've otherwise celebrated over the last ten years in the future.

Say, you believe in american exceptionalism, and that's that your platform for .

a that is actually, look at my platform, the exceptionalism of the ideals that set this country into motion.

Absolutely so vivid. Let me ask a question around where we are in the cycle of the american experiment, where we have obviously allowed the throat to be full forward. And as a result, we've seen extraordinary progress emerge from the entrepreneurial talents and the drive of the people of this country for the past two hundred and fifty years.

And it's really extraordinary and a transformed human civilization. We now find ourselves, particularly over the past fifty years, as this problem has gotten worse with increasing disparity between the haves and the have nots or those who believe they they have not, which is nearly everyone. Everyone now has some point of view that they have not got something and they see other people that do have something that they do not. And this inequality, and this perception of inequality, both with respect to absolute amount of capital income earnings and these perception issues have now driven a popular movement in this country that we have seen historically, many times in the past, different countries that ultimately turn into either socialist nations or fashion st. Nations know, in all cases, some sort of autocratic regime seems to have emerged because of this populist movement that we're now seeing, not just in the us.

but across the west. Do you feel like .

we're at that moment in the us? And one of the manifestations of that, i'll say, is government spending. Because everyone demands more from the government, and the government steps up in the elected officials that they elect.

Step up and spend more. And IT layers and IT layers and layers. And we now have a thirty three trillion dollar debt load, and we have a one and half trillion dollar annual deficit.

And by many projections, social security will be bankrupt in anywhere from ten to fifteen years, uh, ten to twenty years, whatever numbers you want to use. The CPO assumes we're going to have unsustainable spiring debt. What is your point of view and where we are in the cycle, how it's manifesting today and how we're going to deal with the fiscal issues that arrive from this movement?

yes. So I think where we are in that in the cycle, I don't take that as a passive law of physics. I think that who runs this country and leads this country can make an actual difference in the actual underlying course of that so called cycle, which is part of what pose me to this.

So i'm a little bit unconventional. Did my view on the debt loads in the entitlement spending this country in our first step in our way out of IT? I don't think we're in a place of having remotely enough consensus or trust.

And I think trust is probably the more important world than consensus. To begin, just snip, step, make cuts to what people feel like they were entitled to improve. Ed, especially in a moment we are beginning with deep distrust that will take what you call those populist flames.

And through carousin on IT, I do i'm more optimistic about this, and I think this is quite realistic actually, is that the next leap forward as we can grow our way out of, i'm going to say all but most of our actual fiscal com pinting fiscal calamity. But this year, I going to think like right now, last six months, we're talking less than one point five percent annualize G D P growth. What we're averaging right now for most of our national history, we actually grown up over four plus percent G D P growth.

Certainly, if you go back to the party gold standard period and even after going off the gold standard, we had a relatively stable U. S. dollar.

And I am one of these weird guys who believes that the fed should have a single Mandate of dollar stability without playing the phillips curve game. But anyway, put that side track to one side, we'd grown at three four percent G D P. Growth for most of our national history, even relatively recent national history.

And I don't think it's a complicated path to get back there. I think things we need to do unlock american energy. You know, we talk about secular religions. I view the climate cult as one of those secular religions.

What would your specific energy plan be completely, completely unlock the permitting process that we've used as a back door mechanism to shut down american energy production, drilling, fracking, burning coal? Coal should not be a four little word embracing nuclear energy. Later tonight, like after we're having this conversation this evening, i'm going to be at same ansom college laying out my detail.

It's going to be like a giant poster laying out the anatomy of how I will shut down the nuclear regulation commission, which has been a fundamentally hostile administrative agency to the existence of nuclear power in this country, actually to the detriment of actually making sure that we are the nuclear energy from gentoo rather than genre or genres reactors. But that be for tonight. It's an all of the above approach of unshackle ourselves to produce energy here in the united states.

To your point about they'd made a good point earlier about the addiction of paying people more from the federal government that becomes the status quote. That's your voter base. That's not even good in many cases for the people were giving that money too.

And we should stop paying people to stay at home when actually the top obstacle for many businesses to grow, you guys will know this well, is filling vacant job. And so that is an obstacle to G, D. P. Growth, is paying people more to stay at home than many of them earn to go back to work.

Do you think that the I R A was good legislation?

I I don't have um it's not like it's not like my the horse that i'm gonna know ride ride in terms like the main i'm going everything on IT. But but I mostly don't think IT was IT was great legislation like where you come in from on that because we might have .

different if you think about what the irr does for energy and tracked me, you just the B I L chips in I R A. I'm just curious your thoughts on whether government incentives are moving in that direction that you actually support or you still think it's it's missing something.

Well, so what things that I actually focus on and I think is really important, is what can the U. S. President actually do? But I mean, president trumps, I don't people remember this is main promise.

Uh, policy promise was actually repealed in replace obamacare, which never happened because IT required bones congress. So i'm actually focused on elements that I can deliver on without asking congress either for permission or forgiveness. And so that when I answered a Jason, because I go straight, at least let's focus on actually the administrative state, which on my rating of the constitution, reports in to the single duly elected president.

So when I talk about the permanent process of the department of interior or shutting down the nuclear regulation commission, I believe, you know, we could go. I'm going to details on IT tonight. I have the legal authority to do that as the U.

S. president. I think the legislation is getting much more complicated than I don't believe that I can be a position to promise what we would do legislatively to any of that.

You mentioned getting people to take all these jobs that that available. Um you want to talk about immigration for a second of what you think about that .

made based immigration immigration.

Would you are you saying you would cut untitled ments like unemployment or shorten the unemployment period to force people to go back to work?

Is that and and tie them and tie them to work requirements? absolutely.

Would you have specific for like a certain number of .

months or year a pretty, pretty I mean, I do. But I think that again, i'm very clear about what I will do through executive authority, what needs to go through legislation. I mean, that's all in negotiation. But I think a good principle is nineteen ninety six or in nineteen nineties, work fair under clinton was actually far more aggressive then the work enviro requirements that were put into this supposed republican LED death deal.

Where and what did they say IT was, if you're eighteen to fifty five and you are able body ed and childless, then you have to work at least twenty hours a week in order to receive more than three months out of three years worth of welfare, right? Joe biden, as A U. S.

Senator, voted actually much more stringent work fare requirements in the night. So yes, I have ideas on specifics, but i'm not going to make a promise on exactly what that specific look like. But a guiding principle is IT has to be at least as aggressive as what we have .

done in my party of and we had sixty nine, almost seventy percent participation, and we are at six now I think so it's obvious that we have to a trim up to treats. Next point, you know, we have ten million job openings. We're not letting anybody in.

How would you look at immigration? Obviously, we have people coming in the southern border illegally, and then we have h one b visas. And now canada is saying, hey, we'll steal all those h one bees will take them. So how do you look at immigration to chaos?

Question merit based immigration. I mean, one of things that canada does have, and i'm not a fan of american, american, canada or anything like this in in most respects, but they have a point base system right there, a point by system. And so I think the point me system should work differently in the us.

But I do favor merit this immigration. I am a little bit of a departure from what I think is the republican consensus here. You know, people I respect, tom cotton n and others have proposed bills with the hard cap on the number of immigrants. I is a mistake. I think that the cap should declare itself based on how many people meet the matter craic criteria.

or have to different qualities. Then what what would be the top criteria in this point based .

system to criteria skills that match up to job openings in the united states. But second, early, and this is important to me, I would move the civics portion of becoming a citizen to the front end of even being granted a VISA to enter this country.

And I think that addresses and accommodates an important part of the concern that many people who are pro immigration cap actually favor, is I think there are legitimate concerns about the dilution, the loss of a national identity. But a lot of that is conflated with, first, the cycle of illegal migration. And a hard liner on this.

I favorite, putting the U. S. Military on the southern border. I've said I would use on the northern border.

I believe that we are a strong constitutional and legal authority to do IT. I do not think building the wall was enough. There are car tel finances tunnels underneath that wall that vehicles literally run through today.

In some ways, i'm going further than trump in this direction, but simultaneously debug critize, speed up the process for merit based immigration. But part of mir IT includes not just skills, but also civic commitments to the country. And i'm, you know, I used the word nationalist before.

I know that scared to some people. I mean, in a positive way. I think every high school student in this country should have to pass the same civic test that an immigrant has to pass in order to become a citizen of this country. I also would favor bring in that on the front end, and the selects for the of people who know something about the country when they enter.

And they should love this country in order to come into the country.

Yes, I do. I think I think you should want to come here to be an american.

I think I can get agreement around the horn here. sex. You've heard, uh, the vex position so far. You have a passionate the top. What do you agree with and what do you agree with so far?

There's to agree with there. We are talking about american specialty. One thing to talk about there is that I I agree that amErica is exceptional and we're most exceptional when we're trying to certain example for other nations, when we're trying to be the shining city on a hill, as we can put IT.

But lately, and really, I mean, in the last couple of decades, what you've seen is that what american accept that means to a lot of people in washington, is that we run all over the world and impose our idiot gy and our values on all these different countries. We began this Green crusade, trying spread democratic DDL east. We tried to turn countries like afghanistan and iraq into medicining democracies, where you now are very, very involved in ukraine, basically trying to detach the country from the russian care of influence and turning in to a member of our military economic and alliance.

So IT does seem like american exceptional ism is taken on this sort of harder, more militarized edge. Where would you draw the line? I mean, like what makes sense to you?

I think I basically agree everything you just said. I think as a side note on the geopolitics of IT, I do think ukraine is on track to become potentially the next vietnam or the next iraq. I think you have said similar things.

I also think there's something else going on with ukraine that's fueling this, which relates to the deeper identity crisis in our country that I described earlier. I think ukraine is new religion right in the country and its substitute for purpose and meaning, just like climate ideology. Voguish is.

And you got to washing A D.

C. At least I did in june. I was there for one of the sunday shows. My wife and I going for a walk. We saw more transfers, gs and ukraine flags.

Then we did american flags on a short lot that we took through washington, D C, R. Nations capital. So i'm not i'm not whining about this or being historical about.

I just think getting to the essence of what's going on, I think that's a different element of ukraine that's different from even what we thought would be an amr iraq. I don't think american exceptionalism is foisting our values on anyone. I think american exceptional ism is about demonstrating through our example how amErica flourishes and is strong when we live by our own ideals.

And I think the best way we give hope to the free world is by being that shining city on a hill, not going somewhere else, talking about IT with tanks behind us, while actually suffering here at home. If you rome, the streets of kennington, as I did a few weeks ago, you know, you don't have to go to, you don't have to go to back bed to see the third world. And so that I think is is I think a big loss of where we are today in the country.

When you're president put in invade ukraine, you would sit back, not give any arguments and let them roll in.

Here's what I would do. I would actually be proactive in doing a deal, and i've been very clear about the deal I would do. Tromp s. Said he would do a deal in twenty four hours instead.

What IT was I I believe there is deal to be done, but I also believe it's important to be clear about what the counters of that deal would be. I would freeze the current line and seek the status call right now. If so, I can answer your question or I can answer starting from the present. If we can do to me.

the office maybe put me to take nado off the table and avoid the holding. But now. Hey, maybe Better, what can?

Because I don't think that we would if I was president, I don't think we would have gotten to the point of those that things rolling in, angle meral mates and disastrous comments put in made a hard demand, hard note.

Ukraine off the table, put me still invaded. We don't know.

I don't. I don't think about what are factors where I can have one side of the other being able to to prove that, right? So let's check out the president right now.

Let's am U. S. president. I would freeze the current lines of control. We have a precedent for doing this, the korean war, korean war style armadas. That does give putin most of the dombes region. That's beyond the pale of what many are willing to accept in either party. But I think any deal someone has to win, everyone has to win something out of the deal.

I would further than give that assurance that nature will not admit ukraine tonnato, but there is a requirement to in return, the biggest requirement is that russia has to exit its military partnership with china. There's a two thousand one treaty. It's called the treaty of good neighbor inness and CoOperation military co Operation between the two countries that you can pay in put and racing IT up to the so called strategic no limits partnership in twenty two.

That is why china is now coming, by the way, to russia aid. I personally, if we are absolutely sending putin, intuition pings arms in a way that's a mistake. I would also require that putin remove his nuclear weapons from Colinton grad, that we taking a russian military presence in the us.

In the west hemisphere here off the table, ezela, cuba, nicaragua. I think this is a deal that putin would do if we paired IT with reopening economic relations with russia, which I would do because I think putin does not. And I can give you some evidence for this, but I think putin does not enjoy being decision paying little brother.

And so I think that this is actually an opportunity. And I have to confess, I am a guy who seize our foreign policy prism through the prism of believing that china is the top long run threat that we face. And so most of my foreign policy views and national security views, even on topics that are apparently unrelated, china, I still see IT through that prism.

But this one isn't too far leap, because china's literally in a military treaty with russia and coming to the aid, I would use the ukrainy war and an end to the ukraine ine war as a way too bifocal the russia china relationship and divide, basically dissolve that relationship. And then actually that's our best way and most effective step towards deterring shean from going after taiwan because right now she's in paying. I think that there's a mistaken consensus view that the way he thinks about IT is oh reason by analogy rather than by actual analyzing of a situation, say, oh, well, he got that piece of land and maybe I can go get the silent.

I don't think he reasons by analogy, I think give reasons by the cards. He s in terms a hard power. So his bet is that the us won't want to go to war with two different like nuclear superpowers at the same time. But if russia is no longer in his camp, then SHE sian, things going to have to think twice about going after taiwan. I part of my brother taione.

The question there is we wouldn't defend ukraine if would you have amErica and the allies defend taiwan? If IT was invaded?

I would at least until the U. S. Has achieved Sunny conductor independence. So you would entry because we depend on them for our modern way of life in a way that we don't on ukraine and and in the latter part of this IT sounds a little crass to some people, but I believe in being honest. I actually think that get to the get to this point a second, but answer your question, yes, until we've achieve senny conductor independence D I believe we can achieve 3a .

conductor independence。 So it's not your belief is not, hey, these are two democracies. They both deserve equal defense from the united states, ukraine and taiwan is ukraine doesn't have semiconductors. We don't have a strategic need to defend them and taiwan. So it's a more of a pragmatic cut through approached to foreign .

policy IT is I I I of course um you resist the characteristic of cut through a little bit. I go back to the principle of David mentioned of what american exceptionalism is to me is that when amErica is strong and is flourishing, and americans are flourishing within america, we set the example for the free world of what is possible. And so my view is that, yes, at least until time, untoward seni conduct yourself sufficient. And I think things work out here where I think we can get there.

So in time, we've got our semicon doctors after running, you'll like china roll into taiwan. No big deal for you.

I will say that I definitely evaluate that very differently, that I do say a lot things .

to be different. 拜拜 your thought for ever。

Let me just so vivid. I an. I think that your point is is a really important one, which is that when we're happy at home, we can not to look for conflict abroad. That's almost a universal truth that emerged from history.

Human civilization has shown that, you know, when the people in a democracy in particular, or happy at home, and certainly autocracy, are quite different allies under the great and Julia season, August sees you go through history. But like when you ever a true democracy, you don't vote to go. And you don't support the idea of conflict to broad if you're happy at home.

But the counter is true, which is when you're unhappy at home, you tend to look for conflict abroad. And by some assessments, read olio had this great book about this, the changing world order, right? A view if you read IT.

But now he makes this point about the internal strife leads to external conflict, which is why I felt like we were going to go that way with ukraine, russia coming out of twenty one. So I wonder, are we happy at home where I want to ask, I want to ask another question tie to this. Why is Donald trump adding in the polls? Because I think that the two go hand in hand. There is something that he represents, and there is something about his voice that I think echoes the sentiment of this populist unhappiness inside of this country today that manifest in a bunch of ways, one of which is the interest in and support for extra conflict. But I don't know if you're up for kind of think IT about tackling the two questions together, but I love you.

You take yeah great question.

I think you're absolutely right, me. You're extending a theme of where I talk about sort of domestic cultural annoyance as a symptom of a deeper vacuum in our national soul.

I think that actually our projection and focus abroad is a lot easy of a deflection away from the harder step of taking a long, hard look in the mirror and asking ourselves about the health of our own nation today, in citing IT a deep question, I think we're not healthy as a nation today. I think we suffer from deep seated psychic insecurity, psychological insecurity. I think the economics stagnation, the fact that real wage growth isn't up for the bottom ninety nine percent of the country.

Now a lot of that I put at the feet of the federal reserve, there are a lot of other complex factories behind IT. But a lot of this feeds into what you call popular M. I don't is me I I don't like you somewhere.

by the way.

Just to be clear, I think that is is is .

I don't rever that tries to catch too many things that .

IT doesn't catch enough. So you're popular m is actually a failure of our isn't that what's going on? We saw gey cove IT that all the health authorities did a horrible job.

The cdc and the N I H. IT. Turns out they are funding function research, which may have calls go IT in the first place.

They were doing experiments of.

you know, we keep finding out that the elites are superbly running in the country, and in these institutions are doing absolutely horrible job. That's what the reaction is against. Then people come along in label of popular and says, going to lead to fashion.

It's come on. That is a way of protecting the people in power from accountability for the horrible job they are doing. This.

in the use of the word populism, is almost stacking the debate in favor of saying that those grievances aren't legitimate. And so I think, why is Donald trump pulling in number one in the polls? Because people know the truth.

I think those grievances are absolutely legitimate. Now I think the mood of the country has changed a little, including the mood of the hard conservative base has changed since 20。 I think there is now I think there is now a sense that what are we actually going to do about IT? Are we? Are we gonna go the direction of a national divorce made.

The divorce is, is one of these things that speaks itself into existence, maybe applies at the same of the level of a nation, right? That's on the table. The is in the either.

I don't think most people, including in our hard core amErica first base and part of that base, I don't think, want a national divorce. And so I think that the moment now calls for this one in the race. This is actually why at this point, I couldn't have told you this in march, but at this point, i'm convinced actually to be successful in this.

This is what the unique fusion we're going to require is not somebody showing up saying and hope, cuba, let's move forward, compromise, hold hands and declare its morning again in america. No, that I gonna work. But I think that requires recognizing the legitimacy of those grievances, not as lip service.

I, I believe, for seven years, sex as many, many of those aggrieved anes are legitimate y're grounded in truth. But to say, as I often say to the left, hardship is not the same thing as victim hod. And we're not gonna choose victim hood.

We're going to choose recognition of truth as our best path to heal over whatever s happened and then to move forward. That's why i've come out and been very vocal about the fact that I would part in trump of each of the two indictments that had been brought ten. If the j six indictments brought against him, I would do the same thing.

I think that we have to be able to recognize the truth of our past grievances of our fellow americans, and actually not just pay lip service to IT, but feel into IT and acknowledged the reality of them. I think that then the table stakes of this meeting a demand that many in our grassroots conservative base have I one of them a desire to also move forward as one nation. And I think both of those elements are going to be required. They don't go together. I think there are people in the republican primary who offer each of those on their own.

I think successful .

can have to offer both.

This morning there is a an opinion peace i'm assuming you read by retired chief of the national review publish on political get ready for the vive cron a swimmy moment in which I would say he's fairly if you serve a about the campaign you're running right I mean, would you agree like if you think so yeah so there are really yeah something he .

loves you yeah no.

He said he does not love you but he I think he said some complimentary things about your campaign about your character but said there's no way you're going to win and win for president.

Well, you went from under one percent. I think now the latest policy as you above five percent and we're in the very early hinting thing, right?

I think there's one that just came and india, there's some that was a little higher than that.

But ah for the first debate on react is that you have kind of inserted yourself in the debate on every issue, you know every day as IT comes up. I mean, you're kind of live in off the land as a candidate, not out there with just kind of additional stump speech, but you're finding a way to insert yourself into the debate every day on social media. I right.

I mean, you post a tweet that will hit the nerve of whatever the issue is going viral that day, which means a yoga viral. And so for months, i've been seen in your tweet go super viral. And so it's not surprising to me that your cancer started to you catch on in that way.

What some remarkable to me is that other candidates can't do IT. I mean, when you first start doing and I was going like, okay, this is obviously easier. Of course, this is what you would do, but other canada have not really done that, whatever reason. So I mean.

are you I think my perspective you my perspective on that because if we use .

the Normal like IT, is when you accuses of creating a banking crisis. But other than that.

yeah, I do want to close the loop on that either .

on or or I feel right now.

you know I and for the other kids, I anyway, that's less interesting is fine. Maybe I think I is not running IT through a filter. Rk, because collection, a traditional political thing is, and because what's going to happen to me as a consequence, i'm going to eat the consequence of this, right? Everything comes at a cost.

There is no free lunch. I'm onna say something in real time that reflects my honesty, sticks as my whole strategy, right? People can tell the difference, but then i'm going to change my mind on one out of one hundred things, okay? And that's just gonna en right? And I never opened to that and eat my words.

And you know, i'm going to do IT at some point and and that's the trade off we're making is that i'm not running IT through the filters. I'm not making up what I believe i'm telling you actually, to the contrary, what I truly believe. But if i'm doing IT really that rapidly in response to what's happening, I think people appreciate that, but i'm going to eat .

my words at some .

point that's OK in revenue information and response new information .

or sometimes even in response to reflection.

Do you want to close the loop on this anything?

Yeah do you think everything caused the banking crisis by using all caps? It's tweeted yes or no.

I do not really like .

I between on a saturday I across the background.

I did not say I I did never was that there, but we did go at IT pretty hard. I think actually I I think there's a chef.

We might still disagreed, but I think that of sex here, but you so I actually talked a lot of friends who were in the position of running companies that had some amount of get and and and we talk through this like the specific 的 situation， and then IT done on me, where and I might, it's not necessary, were good, agree the into this, but there's a chance that we might actually, which is this. So in the lead up to this before that friday, I was already against any governmental intervention here. Let this play out.

why? Because like, let's put aside all the historical ics, do the math on IT. And I read there's a little hazy now, right? So on the fact, but I think it's approximately right. You correct if you have up to date facts on this, but I think it's approximately right. If everybody had run and gotten their money out, I think I would have been like ninety four cents on the dollar that everybody would have walked out with, right? And so what happened on friday is in this apart, where I want to potentially build a bridge here, the part what happened on friday was that friday was the government, if I see otherwise, froze the ability regulator.

Or friday morning.

yeah, friday morning, you were much closer to the details, but the cover regulation throws the ability to take out deposits.

So I am more sympathetic to the point that once the governments gotten involved, that really is that like you kind of like a no crap moment where your CEO a company, your CFO and you want to get your money and then you can know it's panic, right? right? And so H, I think that there's a version of the world where the version of the world I wanted, I was talking about this before you and I were talking directly to each other. I just think they should stayed out of IT ninety four cents on the dollar, not bad, which is why the public did actually end up the using taxpayer funds was because the bank is healthy and its own right. That's what that's the worst result of bank run would have produced there, which actually .

should have been hard. Let me give you an insight that maybe you weren't as close to as the rest of us war, which is on all the boards that all of us sit on, all of the boards were discussing independent of this show and the conversations in the media. We need to move all of our money out of all of the bags that aren't one of the top three and move all of our money .

into the top rate.

So the point that.

the point of view that we all saw was that there was a mad right in corporate amErica and start up land in small business land. This isn't even VC land. This is like everything from the nonprofit that we sit on the board of to the, you know, long drama of the dry cleaner to every business, every money in a small bank was saying, I gotto move my money into a big bank now.

And that's where the whole banking system is put at risk. And that is why we all univerSally felt that he was important to highlight that the federal government needs to step in and reassure and rebuild confidence in the small banks in this country. Just only the only way to do that was to say your deposits are safe.

And that was IT. And that was the point because the panic that was going on in small business land in america, which adds, you know, employees, half of the people in this country was at risk and that those people, those small businesses, were fearful and they were looking to rush to the big banks. And that would have created the small banks around the country.

So and I think it's it's a difference and vantage point, right discussion, a popular everything else. I don't think sex caused the bank ground anymore that i'm causing populist waves in this country.

Again, I was in with I.

but I I think the reality is people literally .

of tweet that I called the bank ant insane.

But there's there's a technical there's a technical point i'll making them look at to the deep the technical point to close loops. I think I find your position more reasonable given that is after friday when the california regulators came in a located but in my version of the world, I would have just said stay the checkout government of any kind, ninety four cents on the dollar, there's a six percent haircut.

And we've discovered the market actually works and we avoid playing favor, tim, in the first place. And I say, this is somebody who, and this is where you, to my village point, have been a long time opponent of the creation of the notion of syms systemic important banks in the first place, as an opponent to the bail to two thousand eight, as somebody who's running for U. S. President, not to lead incremental reforms, but a sort of revolution in the kind of restoration and the integrity of capitalism, democracy that I think is actually the best antidote to.

would you try constructed sides?

Well, I may give the staus cool where we are. I think that I would have to offer a credible enough basis to make sure that people know that if there's a systemic, so called, previously known as system ally, important bank that fails, that the public still not going to be there for them.

But in a way that a raw laws for enough of an enough of an unburden the banking sector, that we have a resilience in terms of exactly who can actually feel that void. And I think that there is a diverse of impact on. I don't think IT has to be, and this way may may disagree little bit, and this a small scale disagreement.

I don't think that has to be extinct of the world where we just assume consumers are dumb and don't take decision account. Consumers are in part dumb because we treat them as right. And so this is like a hizb g effect, right? You can you know you you you you're find what what I mean is you you, you know basic principle physics, you can, you know, observe the spin and not affect the spin of the electron the same time.

I think the same thing applies to a relationship between the government and people. And so I think part of the reason that people, I think I feel the same way about the F D. A, by the way, I think people would be far more scrutinising of the medicines they took if IT didn't come with the crowding out effect of that individual level of self responsibility and due diligence that the government wasn't doing. But now we live the worst of all world where we have neither the governments, neither actually protecting nor actually providing the space for individual responsibility.

I just wanted to hear, you know, you make a statement, you collect data one and one hundred, you say you'll change your mind. I just want to understand, with all the data, the past, the present, and probably, who knows, every every experimental day, we see something new. What is the four, three hundred and sixty degree view that vivid romi has a Donald.

three hundred and sixty degree of you got IT. Yeah, actually having had a space start, tim, late this yet. So I I think this IT is useful. So my view is that he was a successful present, measured by reviving the economy. Six represent period.

how? Why do I say that? Reviving the economy, growing the american economy, I think that recognizing and speaking to and partially addressing concerns that had been historically unaddressed by major political parties, we did not enter a major war.

We were on the brink of major conflict with north korea on the precipice, and other parts of the world. I is was a thing. IT is IT exists, but is by large, not the same threat that IT was after his president says that was when he took over.

These are major accomplishments, right? I think the immigration crisis, and I think is far worse today, precisely because lines and office is not trump. So I believe he was a successful president.

That's view number one. View number two, he hasn't an effect on people. About thirty percent of this country that I think becomes psychiatrically ill.

What he is, the us. I think it's just fat, right? Agreeing with things that they otherwise wouldn't have agreed .

with because three person applies our part two, one in four.

Well, I think that is is just the reality is people lose their ability to process information. People lose the ability to thin independently. It's like a dominic possession that happens in this country, about the best I can tell about thirty percent of the country.

And I think that s not good for the country and and we can debate who's to blame for that or whatever. But I am just stating in observation that I feel pretty strongly about. And so I think most of trumps policies were good.

Do I have some policy disagreements with them? Of course I, you'll be weird. If I need two people agreed on one hundred percent of things, I would reenter the cptpp.

He exited the T. P. P. I think his exit of the tpp gives us a negotiating position with malaya and japan in a fix.

Some of the micro things that we might have wanted, china is not in the T. P. P. That's part of the path to actually declare economic independence from china. IT comes to that we could go into a lot of different details.

I would have received the affirmative action executive order that london sign that I asked trumps people why they didn't. They said that was a political hill that I want to die on and shut down the department of education we got. But broadly, he was a successful president with who I mostly agree on his broad policy vision. And especially this can .

get wrong and what? And was the election stolen?

Yeah, so so I think I gave you a small examples of what he got wrong. But I think the real care, the real thing that he got wrong and not sure that getting wrong is the even framing, is just a fact that thirty percent of this country became psychiatrically ill and you're the leader of this country, you're leading a nation, and so you could decide whose fault t that is. But I believe leaders are ultimately judged by their results.

And for whatever reason, even when i'm saying the same things that trump often did as a matter of policy or foreign policy or domestic economic policy, maybe because people don't don't yet know me broadly, but I don't think that's IT actually. I don't think i'm having that effect on people and I think that's why i'm in this race to Carry forward unapologetic George washington to amErica first policies and to do so more successfully, but also in a way that unites the country, are rounded that vision more so than downal trump. Every cut in the second term was the election stone.

Here's the sense in which I think the election was stolen in a data driven way. I have not seen any data to suggest that the ballot fraud or anything like that would have been sufficient to overturn the ballot count of the baLance. I've not seen any vidit to that effect. What I do see is hard evidence that people in this country would have elected a different president.

Who's that I like.

Who's this?

This is tli. This is child number five .

number five.

SHE is cute, but number .

one in our heart. What you that's nice.

So we name .

I was .

totally ti.

I am away from my sons is next last few days so I, you know, happy for you. Hopefully we will be with a little guys soon. You know, what I was saying is get to punch line.

The sense in which the election was stolen was the hunter and laptop story and the systematic suppression of information. I think there is no doubt, is no doubt, I think that the evidence strongly suggest that trump would have been elected and not biden, had we actually a voter base that had access to that information. And I think that is something that we ought to learn from. And I think that IT does cast a lot of doubt in frustration on the legitimacy of the election.

Let me double click on that. Uh, you seem to have set on other programs, have heard you at least to have thousand times talk about, uh, deep, deep state conspiracy, trying to frame Donald trump federal indictment of the thirty seven criminal charges for the stolen documents, refusing to give them back. You got the new york case, thirty form are felling accounts.

We're about to have another one drop on january six. You ve got the georgia where we try to get people to get ten thousand more votes. You got to new york case where C O S going to jail, you got guilty of sexual, uh, assault, and then you got the tea. James is suing the trump organization of these seven or all seven, a deep state conspiracy.

I think it's it's a collective anthills tic immune sense to to gen that chAllenge the system, I guess. So anything .

wrong in these cases he's got free. And I would be really .

clear about something. I'm running for U. S. President in this race against Donald trump because i'm the best position to lead the nation forward.

And I would have any .

seven I would have made. I would have made very different judgments than he did. But I think criminalizing bad judgments, especially when done so against political opponents in the mist of a presidential election, is an awful judgment for A U. S. President and the department of justice .

underneath him to make so the department of justice and the person who put in charge of IT, they're all conspiring and that he didn't do anything wrong. Well.

there's like a lot in that statement, right? sure. Does he did he do things that I think are reprehensible that I wouldn't done? Yeah, I think so. I mean, that tax, as they exist, absolutely do.

Do I think the biden and a lot of other politicians who have come have done things that I would have done differently in actually think you are wrong decisions? absolutely. But do I think that conflicting a bad judgment with a breaking age of law is a risk to our future?

I think that is. Do you think you send those people to I am just six.

I don't think he did. No.

no, I to march down there. And when he told the provoke to stand by and stand back, you don't think that he was .

exciting them. Let me just say i'm not here to defend the Donald trump's behavior. I'm running for U.

S. president. I think we opened on this matter. Yes, I want to be very clear.

The hat i'm wearing, I would not have done what he did, but he was very clear. And you look at the transcripts and you run, despise. I have first amendment scholars just to check mib.

And exciting violence is not protected speech by the first amendment. There is no sense in which when he tells people to peacefully make their way to the capital, that does not meet any supreme court test for what constitutes exciting violence in this country. I think that lets just take take the york example. I mean.

some of the stuff, the details. Actually.

my first old key profounder suit, roads, got eighteen years. Do you think that the justice department did that because they trying to frame trump? And do you and trump told the old keepers to stand by, to stand back? Do you think he incited the earth? Keep reject? Now.

based on the fact that I have seen, i've seen no evidence of that.

Your delusional K I do. I buy.

okay. So i'm also there's also an indictment that hasn't been brought. So i've offered my opinion the first two indictment ts that have been brought against him, right? I D them. I read all forty nine pages in the last one and responsible ets, yeah on the first two indictments. I think they're absolutely politically based .

in and go through your .

interest, right? I mean, I just give you a light on each right in new york, IT has take a fact that it's a state offence that was up charged to a felony and outside the statue of limitations only by tying IT to an alleged federal crime. And what was that federal crime? FAiling to report a hush money payment to a porn star as a campaign contribution.

There would be a stronger case for using in paying hush money and using campaign funds to do IT that that was a federal campaign financial violation then not actually counting IT. So so many counts to politicize prosecution against anybody else. They would have brought IT documents.

Case a forty nine pages died, read twice that does not once mention the presidential records act act, the most relevant statute that talks about what the basis is for president to keep documents or not, and instead charges him, according to, I think, one of the most unamerican laws in U. S. History, past during world war one to silence world war one decently, including U G E V debs, U G E N V debt.

Who has actually put in prison over this? I have long argued that that was a statue that should have long been over, should have been resented. That's now being used to charge a crime, rather than even more precisely.

So I tend to be very responsive, maybe to the point of frustration, of being technical on these things. But I believe facts and law actually matter. I think that if trump was the best guy for the job I ouldn't running in this race, if ronal reagan were alive and well today, I would not .

be running in this race.

I think I question about these trump scandals. Do you think .

that one of the.

well, I think, do you think trump s should be edited for trump junior being paid eighty three thousand knowledge of months to serve on the board of a ukrainean energy company despite having no energy .

expertise that matter.

and his personal life being crisis because is a drug added him getting that job three months asked his father approved a and back to coup against the ukrainian government do you think that don't investigated for that?

And David is is this also after, uh, that Donald trump then sends two hundred billion dollars of U S. Taxpayer money to that very country after he's elected in office? I think that the strongest of the .

scandal I heard so much so you believe fighting is a great well process for on grifters. What do you think of Jerry Christian getting taking down two billion from the sauces after he walked out of the White house?

I don't have that's not a matter that .

I have views on.

You don't have views on that.

but you ve got plenty of this is a .

great the great example of why am in this race. I'm telling you this is there's something .

about the existence .

of Donald trump tly and trying .

to say very .

forward the agenda of this country, much of which was trump's agenda so vivid.

And in order to win this candidacy, and the reason I brought up the political a publication this morning, obviously there there is a bit of tongue cheek on the effusiveness. But the key point being made was you have no chance of winning and that you shouldn't be in the race at all. Now look, i'd like was the pieces of the peace.

That's a good everything .

is where it's coming from, right? It's coming from the establishment voice. And I think we'd like to hear just a little bit around your political strategy.

What is your intention around building bridges and ties to the republican establishment to support your candidacy here? Or does the or does the republican establishment largely set on the sidelines right now and wait to see who emerges with this popular movement and and who's out there? You're obviously running an incredible campaign on the road, very active, very vocal and as everyone says, probably by far the most articulate and most thoughtful and most intelligent of the candidates in the race today.

But lacking experience, lacking connections, not part of the establishment and as a result cast in this negative light consistently by the um by these sorts of writers. So what what is your strategy to win this race given me is is not important, as trump showed in the last electric cycle, to have those republican establishment ties? Or are you going to be building bridges? And then my follow up question is, if you don't want what .

you are going to do? yes. So yes, let me let me dress the first. It's basically in the camp that I don't think that is the voters that ultimately matter, not the people who have appointed themselves in the raining establishment. It's not even the establishment anymore.

It's an outdated establishment that I don't think actually is going to influence meaningly the result of this election except one respect, which is money, which I get back to. So so the area where we're punching above our weight, right debates haven't even happened yet in at least in the last week. I'm third in most of the national polls.

This is well ahead of even where we planned to be, right? We planned to be in third by november, december ahead of the eo caucus's. I had a new hampshire over perform expectations, and both of those use the moments and then win the race.

That was broadly the strategy with the debate stage as the plate is the way where I would steadily work my way into that. I think we're just now on a different curve where, you know, we might be in second place by then and by a smaller margin than people expected. I think the debate stage is critical.

The campaign strategy is actually to combine the initial investment that because i've live american dream of was able to make, but to combine that with a true grassroots uplift, we've got close to seventy thousand. Maybe more. Have to check the exact numbers, unique donors already your former advice presidents, rather candidate that are you know well on their way and struggling by some measures to get to forty thousand, which is the threshold for the first debate.

So our strategy is very much grass roots strategy. I've done more campaign events than anybody in the republican field. And so this is our strategy is very grass roots to driven.

So i'm punching above my weight in terms of events, unique donations, polling. The one where i'm punching below weight is large scale donations. So we are not raising mass numbers of large check external funds yet into the campaign. My super packs or I don't have I made whatever. There are independent expenditure.

I know there there's an entity that exist out there that's been a filled with me as based on public reports, that tiny amounts of money compared to those that are supporting and all in for candidates from tim, Scott, Dennis. And that's also a reality, right? And I think that comes with competitive advantages and disadventure ges.

There are two sides of the same coin. I think I am met liberty, totally liberty. If you are totally unconstrained to pursue the strategy that David mention earlier, which is that i'm reacting in real time to what I believe.

Have you been surprised by the lack of clarity maybe, uh, of the descendest campaign in reality, creating a pathway through trumpet? And if you are surprised to what what do you think he's doing wrong to critical?

Yeah i'm not surprised because and I know him h and I think he's a good execute, right? I think he has been oh, I disagree with some other people on this. I think he's been quite an effective governor.

I think that when you're talking about any scot Walker in the last cycle was quite an effective governor. And for the same reasons that people believe scot Walker was going to be to run away nomine last time around, I think that people naturally gravitate. People think they want somebody who has done something as an effective executor.

But when IT comes to the U. S. Presidency, I think it's a unique role where what matters is actually having a vision for where we are going, right? And so i'm not I don't without in things that are interpreted as being mean about somebody else or not.

I know all of these people have known them for a long time. I've shared stages with them over the course of my world pink book tour and nation of victim's book tour. I'm not surprised with how things are going in this race.

You know, as we expected to be where we are in november, we're here in july. I'm not surprised that we're doing well. I understand how audiences across this country responded to my message and working. I am not surprised that they're continuing to respond well, truck because nothing surprising about where we are in this race right now.

And so you're not surprised because good because the scientist is a competent to administrator, but that is a great job as governor, but not the bill of goods for the president.

I'm really an appointed this race from I but to be honest with you, I think I think there's a lot of truth to what said do .

you think private though, is that trump has singled out the scientist as the one can not who he's gonna beat the hell out of. I mean.

I don't think so. David actually actually .

attacked you, just actually say good things about you.

Ah he's not attack anybody else in this race. yes. Is that anybody .

have you spent?

I know all these guys have you spent .

was the last time we talked.

not a serious amount of time. I been more time with the santis than I have a metal one dinner with trump at once yeah when this long of .

for president and we've elected state.

I mean, most of us will. We intersect each other. We're speaking at the same forms, the N R A, the family leader, think the tuck, or did back stage.

We have interactions with all other kids and like to think i'm friendly with everybody. You know, I don't know how you I haven't talked around recently, but I talked him more before. But I think the reality is today, what you said is definitely true.

And i'm not in this to be a political landale right on in this step. Stay what my beliefs starts, say who I am and people can vote for me or not. But I actually do think I did I don't think to the trumps, commentary on the other candidates is having so much of an effect.

I think voters, main people who are maybe initially behind the same as I know many of them were people who are part of that traditional establishment. They didn't want that. Most of them wanted to have nothing do with trump, but decided that was the next best thing.

So I don't think the trump attach are going to persuade them one way or another, I think comes down to the study of what happened in two thousand and sixteen. I D, scotland, a great governor really respect a guy, and I like what he's doing in his post elected office life as well. But everybody has a role to play in reviving this country.

And I think we all have to look ourselves in the mirror and ask ourselves how are we going to make our unique contribution? And I think it's gonna require governors who are effective implementors of a vision that makes their states thrive. I think government sense has done really good job of that.

I think Christine known has done a really good job of that. I think there are people who hopefully will continue to have an impact on our culture outside of government altogether. There's a really important for that. yes. I think that's my answer to your other question that which I forgot to answer.

which I do two two things that you mentioned just in passing, but I just want you to clarify your thoughts on them. One is you said you would abolish the department of education, and I thought i'd never heard anybody say that really. So could you just expand on that, what you mean? And in the second, I love for you to talk about some of these supreme court decisions that have come in the vast a while, specifically the abortion debate.

You from the action debate, the rights of businesses to not service people that whose ideology that disagree with the end. So the third point is maybe use that last part as a jumping off point. I'd love for you to understand your position on L, G, B, T, Q, the role of the trans movement, what's happening in schools. Those are the three kind of big that that I think I are worth talking about you, if you can just give .

a few minutes and there's a lot there. So so so let me, if I skip over something, bring back. So department of education, I think the federal government is not, as a factual matter, directly involved in education. I think IT is a, therefore a dead way waste for money to cycle from the taxpayers to the federal department of education to then disperse those funds inefficiently as they do, tilting the scales to for your college degrees over choices that people might have otherwise made Better, Better choices for them. Vocational training, one year, two year.

Progress using IT as a casual in this relates to the latter issue, you asked about to tell local schools they don't get that money unless they're adopting what I certainly is, toxic, racial and general ideology based e agendas. They use the money as a casual to do IT. So i've said that that department that spans about eighty billion dollars of taxpayer money, i'll shut IT down tonight in new answer.

I'm laying out the anatomy of exactly how will shut down and then return that money to the states, to the people put in parents pockets. Very specifically, you have to be a state that has a school choice programme in order to receive that department of education. Shut down, divided.

I think that if you're that such a state, I would also believe that those states need to write their teachers union teachers contracts in a way that stop teachers from joining teachers units, which I think have been a destructive force on our public schools. If you're unionizing against the public, think about who you're union zing against the very kids you're supposed to represent. Now we have transparency.

We have choice. If you teach them in the classroom, put IT online. And then there's an interesting fact in this country where the you guys will appreciate how bizarre fact really is. There's not only like a failed positive correlation, there is a negative correlation and inverse correlation between how much money per student a public school spend and the actual outcomes that that school achieves for its students.

So in my version of school choice, my preferred version, IT, would not just be the parents get to get these vouchers and educational savings accounts to send their kids to some other school as part of the story is first step. But I think any parent who moves to a school that spends less per student, which we know based on the data, is actually all this. Could a Better performing school as IT relates to achievement, should be able to take half the delta with them, said, take chicago or pensylvania, spending thirty five, forty thousand dollars per student, fifty miles away of a school, spending fifty and twenty thousand dollars per student.

I think they should be able to take half the difference that ten to fifteen thousand dollars, half that difference of the twenty thousands of ten thousand dollars they take with them. You're on the math on Normal investment returns, which had about a quarter million dollar plus graduation gift when that kid graduates from twelve to grade. So you tell me which is a Better use of money is not even close .

and I think the head the same but you actually another .

guy is a arba treasures who is a friend but who share similar instincts and like i'm .

like i'm a value .

investor yeah I want .

to talk about the specific .

the gay in the trans issue. Um two questions. One do you think it's Normal to be gay and you have any problem with people being gay?

And then no I don't think .

is no problem. So then the second course talking about trans, I heard you meet the press say the trans was a mental disorder, which yeah you know IT wasn't the D. S.

M. Four, I guess whatever the latest one was to yeah just to a couple years ago. And now it's change. So maybe explain why you think differently about those two things. One you think is fine to be gay, but you think it's a mental disorder in all likelihood if people want to transit.

Yeah so you know I want to only view the good sense of where i'm mad on on these issues, right? So I think it's at least curious that we take the L, G, B, T, Q, I, A plus value set in vision for what the movement stands for. IT does require you to adopt simultaneously conflicting beliefs.

S at once brighten. The gay rights movement was predicated on the idea, which are quite synthetic to that the sex of the person that you're attracted to is hardwired on the day born, but now with the t component of that same movement that now says your own gender is completely fluid over the course of your own life. And I think for not going to observe the tension between these two observations, I think were purposefully having our heads stuck in the sand.

I think what's happening in many cases, somebody who claims to be trends is really just gay. And part of what we're saying is it's not OK to be get. So to answer your first question, part of what the trend movement is effectively telling people that is not okay to be gay.

You know who says that are actually iran is a nation that if you are gay, they force you to undergo gender conversion surgery? It's not that different then what's baked into the ideological premise of much of the trends movement here. And so I just want you to come from the fact there's a lot of people in the G, P O offer surface level stuff.

I to have. It's been a lot of think IT about this gender dzhin a is what i've said is a mental health disorder. I've been very precise.

Let's take the intersex case out of a client filter syndrome, Jacobs syndrome, right? Client fellor is X, X, Y, Jacobs, syn. Rome is, X, Y, Y is, are ultra rare.

They exist. They are real for the purpose of our discussion though it's under the broad trains umbrella. I'm onna.

Take that out of IT because that's not a mental health disorder. That's a genetic reality. But now let's go back to the conflicting superstition. There's no gay gene yet. The sex of the person attract to do we accept for civil rights purposes is heart right in the day born, yet there are excEllent chromosomes, and yet your own biological sex slash gender is now completely fluid over the course of your life. There's attention there.

And I think the attention is best explained, by the way, we've treated IT for most of our national history, for most of our medical history, although we through actually, I think the D S M five, not just the as a mental health condition. And I think the compassionate thing to do is not to a firm, especially when it's a kid, to affirm a kid's computer. I think the compassionate thing to do is to recognize that there are some other psychological struggle manifesting itself in this form. And IT is cruel to a firm .

that kids confusion that I .

ent two Young, old surgery.

Gery ortheris, actually.

yes, and you would be doing on that here in new hampshire, literally like where I am right now. Yeah, who are in their twenty years that badly regret undergoing double macc to mies? One of them underwent a hic to my, both of them underwent beauty.

Even if the parents in doc and they agreed with that, you say they can't make that decision for the child.

Just like you can't get attack too before the age of eighteen. In most, what we say is a decision that you are likely to regret, many in many cases, at less likely regret later alive. We let you make that decision as an adult, and I do believe we live in a free society.

As an adult, you're free to identify how you want a free to wear what you want. But kids aren't the same as adults. And even among adults, there's a difference between living your life freely and expecting that everybody else changes their linguistic and traditional understandings in sports and traditional understandings in lockers and traditional understandings and language. That's a difference. And so I don't believe in maternity of the majority, but I don't believe in a maternity .

of the minority either. You think this topic is over indexed on right now is a really important top with presidency? Or do you think this is like some sort of culture wars thing that this actually isn't that important to the national discussion to be healed privately by currents?

Appreciate you asking the this is I think I feel this way about a lot of the topics .

right from actually I think like why is this the most important topic?

This interesting because of the symptom IT is interesting, or only to the extent that IT is a symptom of the deeper void, of the deeper vacuum. And I think the mental health epidemic is not limited to gender theoria, anxiety, depression, drug usage, funny suicide, these, let let's have the conversation more holistically. These are symptoms of the deeper void. And all I care about is running through this topic without somebody holding the line of defense by stopping us to get to a discussion about that way, say, no, this is exactly what that kid is, and you're wrong to think about his mental health. I think it's unproductive because they adopted from getting .

the truth over the years. It's been the case that Young people tend to orient to be in counter cultural or entire establishment, generally speaking, is part of the psychological seasoning of a human to be against the parents, against the system, and ultimately to create independence for oneself.

And that typically counter to what what came before IT and IT has manifested in every generation with this point of view, that there is some psychological torment that has taken over the Young people that is causing them to act out from bx to hippies, to puns, to god, to e. mail. And every generation had some cultural representation. Is your point of view that gender dizzy a is the current manifestation of that pattern of behavior that we've seen over the generations?

That's not exactly my view. My view is that it's not limited to Young people. I think there is something unique going on in amErica right now struve.

All of us is some sense, some of this comes himself reflection. But I think it's true for most of us that were hungry to be part of something bigger than ourselves. Yet we cannot even answer what that means to be in american, or what IT means to believe in god, what god is. And we have come up with new false idols that substitute for that. You don't talk about generational history, mean most is by time he comes down from the mountain top.

You got the golden cave, is a lies, are last the desert? They say they want to go back and be ruled by the I think the historical trade pact is a slightly different one and maybe has a long or arc to IT and the one you're talking about, but I but am I diagnosis is not specific Young people. It's specific to where we are in a national history when, like a bunch of blind bats in a cave, I has a bat, figure out where IT is.

IT sends out echo location signals. So our signals that come back and say, this is where I am. I think we human beings required to do the same thing in the pillars, the walls, the fixed points of truth, from family to faith to patriotic m, to hard work to individual pride, the things that used to ground us when those things disappear.

We're now sending out these signals, and then nothing's coming back. And so we're making up new pillars instead. And maybe one of them is a transfer g and maybe one of them is a ukraine flag and maybe one of them is a climate cult and maybe one of them is a racial intersexuality hierarchy and maybe one of them is final.

But I think that that's. I I do have a deep point of gree with you and Jason, and I think we sometimes get too hung up both sides, maybe republicans a lot. So right now on the symptoms without getting to a deeper discussion of the deeper cancer, the deeper void that we need to fail, and that's what .

i'm interested to run up, the roady wade, uh, issue. I am wondering, what do you think is the most productive path forward for the country in terms of a reasonable right to choose versus right to life argument? Because you personally feel that abortion and should be banned on my correct.

I am personally pro life.

You prove so you do to be able to get abortion under any circumstances. Or do you have raped by .

you as someone who's run for U. S. president? Responding to the question about the supreme court case is that rovers s weight was correct to be overturned on constitutional grounds he was made. But IT leads also to the path for moving forward, which is that I think the federal government should stay out of that. And so there's a discussion among the republicans.

I think i'm the only republican canada in this field who has come out and said that I would not support a federal abortion ban of any kind on principled ground because to meet, I am grounded in constitutional principles and I think there's no legal basis for the federal government, legislature. The tend, the man says that part of the american experience, we have diversity across states. And I think this is a state issue.

Now, at the level of the states, I personally believe that unborn life is life. I think that the pro life movement needs to, we need to walk the walk. When IT comes to being pro life.

What do I mean? I'm pro contracts tion and pro adoption and pro childcare. I'm pro more sexual responsibility for men for god sake.

We live in an era of genetic tests. We can actually put more responsibility. I mean, this doesn't have to be and should not be immense versus women's right issue.

And nobody on our side is really talking about these issues. I do because I don't think this has to be as divisive as we made IT out to be. But I can almost prove to you that more people in this country share my instincts that are willing to admit t IT.

There's a case your clear Thomas brought IT up of pregnant an walking down the street. She's assaulted. The unborne child dies.

As a result, I haven't met and I have many little friends. Most of my friends growing up have been, have different political persuasion. I have now I ve been a sing.

One of my liberal friends are otherwise. Who says that that criminal does not deserve liability for that deaths. And so I I just think more of leaders.

just one state wants to ban IT. They can ban. If another state wants to have .

a twenty four week rule, they could have twenty four week. We if some legal scholar convinces me that the U. S.

Constitution gives the federal government the authority ties, design that in the law so bit. But I have not been so convinced, and I think many other principled constitutional alist. Haven't been convinced. Ed, even though the other republican field has all, doesn't I, of the canada in this races that they would sign one.

What is your thought on just the the gross tonnage of dollars that we spend on the military and defense and ebony and you know internal external security and then when goes bump up against civil liberty is just give us your kind of framing on how you think about those sets of issues around national level security. But where and persons, personal.

private, for more of my life than not identified by that, a conservative. And I still have all of those libertarian an instincts in my core. It's just that I care about more issues than libertarians care about, because libertarians was all about the relationship between state and the individual.

And I actually do care about culture and the fabric of the society outside of government. Two, the long way of saying i'm deeply skeletons, al of the national security establishment. I was deeply skeptical of the iraq war at the time and the guy today, in retrospect, I was deeply sceptical that prisoners in guantanamo bay should have been denied constitutional due process rights, when that's exactly what enshrines the justice system that we otherwise believe in.

I would part in july, a sage I would part in. I would, snowden, i've committed to a long list of pardons of people who have taken steps to expose corruption that we otherwise would not have seen in this country. And I think part of the reason why there's a weird corporate analogy, you are talking about companies in finding their purpose and coin base, I think there's a version that going on in the U.

S. I think the U. S. Military has lost its sense of purpose actually. And so my view, the purpose, the U. S. Military, to secure americans on american soil, to make sure that we went necessary, win wars and more importantly, deter wars.

And I think part of what you see in the loss of you people complain about workers in the military that are these gin symptoms of a deeper loss of purpose of an institution. Not that much different than the company. But my view is i'm not in the same way with the immigration debate.

I I don't engage in this. What's the cap? You know, higher or lower? It's the wrong debate.

Merit purpose. What are we achieving? I feel the same way about the military.

It's at a higher, lower discussion. It's a what are we doing discussion. And I think there is a legitimate case for the U.

S. To have and continue to have the strongest military in the world. But I think that deputising that military to fight wars that are really deflecting tact is often for our own elements at home. I think he's been a mistake, and we're at risk of making those same mistakes again right now, most permanently in ukraine, unless we learn from those best mistakes.

I want to ask you about the division within the republican party on this, specifically ukraine.

So at turning point, which you just spoke out, and I think you did very well in the stopple there, you had tucker interviewing mike pants, ask him, why should we priorities ukraine over our own cities that are increasingly broken down? You've got homeless people living on the streets, you've got this Price of drug addiction, you've got rampant crime, you've got schools that are terrible. And yet ukraine seems to be this fixation of the unit party in washington.

And and pants gave this totally done their head and answers something like that's not my concern, which I guess his apologists said afterwards that, well know, he was talking about something else. He wasn't saying that american cities weren't his concern, which even if you grant that was the case, means that he wasn't really paying attention to tim's question. But then you also had tim Scott say something he was definitely Better phrase than what pants basically said that he thought was a good idea of, of us be giving all this money.

Ukraine ine, because degrading russia's military was a good deal for the united states, you know, by which degrade, I assume, means killing russian boys. And you've heard blinch grams say this sort of thing. Then I had this republican pollster named patric refining, who I didn't really know before, but he is apparently republican pollsters.

He's got salva ukrainian as bio. I'm not quite sure what's motivating that, but he twisted that, be saying that ukraine is the like number seventeen on a list of top voter priorities, despite efforts by the likes of coral son and sacks to make IT a thing. Notice how IT almost never gets brought on the trailless tucker is there. My response to ham wall is to post a quote from each macao saying that ukraine is the number one priority of the G.

O. P. I am like .

you're making my point for me. I know that it's number seventeen in the eyes of voters in our party in terms of what they think we should be focused on, but it's number one in the minds of MIT mcconnell pants and scot and niki hai and Linda gram. These people are obsessed with this idea.

So I guess, you know, a, what is your reaction to that? B, how we onna change this? I mean, this seems like there's something fundamental broken in our party when the base understands that we should not be focused on ukraine's, focused on our own borders, our own cities, as opposed to some far away lands, barter and cities.

And then also in that same turning point poll, ninety five percent of the attending that conference were opposed to U. S. Involvement in ukraine.

IT was the single highest number for anything they pull on. I think trump got like an eighty five percent approval. Opposition ukraine got ninety five percent.

So clearly there is a fundamental divide between what the establishment or elite of the party thinks and what the base thinks. Yes, what is your explanation for that? And how does that ever get solved?

I mean, how we're going to fix IT. I'm going to give you a facile answer. David IT has to do with what we're doing, what we're doing. I want to be alone to the next present. I think I will be. And I think reflecting the will of the people in the way this country is governed is part of how our system is actually supposed to work, both in the primary and in the general election.

And so you I know we are sitting in different seats, but I sit in the seats that I am now precisely because I think somebody needs to actually step up and fix IT when most of the republican party has lack stock and barrel for all of their criticisms abiden none. The most important form policy matter of right now have locked stock berial adopted what is effectively the biding position, which is mysterious. And it's interesting now I think that IT has become A A sort of A A fixation, not because these candidates, I think, have arrived at this viewpoint independently through reasoning their way to IT, but just understanding that that's what they are supposed to say in the tradition of a party that was historically based on projecting hard power through deterrence.

The U. S. S. R. Not recognizing the fact that people sometimes seem to forget this fact, the U.

S. R doesn't exist anymore. And nato, which is created to contain the U.

S. S R, has now expanded far more after the fall of the U. S. S. R. Then IT did before, which is itself a symptom of a republican party that still sometimes this is a musli.

What about the influence of the military industrial complex? Do you think somehow, like it's related to donors?

Like what do you mean? yes. So a, i'm very open minded to N. M. G.

In the, so we were going to this um event where we're meeting with parents of kids who who have died as a consequence of final, and I don't want to keep them waiting longer than. Then we need to. But if you guys are going to do this again.

there's been a lot of the minutes it's asked.

Answer David's day was question .

I A Better just that last question. Number one, are you vaccinated against copy? Number two, what do you think a foul cheat? And what could we have done differently? I mean, amount of science. So I just curious what you think about the whole thing.

So I am accent ated against covet. Had I had the facts that I do now, as a Young, thankfully healthy, male, would not have actually chosen to get vaccinated, I think that Anthony fauci betrays science by substituting the scientific method, which depends on free speech and open debate and inquiry with authority, which is actually fundamentally anti scientific at its core.

And I think one of our main lessons to have learned from the pandemic, and I hope we do learn that in the future, is that IT is precisely in times of emergency that free speech becomes most important. I think if we had been able to debate in the open the merits of lockdowns for children, we would not have locked down our schools. I think we have been able to debate the open what the origin of the pandemic was. A lad, uhh, appears to be the overwhelming is the truth. And me, we know that that's exactly the most likely to correct explanation.

It's in the name IT really.

really is. But but everybody is the name. You couldn't said you could call that you couldn't name the unspeakable city forwards, the virus originated.

So I think one of the top license is free speech and open debate. The path the truth runs through that science depends on the free exchange of ideas. That's who we are. And the beauty is our country is founded on that very principle. It's in the first amendment for a reason.

I will let you get to your event, but I just want to say thank you for being incredibly dynamic and open and honest. It's really great to have guys like you to talk to appreciate you guys.

if you do, to get I had a lot of one to so do I got to work.

Thanks for not being like political politicians speak in being so honest and taking on every single .

topic we ask .

about your topic and .

appreciate you take your guys.

Thank you.

We didn't talk about this. Did you guys mention where you are that well.

based on the number of button here, I can tell you I, I, I, I can't talk to myself because, you know, I would tell you the story about two years ago when I was in middle and the stockers.

you fucking told everybody you were there. No, I didn't.

Everybody was. I was at trios beach club. I took a picture of the ocean. IT was during, I took a picture of the ocean, and in the corner of one of the toes was the logo of china speech club.

And some guys found that logo on the town, did a google image reversion of search, found the beach club that trim's part of, and then showed up at the beach club. Will always drinking hundred fifty dollar bottles of percent unch. Much cloud to pitch me there, start up. So I don't want to say exactly where I am, but I mean italy.

where you guys means that shouting distance from each other, we're to see each other.

Ever take, guys, the story about last summer, when I was in italy to athon, and I were walking down the streets of malon. yeah. Ever tell the story?

No, no. OK. This was like the last time that J.

L. And freebies are having a major fuel. And I looked like the pod was maybe not to break up. So I made for .

break up number one. Yeah.

this is break up number one. I may break up her two or three out or no. And you guys are definitely feeling.

So we're walking on the street always on somebody stops us and he, this is like a fan from, I don't know, like the australia, australia alia. I just remember this. He was from australia, a visiting malone.

and he stops us .

in the street and takes the photo and the whole thing. And as we're walking away to me says, we Better make this thing work because I like being famous.

You can go back to not you .

guys Better not screw this up because I like this a delicate.

free or being right.

Who for people who didn't get the joke week, I love freak. I'm trying to develop a deep, meaningful relationship with free. I do we think of vivid.

Let's get back to the Price tax. R, F, K versus viva. We've now had two of the top five candidates, and Chris Christie is agreed to come on the mach put me in touch.

I have to be honest with you. R, F, K, and he are more similar than they are different on a lot of topics. You know, the contours I think are are different on a few very specific one's obviously.

But it's like these outside are .

candidates I think have like up. There's just a their breath of fresh air because I think and divide set IT right the he N R F K, they have nothing to lose. So they just tell you what they think.

They don't have to memorize anything because what they think is what they think. And so you just consistently get this stream of consciousness. And the more and more I hear for these kinds of candidates, the more and more they make sense and jokes opposed against the established my candidates. It's very dark. Would you .

consider trump sax udo as being the sort of precursor these two non traditional candidates? Or now we have three nontraditional candidates in the mix, trump, the vic and R, K, and they all are shoot from the hip. Here's what I honest think, and maybe more moderate and pragmatic in terms of their positions.

Well, sure. I mean, trump ran for office or present without having ever .

run for office before, and he moved .

public ways that were totally new. Trumps lasting impact, I think, is gonna on the republican party. I mean, he moved the republican party from an open borders, completely free trade.

sort of party.

war mongering.

neo mongers.

new york military m neocon, to being anti war one, in how strong borders being, at least skeptical trade, at least with china, if not other countries. And I think he hasn't wanted to mess with entitlement. And he understands that the third rail, and very much against the the paul ryan, wanted to touch those at least in a non bipartisan way. I think that for the republicans to take on those issues by themselves, I think he understands the .

suicide lose votes when you start taking on entitlements.

And I think that what trump also did, which is really interesting, is IT cascadia, a wave of self reflection in a lot of other western country. So italy, more right. As a result.

The U. K. Went right. Spain looks like it's about to tip, right? The dutch actually just lost their election because of national border issues or you know that they dissolved their government. So there's like a real clear nationalism.

which you say it's more of the .

national national inflection as the part of the global I mean .

that the over ten window.

I think changed quite a bit with trump in the mix because now you actually had this much more amErica first nations orientation as the alternative to this sort of globalist. Whether its new liberalism or new conservatism, those two things have more in common with each other than they do with this more nature populist approach.

right? Freeboard.

what do you think? What is your take? I mean, R, F, K, obviously concerns you a bit because of the, I don't want to use the conspiracy word, but let us call IT. Maybe, you know, his open minded to, he's open minded to different theories. So what where do you stand on R, F, K in relation to the vector prepared?

Obviously, I I think he's crafted his narrative in a way that can be broadly appealing as as I mentioned in our text tree might think also appeal to the trump place in a way, it's a very smart campaign. I think that the the strategy, that the positioning, everything feels like it's hitting the mood of the moment.

And you know, I I would argue like you could probably call any election cycle, any campaign, one of two things, it's a promise of what can I do for you or how can I go and destroy the system that did bad for you and front, or F, K, by the way, to hire the magnitude of that statement. The more appealing the candidate is, I think the sec is doing a great job hitting A A reasonably high magnus de on the you know, this system has failed us. We need to go and fix these problems kind of moment.

And and and it's it's really good, but it's I think it's really good for call IT. The audience sets engaged in the intellectual, the data around IT. Not that would you could be back at this point. I need to spend a little more time with scientist to be honest and understand where where he said. I obviously a deep concerns about biden.

What would your concerns on biden be? His cognitive issues or the out of control spending. I I don't think .

he's winning the country, and I think that those who are there is absolutely no accountability and discipline. And what's going on with respect to spending, as I mentioned, the vector not appeal to me in resolving that concern either. By the way, hey thinks were going to grow our way out of IT, which is part of the premise of modern monetary theory, which I think it's a flum.

So you still don't have a candidate terms of controlling spending. yeah.

Look, I think the problem with the VC is he's not gonna appealing to the masses because he's so smart .

and so .

articulate that IT doesn't have the the trump basics. The trump basics are insult the bad guy, call yourself the best thing in the world, make jokes .

might be over, I think, might be the bullying, the name calling, the the bombastic trump nature. You think people are over IT. You think that's gonna burn people out this election cycle?

Well, not. If you look at the polls there on the policy party, I think in the general, they might. I mean, look, I think right now IT looks like we're on track to have a biden trumpery match. And right now biden probably looks like he's gona win. Boring a recession happening or the ukrainean side collapsing in in the war.

which I M I M I an indeed ment dropping sounds pretty like another bombshell. So, and I think you, no.

no, no, no OK. So what your favorite moment.

you know, from this discussion was, what was your stand up moment for your sex?

We sorry, I wanted your chart answer question to mock. Would you vote for? Or you still in out of case camp or you kind of still open minded about everything. I wasn't sure what is campaign was .

about and .

and I come away pretty meaningful ly intrigued about what he had to say. Um I think that there is some fundamental issues. That R, F, K has me on, that I wanted be back to own and he he flooded with him, but he didn't quite on them, such as I think that the just like the deconstruction of the military industrial complex was so definitive in our F, K.

And IT was IT was almost quite there with the fact, but not quite there. So I wish would, I wish you would know that. I think that the deconstruction of the department of education, I need to think more about, but some of these ideas are Frankly more compelling.

The prolife propose thing, I think, is very complicated. And I think you can go to this place of saying, let the states choose. But I am just not sure whether that's the right ultimate solution. And you know, proposing some federal legislation.

would you want to end up on that? You would want to end up like europe pe, like a certain number of weeks federally, and then maybe some local laws around abortion. And to tudes, I think that .

there is just like you you have a fundament if if you believe in in personal freedom. I think having an orbital definition of what a person is, and then what that freedom means to me, is already the slippery, slow. And so I have a real issue with that. But I also agree with him about the actual decay of american society, you know, the lack of religious institutions and the lack of family and purpose. Those two things above ve all others, I think, are tearing this country .

apart because people substitute something for IT with this point.

right? It's leaving people incredibly empty. And so I just think that you have to have some of these fundamental protections sex.

what were your favor moment during this or moments where you think he stood out we shine, moments where you maybe have some fundamental disagreement well.

okay, there's a few issues let me um respond to. So in terms of the vague versus ark junior, I think where Kennedy really shines is like jasa when he talks about the military industrial plus. And I would say more generally, r fk has this critique about regulatory capture, which he describes as the marriage of state power and corporate, agreed.

And included in that is what's happened to the F, D. A, A big farming and the whole governance response on covered. And then he wraps in censorship as being the way that this marriage .

of corporate .

greed and stay power, the way that defends itself that and that's unacceptable. So I think like on those issues, I don't think anybody speaks as deeply as rf k junior. Now when I comes to the list, if if you're to like list out all the issues and where the a is, where I am is a pretty close match.

I mean, i'm not a line with him completely on every issue, but I think I would be pretty close. And I do really appreciate worries coming from on ukraine. He's not afraid to just come right out and say the truth, which is this is not an important enough american interest be spending hundreds of billions a year on.

I wish we had more time.

What an amazing moments delve into that. And particularly I wanted him to explain what was happening in the party because there is a divide within the party between these like oxygen and and sort of more establishment republicans like mcconnel, Scott like pants.

the war machine.

the war machine, and then people like him, trump. And you put trump in this category to, or resisting that. So I would like to hear more about that.

What do you think of the moment where I kind of hindoo? And I said, would you you so you wouldn't defend ukraine, but you wouldn't defend taiwan and he said, yes, for the next five years, I would defend taiwan because of the semiconductor. sure. I mean that i've never heard a candidate say something that pragmatic.

Here's my interpretation.

I well.

IT is pragmatic. What he's basically saying is that amErica right now is dependent on these chips, these three ophth ticad hy tech chips and me conducted chips and and not just like the low and once the high end chips that are made in taiwan. And that is a vital american interest.

And until we alleviate ourselves or wein ourselves off that dependency by making them ourselves or securing some other supply, then we need taiwan. And so therefore, we cannot allow to fall into chinese. I saying a lot more than he did, but it's kind of an argument like saying chips is the new oil and as long as this is a critical input into our economy, we have to secure our supply.

The difference being, bush never said we're going to the middle for oil. He said we're going there for democracy. So that's what I thought was like. The very candid moment .

that always happens is that when amErica is vital interest, you always locked in liberal rhetoric about rights and freedom and democracy and that kind of things. But so what's frequently driving the decision is american interest. Underneath he's being exposed about IT. What he's basic saying is, as long as americans got this, yes, as long as amErica s got this dependency and we need taiwan, we Better defended and protect them from falling you to chinese hands. But once we don't have that interest than we don't, I can understand that this was wild.

That was wild. I mean, refreshing for me. I actually was a highlight of the discussion.

couple of the things he touched on. So we talked about the other candidates. I think he's being not discontinuous, but maybe a little bit unfair to the sentence.

I think there's no question that the scientist alone has been singled out by trump, and not just trump. At trump, sir gets to be relentless, lesly bashed on. And this happens on social media, happens in speeches and talks, all this kind of stuff.

So they are going after the scientists and then that has an effect for a reason. He's number. And trump clearly has packed him as the biggest threat, and that's why they are targeting him. So that does have an impact.

The advances that someone like the vake has, in a way, is that he doesn't have a record as an elected official, and so he can go out there and speak fully on these issues. And like I described on the show with him, he goes out and and insert himself in the conversation. When the next issue is going viral, he jumps in. And I think IT is very important that he's doing IT so quickly because if you're a candidate and you wait to the next day and then the new cycle moves on, you miss that, right?

So he's this he's timing IT perfectly.

So he hits the sweet spot. There's only one way to do IT, which is not to have surrogates, not to have a process like not know the .

portal company what's the same thing .

with our portfolio companies, right? They run IT through like all these P R people and like A P R agency. And IT gets reviewed.

And by the time 1 by the time he goes to his tenth draft is too like IT doesn't go viral。 So he's running a social media campaign and is very effective. Now I think that distance is running a different kind of campaign.

Distance is actually as a record. Ideas are fantastically successful, record as being the most successful governor in the country, running the most successful state in the country. So he's out there with this idea that, listen, let's make amErica florida.

Yes, so that's what he's campaigning on. And so he is going out there with kind of determined agenda and a stump speech, a playbook. And it's different than someone like vae who's letting the issues come to him and then he's responding as issues come up and the vis living off the land.

And and that is all of that is free media for him.

for me, is earn media and traded the same thing in two thousand and sixteen right every day. He would figure out like, what are the issues today? And he go on, speak about them. And you know, you go all the way back to pat.

You can in working for Richard nick on back and I think it's seventy two elections, something like that where every morning you can in and there's a couple of their speech writers that opens the newspaper and find an issue or two and they would go to next and say, here's your talking points, you know and so they would find an issue that back in those days was going viral and have the candidate speak to IT. So they were nimble, and I think that's what they were doing. And if you want to go viral in the social media era, that's what you have to do. You have to lean into the issues are people are talking about that day. And and this is the thing is that I think the vague knows how to do that.

Trump, clearly to do.

Rf k definitely knows how to do ark on final everyday. They're trending .

topic native and that's the difference. Freeman, do you have a highlight or a great moment or two from the VC things that made you go, uh, I really appreciate this person or candidate during .

the discussion. What I appreciated was that we didn't see him like fell down on any topics. And I I think that his ability to go through the full discourse with us for however long we went ninety minutes, our four says a lot, you know, R, F, K, junior did the same.

But again, it's a stark just to position from what i've have seen by and do in terms of interview format. His interviews are edited. They're short and to be able yeah to be able to have this bread but also have the data and be able to pull IT from the top of his head and not have speaking notes.

We gave him no questions ahead of time. There's no agenda and I I think it's great to see a candidate who can engage in in that level of discourse, which was important and impressive for me. I just hope it's broadly appealing.

And this, by the way, I just want to repeat something I said many times in the past. There are two things I hate about politics besides the relationship to a growing government. The first is that people pick politics as a career. And I think that that's ridiculous. I think people in a democracy should have a private life, and then they should rotate into being civil servants .

and go and served.

That's right. And so they were, you know, they had their jobs and their businesses and everything, and they would rotate in and then they would rotate out of government. The fact that people can be a politician for thirty years is ridiculous, and I think that leads to all of the disincentives that have driven to a large government.

What I appreciate about the sec and R, F, K, junior is that they come at this from and even trump. They come at this from private life, and they take their turn in government and and rotate out. And that's why I did not get him to answer the question on what what he do besides being president. And IT didn't work out. What's do you going to do next? The second thing.

I don't like that, by the way, there's just on that point. There's last speculation about that within republican circles. This is something I could we just enough .

time to get into finish finish and then talk about IT? So sorry. Yeah, just come back for the second measure of money in politics. And I hate that you can raise money and get vote, just the general concept that you buy ads space and that you get people to change their vote, I think is the most yeah, but I think it's fucked up.

But what I like about what we just did is we actually had a conversation with the candidate, and people can just listen to the conversation. That's the old town square that acts, talks about that doesn't exist anymore because everything is chopped up and then sold as media bites on paid dreams. Where is what we just did is a free conversation with a guy that anyone can continue and and listen to you and learn about him. And that's what I found most compelling, is, is we had a real conversation instead of watching a thirty second advice.

What's the rumor? sexy?

O yes, so I got sexy.

The knock on the vague is that he's basically a trump, sir. And I mean, trump has said good things about him. Trump likes him to be out there clearly.

I mean, trump is orbit said that so the idea is that the vague is out there and initially he's doing this less now. But early on he was his launching broad side after broad side on the scientist. And so the idea is that he's out there. A trumps er get attacked in the people trust, want them to attack on the whole saying good things about trump and that he'll be rewarded for that .

somehow a cabinet position or a .

vitamin position. People even now saying VP because these doing so well or maybe he gets an an endorsement for a senate run or something like that. So if we had more time, I would ask him about this like organ idea. But i'm sure what I said, no.

But that's why I ask them specifically how much time if you spent with trump and when the last time we talked to him and he was honest and with them before, I was even a candidate. So I wondering if there are some clean test in agreement with them through some bacchanal l for .

him to do that.

doing his own accord, I think.

well, clearly has an answer, would be, no, not a circon my own candidate. And he probably is. And so my guess on IT is that you can go out there and act like a sr, get knowing that trump's gona like IT, and then you'll be rewarded.

You don't need to have an explicit deal to understand that, that would work out for you in that way. Response of freeburg points of feber. You said you don't like the money aspect of politics and you don't like the sort of career aspect of politics.

I think what we're seeing with canada, like va or ark junior or trump, is canada who are bucking those two trends. I mean, clearly, these are not lifelong politicians. They have maybe had to have lifelong interest in politics, but they're not like lifelong office holders or kinds for office.

And then on the money side, what they're all showing is something that we all know from our porfolio companies, which is that earned media is so much more valuable than paid media. Paid media cost of fortune and IT doesn't really work. No one really wants to look at advertising.

They block IT out. So you spend a lot of money on advertising, and that never really gets you much compared to earn media, which is you figure out a way to insert yourself in the new cycle by appealing to people on issues that are being talked about. You figure out how I kind of hitch your a wagon to, like you said, just a trending topic.

And that's what all three these cans have done in IT. IT works so well. And I think that sort of the career politicians who are proceeding in this very kind of playbook way, which is were going to go out, we're going to raise the most money from donors that we're onna buy the most TV time, and we're going to be on, message me, we're only going to talk about the things we want to talk about. The problem is that doesn't work anymore because earn media is so much more valuable than paid media.

Well, look, I hope that's a trend, and I hope IT flushes the money out of the system, and that candidates win based on the merit of the conversation that they have in earned media, instead of buying more ads space on paid media. And that IT changes the game. And I hoped the laws change to, and I also hoped the laws change with respect, real politicians and term limits and all that sort of stuff, because this whole career system and money in this thing is what's driving so much of the contributors to change in government spending and government accountability and all the nonsense that goes on. And I I would .

love to see a change. I think the own media is so viable now that I think candidates who try to stay on there, message on their agenda is gonna cost too much money. It's spacial an unsustainable path.

I would urge all the republican candidates, including the scientists, just to get out there. By the way, the center is a tremendously smart man. I mean, he .

went hard, give a lawyer and three fair.

I ve been ask me yet.

but why? Yeah, that's on Christies coming.

I must do something. We have difficulties. Remember that they go just .

for the record uh the match who IT loves the fact that a unit of time has been named after him from u sex ah any eleven day period is known as a match so if you have the eleven I it's a much but he literally introduced me to governor Chris sti over text so i'm entituled Christians is come on the part so that three of the top six or five in terms and will never .

get in because .

he'll I don't think biden can do forty five minutes with that.

but I think you can. I don't know. Let's not gx. I mean.

let's try and get by and I mean.

would be great. I have an hour with him. I can never real conversation of us. I'd be through the really interesting well.

bion just had freed sicarii. There was an interview that was pretty much localize to talking about for policy in ukraine.

He and he also did that other woman on M. S. N. B. C. They're all can. He gets the questions I had a time, and then they edited for him. So he gets post reduction. Yeah which, you know, then you could shape the thing however you want and shame on the media for doing that. Honestly, to the left media, you're not helping the democracy here in the united states by, you know, put in the fix in for biden if you can do the interview if you can't handle an hour at least and can he be the president I mean, let's be honest here over get the ratings .

just in terms of deeper, is for there anything we want to say about the the whole banking crisis? I appreciate that he tried to find common ground with us.

Yeah, I nearly made a joke that you are now going to do fundraiser form after that. Now i'm in. Listen, he said at himself, i'm gonna respond to everything one out of a hundred times.

I may change my position based on new information, which, by the way, we do hear every week, every week we all listen to each other. We have viBrant debate and sometimes we change our positions. You know like I think that's what any reasonable person does ahead.

So yeah, I mean, look, I don't think we are that far apart from him on the whole banking crisis. I mean, I think we all agree that there should be no bail out for the shareholders and the bond holders of these banks that are poorly managed and go under. And I think that the vae did endorse a proposal, which we I think Jason unite both come up with, which was to have a higher level of fit insurance for business banking. I think he was like ten million or something like that.

And and you just include that in the cost of the insurance yeah, exactly.

It's just paid by the problems of these banks for banking, insurance and the vaca at this point about know roku is student enough to keep five hundred or million in a checking account and the bank goes under may be they should lose IT. It's like, okay, my girl is not to save a roku if there are super enough to man the .

money down to save the local school.

Really the only difference is that, and I think freeboard, you hit and now on the head is when you have a bank run under way, you have to stop up before the panic can spread. Can is real. The country was absolutely no.

I don't think people outside could understand that because they weren't in those friday mourning, emergency phone calls and board meanings that were happening. So we know we had pretty moved so far beyond S. V.

B. At that point. We had founders moving their money at the first republic and all these other banks thursday and friday on thursday and friday, and they wanted to go to the top four banks. And if IT wasn't a sib.

IT wasn't good enough. If IT wasn't called silicon valley bank, this would be a totally different thing. And if I had been us raising almost, be aware, people hate smoking valley tech.

This is contingent of people who hate sloan, value tech and rich people. And they were just glial. There's twenty percent of the sort of far left communist, socialists know idiots who mids Elizabeth warns whoever who are just like, oh, great silicon valleys getting kicked in the nuts.

They were thrilled to see IT that that was shorten fried. We got a rap. Hey.

pull up these pictures very quick. This is your five second science corner. Look, these photos taken on mars yesterday. How colossus.

that's all I have to say. Those that's exactly the chances of taking a photo on mars are three billion seven .

hundred and twenty one twenty, if you can.

Those from a very similar to the photos I took on my english last night. I took my iphone fourteen and I. These boarders are very simple to the dingle berries. What are these? My ls, and and if you look at those two borders similar to my huge balls.

you guys can put .

the file.

Love you guys.

Do you think that's cool that there's these cameras ble there .

are so many good topics for us to talk about.

but the topics but you I love.

love you guys I hey, if you guys are around, you know anyone .

want to have wine and .

you can get some wine later, maybe next week or some that who knows? Maybe we all get together in person.

Have a good wine. I see you soon. I love you nice.

I love you best for the architect himself, the dictator, the salt of science. Obviously, after today's performance, I am still the world's greatest moderator. This has been another episode of the all in podcast are still together. The band is still together, producing hot tracks. We'll next week, a cubit action, two for tuesday, tears for fears everybody wants to rule the world, including viva next time.

your.

World, man.

We open sources to the fans and they .

just got crazy with.

You should all just get a room, just have big, huge org because like sexual attention.

No good. we.

get.