Latest / Normal Men / Episode 77 - Placeholder Topic

Transcript

Episode 77 - Placeholder Topic · Normal Men

• 0:04
  Lowtax: Pal, I think we gotta bring Brian Kelly back. He can call them little lobsters. I don't care.
• 0:19
  George: Look, whatever you do, just don't hire anyone involved with the Washington commanders.
• 0:23
  Lowtax: Oh, God, that was amazing. Running the ball with 8 seconds left and no timeouts. Great playing, guys.
• 0:32
  Propter: It kind of felt like that one was destined to end in a. To end in a tie.
• 0:36
  Lowtax: Like, how do you get. How do you get three touchdowns, no picks about a 100 rating out of Jameis and not win?
• 0:47
  Propter: Harbaugh ball, baby. Giants will do that to you, I guess.
• 0:50
  Lowtax: Oh, that's right. Harbaugh's there. I forgot about that. It feels wrong for him not to be in Baltimore.
• 0:59
  Propter: It does. An institution.
• 1:01
  Lowtax: Yeah.
• 1:04
  Propter: Yeah.
• 1:04
  George: Harbaugh's allowed to coach in Baltimore or Stanford and nowhere else for any other reason.
• 1:09
  Lowtax: No, that's wrong. Harbaugh.
• 1:11
  George: I. I know I said Harbaughs. Plural.
• 1:15
  Lowtax: Well, Michigan.
• 1:17
  George: No, no, that was a mistake. He should have just stayed at Stanford.
• 1:22
  Lowtax: No, I don't think so, because Michigan paid for that national championship with their souls. Clearly.
• 1:30
  Propter: It's been a long time in the wilderness. It's. It's. It's important to note, since we're talking football, that the. The Seahawks Niners game is in progress. I do not, at this point, know the outcome, which will be highly determinant of my mood for the week.
• 1:44
  George: So are you doing a, like, don't tell me thing? Like, should we not tell you?
• 1:48
  Propter: No, no, no, no, no. I mean, we're. We'll wrap. We'll. We'll wrap by probably third quarter. I'll watch the fourth wife.
• 1:55
  Lowtax: So, Ed. Ed wants to die right now?
• 1:58
  Propter: Yeah. Why?
• 1:59
  George: And would you prefer if we talked about soccer?
• 2:01
  Ed: Why do you think I want to die? I want you all to die. Come on. I like me.
• 2:11
  George: Well, the good news is there is no justice in the universe because Man City went into Liverpool this afternoon and beat them 3 nil, which, for those who haven't followed Premier League, basically, Man City have been found guilty of cheating on every possible charge except for one, and this is the first. They dropped the epl, clearly dropped it into the very long, unusually long international break, knowing that it would be a media firestorm. And the first game out of that international break, man City won 3 nil against Liverpool, who should be competitive with them at the top of the near. Near the top of the table. And so, you know, Liverpool, I don't have anything against you, but come on, guys. Like, come on.
• 2:56
  Lowtax: So what you're saying is Man City
• 2:59
  George: totally exonerated in the ball don't lie school of the judicial system. Yeah, it would appear that way. I think also took a red so
• 3:10
  Lowtax: they, they should let him off because this hits on, I think it hits pretty close to the rule of cool. Like you drop this media firestorm on them and they still went out and whooped the other guy's asses.
• 3:23
  George: Yeah, I mean the reality principle is going to intervene, but speaking as a supporter of the other team at the top of the table fighting it out for the APL League title this year, I would really appreciate Man City losing more so we can just beat them fair and square. But, but that's a separate issue.
• 3:41
  Lowtax: Who's your team? Arsenal.
• 3:43
  George: That's correct.
• 3:44
  Lowtax: Okay.
• 3:45
  Propter: A Gooner as they say.
• 3:47
  George: Yes, yes. Arsenal. Guns.
• 3:49
  Lowtax: Gunner.
• 3:50
  George: Gunner.
• 3:50
  Ed: Yeah.
• 3:51
  Lowtax: Okay. Okay.
• 3:53
  George: It developed before the other term.
• 3:56
  Propter: Right. I'd say it means something different over there, but I'm not actually sure it does.
• 4:02
  George: Well, it did. As for now, who's to say. But hey, you know what though? Charlotte FC stoppage time winner last night my daughter and I were at the match and had a very good time. So you know, it's, it's, it, it's not all bad things in the wide world of sports. Unless your name's Ed.
• 4:22
  Propter: I mean.
• 4:23
  Lowtax: Yeah, or maybe blow a 14 point lead and then lose by 24 then get up today and watch the Dolphins lose by. I don't even know the fuck they lost by.
• 4:44
  Ed: What?
• 4:45
  George: I mean it's the Dolphins. You got to bake that one in, right? At least that one's like right in line with the expectation.
• 4:49
  Lowtax: Yeah, like I said, I said last week, chat. Is it good going into week five and having a 50% shot already at the number one pick?
• 5:01
  Propter: Is it, is it even clear who, who you guys would draft number one? I mean I'm assuming it's all quarterback all the time.
• 5:07
  Lowtax: But who's the quarterback though? Yeah, like, I mean it's not gonna be sorry ass Arch Manning.
• 5:16
  Propter: It certainly is not gonna be Manning.
• 5:18
  Lowtax: Hey, have you no idea, have you
• 5:21
  George: heard about this Dylan Raiola guy out in Oregon? I hear he's pretty good.
• 5:28
  Lowtax: No, I, I, no, I, I do not stay up until 2am I'm not
• 5:33
  George: watching Oregon this stat line. So for those who aren't familiar, the Dylan Raiola was the quarterback for the Oregon Ducks and he had had, I think he was like 9 of, no 9 of 23 or something like that. Had thrown two picks like just terrible. And then they benched him and the bat, the, the other kid comes in the second turn, quarterback comes in and goes like 8 of 10 for two touchdowns. Like 150 yards or something like that. It's like, okay, right, almost done. That's it. Career's over in one day.
• 6:06
  Lowtax: No, I think it wasn't, it wasn't the second string quarterback, it was the third string guy. Because I think they've lost their quarterback, haven't they?
• 6:14
  George: That may be true. Sorry. Oregon's quarterback depth chart is not something that had ever gone into my brain. So, you know, second.
• 6:22
  Lowtax: Yeah, somebody mentioned it earlier in this week and I thought it was Oregon who lost their starter and their backup sucks and they had to put their third string walk on out there.
• 6:32
  Propter: It's been, it's been a rough year for Nike all around.
• 6:34
  Ed: Really?
• 6:36
  George: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Although weirdly, like, I have never spent more on Nike products in my life than I have the past, like, few actually this year. I mean, I've got, I feel like just on training shoes. Well, my race shoes and my training. One of my pairs of training shoes for this marathon. That's a lot of money. Like just that. And yeah, I, I'm a committed Nike partisan.
• 6:58
  Propter: Are you, are you a one pair of training shoes per marathon guy or how does that work?
• 7:03
  George: No, no, you. For, for a proper marathon training cycle, you're going to run enough miles that you need multiple pairs of shoes. Like, like, they're not designed, the training shoes aren't designed to last more than 500ish miles. Like, and then I have a carbon plate pair of shoes that's for the race that those won't last more than 200 and that's best case.
• 7:24
  Propter: Gotcha.
• 7:25
  George: So, but, but you know, like, do
• 7:29
  Propter: you take those, do you take those out for like dress rehearsal or, or are those.
• 7:31
  George: Yeah, yeah, you need to put some miles in them before. Yeah, no, you need to put. Well, I mean, just there's the whole like break in a shoe thing. But also you like, you want to know, you want to know how your body's gonna respond to that. And it turns out actually like this run today. My God. So last week I did a, my long run was 20 miles with 10 at marathon pace. And then this week it was 18 miles with 8 at marathon pace. So ostensibly an easier workout, especially because I didn't run that much. I was in Mexico this weekend, didn't run that much. So my legs should be pretty. The run last week was in the carbon plate alpha fly twos or whatever. I don't know, whatever Nike shoe I've got. And the one this week was in my, like, Nike Boomera trainers. And, like, I got about halfway into my marathon pace block, and not only was it harder, I didn't hydrate and carb load properly and all that, but, like, I had. I felt like I was in the gym doing squats. Like, my glutes were, like, sore. Like, like. And if you want. If you're being. If you're sore somewhere on a long run, you really want it to be a major muscle group, like, your glute is your best case scenario because that's a lot of muscle to, like, absorb shock. Right. Like, you'd much rather be there than your quads or your knees or wherever else. Right? So, like, that's good. But the carbon, at my size, like, at 225, that the carbon plate is doing a ton of load transfer that, like, really helps. Like, it really legitimately helps. Even though I'm not running, I'm sort of at the edge of what should be like, a time and, you know, like a time pickup for using those shoes. But it. For sure, it helps a ton with the lower body stress. So, anyway, I was talking to my brother on the phone about all this as I was walking at the end of my failed 18 miles today. And, like, the. The stuff that technology has done for running is just, like. It's crazy stuff is totally accessible.
• 9:26
  Ed: Now.
• 9:26
  George: That would have been, you know, if you were running a marathon 40 years ago, like, you were a psycho. Like, like, absolutely. You. You just. You can't do it. You can't. No normal person can do it.
• 9:37
  Lowtax: But now I don't think the technology has changed whether or not you are a psycho for running a marathon.
• 9:44
  George: Yeah, true, true. You okay? The degree of psycho you have to be is much, much lower. No, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Like, I am. Having done this, I am pretty convinced that barring people that have, like, major existing issues with their knees and, like, you know, some people's bones are more fragile. Like, it's just kind of how it works. But, like, you know, someone who's otherwise healthy, basically anybody that puts their mind to it can do it. Of course, like, putting your mind to it is the cycle part. But, like, that's just. That wouldn't have been true 20, 40 years ago,
• 10:20
  Propter: but. But I mean, it's less. It's less punishing now. We're much better at recovery medicine, recovery practices. We're better at, you know, obviously, just the straight tech with the shoes and the. And. And the kit has significantly improved over. Over the status Quo manti. I mean like, you go back, you go back a century. You know, we're talking before, before Phil Knight started pouring rubber into waffle irons. So like.
• 10:44
  George: Yeah, I mean, like, like, and not even that. Like just being able to. You can get a $200 GPS watch on Coro from Coros, right? Like, this is not expensive stuff, this. Spending a thousand dollars on a Garmin, like oled, whatever. If you have that piece of technology, you can, I mean, it's the, the heart rate accuracy isn't perfect, but like it's good enough that you can make sure you're not over training, you're not under training, that you are running accurate paces to whatever, whatever pace you target. It is. Doesn't matter how fast or slow it is. Like just knowing within five or ten seconds, a mile you're in the right spot and then linking that to your heart rate, that alone is like, it's crazy. And then you add in like basic AI stuff too. Or just taking like a random training program that's available online for free. You don't even have to use AI. AI does make it easier, but like, it's crazy how much more accessible it is. It's really cool.
• 11:43
  Ed: No, you, you do legally have to use AI. Did you not look at the news where we're, we're, we're making even low tax. Use it now.
• 11:55
  George: I am excited to do a big post, like, post thread on Bluesky after I finish it off and be like, so like, here's how AI enabled me to run a marathon and for so many people to get so mad.
• 12:08
  Ed: Haven't, haven't the. Haven't they. I was going to ask whether they'd blocked you yet, but let's be honest, they're never going to because then they can't yell at you. So like, I mean, like, this is. This, this, this is a virtuous cycle of, of, of people being mad at George. And I don't know what we do with that, but like, watch in quiet awe perhaps.
• 12:34
  Propter: I, I genuinely think the climate's gotten better.
• 12:36
  Lowtax: A virtuous cycle of people getting mad at George as opposed to the vicious cycle of people getting mad at Propter.
• 12:45
  Propter: I am, I'm an angel who has done no wrong.
• 12:47
  Ed: Propter could get people to stop being by not posting.
• 12:53
  Propter: I don't think I could. No. Yeah, I know the feeling.
• 12:58
  Lowtax: Propter's got some. When he wants to, he can really get the stancil vibes going on Bluesky.
• 13:07
  Propter: Yeah, I think, I think the discourse has been better about this Kind of thing, honestly, I mean, some of it is that we're moving into general election season and despite everybody's queer proclivities, I think that's contributed to a somewhat better mood online.
• 13:23
  Ed: What? They're just blocking you?
• 13:25
  Propter: Oh, they might just be blocking me. Yeah, that's possible.
• 13:27
  Lowtax: Is that the mandarin orange, George?
• 13:29
  George: Yeah, that's the mandarin orange electrolyte. Which if, if you. We've talked about this before. Yes. Hell yeah, brother. The only thing I'll say is that I actually earned this and you're just a guy that lives in Florida, so.
• 13:42
  Lowtax: That's true. Well, I mean, living in Florida is earning it.
• 13:46
  Propter: Wotax is, is, is also holding a mandarin orange electrolyte.
• 13:51
  George: So we've been over this before, but, but for the uninitiated, the correct way to drink. There are two correct ways to drink electrolyte. One is the mandarin orange straight, and the other is cucumber lime with some sort of agua mineral. Minaragua or Topo Chico are both good options. And you need some Tajin and ice for that as well if you're going to do it that way. So those are the two ways you can take your poison.
• 14:13
  Lowtax: No, don't do that, don't do that. Because cucumbers are nasty as hell and you should just drink the blue raspberry.
• 14:22
  George: No, pepinoin is like, that's elite. I'm sorry, you're just not a ball knower if you don't like pepinoin. Limon electrolyte. That's just not. Again, you gotta, you gotta, you gotta add a bit of mineral water to it. So it's a little spicy.
• 14:38
  Propter: Mineral water to heat.
• 14:40
  Ed: Yeah.
• 14:40
  Lowtax: Yep.
• 14:41
  George: Dress it up.
• 14:43
  Propter: So.
• 14:49
  George: This is Normal Men, a podcast from four men who are clinging desperately to normalcy in an era when that's asking a bit too much.
• 14:55
  Propter: I'm George in Charlotte in D.C. i'm
• 14:57
  Lowtax: Propter Malone in outer Florida. I'm Lowtax Speedrun Enjoyer.
• 15:01
  Ed: And I'm Ed in Boston.
• 15:07
  Lowtax: Speaking of the general election.
• 15:09
  Propter: Yeah, it's, it's the autumn season. So you know, football is obviously the national sport but every couple years we, we do some election ball also and that's where we are right now. It is October 11th as we tape this show and we have under a month until, until, until vote counting time I think as kind of like the, the overall, the overall metric right now. I think, you know, if your Dems compared, compared to where I thought we'd be here a year ago, you got to feel insanely good like, like we are looking great across the board. We are contesting races that I thought were going to be out of, out of reach for generations. You know, we've got a narrow lead in places like the Kansas Senate race, which I can't believe I'm saying, but that's, that's showing up and pulling. And, you know, if, if, if I had to bet on whether or not we pull that one off right now, I, I would bet on Hamilton to do it. We've got a number of contested deep cuts in, in places like Idaho, which we've talked about on this show. South Dakota, which we haven't really, where, you know, we've got not anything like, not anything like coin flip equity, but we've got a puncher's chance in races like that that if everything breaks exactly right, you can see a path to victory instead of. If everything breaks exactly right, we're still going to lose by 20.
• 16:39
  George: I mean, almost the, the worst case scenario for the Senate, if you just look at the polling, right, Forget any other metric and just say, okay, where are Dems likely to pick up seats in, in the Senate? One of the worst case scenarios would be Texas being the sort of best pickup that we have. Texas.
• 16:58
  Lowtax: Texas. Yeah.
• 16:59
  George: And also, like, you know, HOSA in Texas is running ahead in polls for governor. Like, it's not just the fact that James Talarico is an excellent candidate and is running a really solid, smart campaign on top of Paxton being one of the worst candidates that I think has run for public office in this country in the past generation. It's like him and that guy from Alabama that Doug Jones beat.
• 17:22
  Ed: Right?
• 17:23
  George: Like that. That. That's the list.
• 17:25
  Lowtax: Yeah.
• 17:25
  Ed: George really wants to get yelled at this week, I guess.
• 17:28
  Propter: Yeah.
• 17:28
  Lowtax: I mean, I mean, to be fair, Keisha, Lance Bottoms, not great in the state of Georgia right now.
• 17:37
  Propter: That's looking rough. I mean, it's hard to say. I think it's a little bit hard to say exactly how it's going to play out.
• 17:45
  George: That.
• 17:45
  Propter: Because the degree of ticket splitting that, that the Georgia polling right now implies is, for my money, unlikely.
• 17:54
  George: I believe it. I, I believe it. There are enough relatively newcomers to the Democratic Party in suburban Atlanta that are looking at KLB and going, nope, not gonna do that. Like, I know some of them, you know, it's, it's not. Yeah, she may squeak it out, but if she does, it's, it's gonna be by the. Just, it's, it's going to be really tight because there are a lot of people who really can't stand her. And frankly, like, I get it, she's pretty, she's awful. She's about as bad as anyone we put up in the Democratic Party. That said, she's nothing like a Ken Paxton. I'm not trying to say she's as bad as that guy, but. Oh, no, no, no, no. No grading on the internal curve.
• 18:34
  Lowtax: But if they had, if they had nominated the other damn, what was the name, Estevez or something, that race would be over.
• 18:44
  George: Yeah, yeah, that's right. It's a damn shame too, because there's a lot of really smart sort of up and coming type people in the Georgia Democratic Party. And you know, we've talked before about some of the coalitional stuff and within the Democratic Party in the south and KLB is one reason that's, that that sometimes doesn't work.
• 19:03
  Propter: So, I mean, I think Georgia's maybe, maybe instructed in that way because Georgia's, Georgia's had a series of underperformers at the top of the, the state ticket. And, and you know, and I think, I think you kind of have to address the problem head on here, which, which is that it's difficult to tease out whether they're underperformers because of, because there are bad candidates or bad campaign or bad campaigners or what have you, or whether they're underperforming because it's a racist and sexist country and a racist and sexist state and they're black women. And that's, it's tough. You know, we've had that same debate play out at the presidential level, obviously, and in the past few, whether or not you're better off saying, okay, fine, you know, these are the, these are the prejudices and we're going to run white dudes and have a better chance to win or whether we're going to run the choice of the electorate, choice of the Democratic electorate, who. I think both of the female candidates we've had for president have been excellent candidates and would have been excellent presidents, but they both lost to Donald Trump.
• 20:30
  Lowtax: I don't think Hillary was an excellent candidate.
• 20:34
  Propter: Yeah, I'm probably highest on Hillary of the, of the people on this bottle. I'll stipulate to that.
• 20:40
  George: I, I could, I could see a defense of Clinton having been a good president if she had been elected. I don't necessarily buy that, but like, I think that's defensible as a, take as a good candidate, you know, given the baggage she carried. Whether that baggage is because we live in a misogynistic country or not is kind of beside the point to my mind. I, I just. She had so much baggage, man.
• 21:06
  Ed: The game with the lines as they are.
• 21:08
  Lowtax: Right.
• 21:09
  Propter: Yeah.
• 21:09
  Lowtax: Yeah. A lot of the baggage was not her fault. It was just 30 years of right wing building up on her.
• 21:16
  Ed: Yep.
• 21:17
  Lowtax: But I mean, like, look, you, you had, you had like a 36% favorability rating and you were under FBI investigation. That's not ideal.
• 21:31
  George: I mean, I really think the argument that people who would hope we run another woman, another black woman sometime soon should make is that the Harris campaign, if you strip out the binary and you just look at it relative to other incumbent governments in 2024, 2023 to 2025. Right.
• 21:52
  Propter: Yeah.
• 21:52
  George: The swing against incumbents globally was enormous. And the fact that Harris was even competitive and the fact that she was really competitive in the swing states, I mean, the big falloffs in Democratic votes were in states that Republicans had no chance of winning anyways. Right. And won't in the next general election. Voters were unmotivated to vote, but when they knew they had to, they. They came out. And the campaign did a good job investing in swing states. I mean, again, North Carolina and Georgia are both really good examples of this. Right. Like, swung much less than the country as a whole, in part because the campaign was well executed. You know, if I, I think you can make the argument that Harris actually has a very strong war, like, you know, wins above replacement. Right. Like, I, I don't think there's any argument that she was a bad candidate or, you know, like, she's. Her outcome is a reason that you shouldn't run a black woman for president. I totally disagree with that. Now, I don't think she run again in 2028, but that's a separate conversation.
• 22:56
  Lowtax: Well, the good news is it doesn't. If her husband is in the Wall Street Journal or to be believed, it doesn't really sound like she's going to.
• 23:07
  Propter: Yeah, I mean, I feel like, I feel like saying, gosh, we, you know, we'd hate to have her back out on the trail is. Is kind of table stakes for, for getting weak to the press in terms of your, in terms of your running attention. Right. Like, you know, you know, reluctantly, I will serve is. Is sort of the framing there. So I'm not, I'm not sure that I fully buy.
• 23:28
  Ed: You kind of have to have people want you to, though. So that's like a risky thing to play with. Right.
• 23:35
  Propter: Like your family. Like that.
• 23:37
  Lowtax: Sure.
• 23:38
  Ed: But like, like the if called, I will serve type thing who's calling is kind of the question you start with. I mean like every, every one of these people are lunatics who think that they of course are being called. But like that's, that, that doesn't necessarily play super well.
• 23:57
  Propter: I mean, you know, like it's, it's
• 23:59
  Ed: okay unless you're, unless you're Joe Biden. He, I'm sorry, but he should have, he should have listened to the call the first time. Caveat.
• 24:08
  Propter: The caveat here is, is, is, you know, it's way too early for 2028 primary point attention to mean anything. So that significantly undercuts the fact that Harris is still, is, is still top ticking polls of 2028 voting intention, but she is still top ticking polls of 2028 voter intention. So.
• 24:29
  Lowtax: Although not at a particularly impressive number.
• 24:32
  Propter: Not, not. No, that's true. Not at an impressive number. It's a very fragmented field. It's an open field. I think it's going to be a lot like 2020 all over again in that sense where we have lots and lots of people.
• 24:42
  Lowtax: I think JD is at like 40 something on average, maybe around 40, whereas
• 24:48
  George: I think sitting vice president.
• 24:50
  Lowtax: Yeah, but she's, she's at like low to mid-20s.
• 24:55
  Ed: Yeah.
• 24:55
  Propter: Yeah.
• 24:55
  Lowtax: That's pretty weak.
• 24:57
  Propter: Yeah. With the ceiling, with the ceiling around like low 30s. So like it's not like she's running away with it. This is, this is not a, this is not a 2016 Hillary Clinton situation.
• 25:05
  George: The 2028 primary is going to be really boring because we're gonna know as soon as South Carolina votes. I mean it's really like, like I, and Proctors. Propter's kind of rolling his eyes. He's gonna, he's gonna disagree with me on this. And you know, we can have that conversation, Propter. But here's my, here's my take on it, right? If you are able to convince the black electorate in the south to get behind you in a big way and you know you're never going to get a hundred percent, but that's kind of how it works, Right. You now have a mass of delegates that makes anyone else beating you really tough just because there are not that many other delegates, that blocks of delegates that are going to go solely to another candidate the way that block does. So you set up a really high hurdle now that maybe we do. We go into South Carolina and, and there, there, there's fragmentation in that voting block. I don't believe that'll happen. My guess is that state's going to get behind. Well, specifically the black folks in that state, the Democratic Party is a lot more diverse in South Carolina than it was 15 years ago. But you know, still, my guess is that that block is going to get behind somebody and that's it. And it'll be anticlimactic.
• 26:17
  Ed: We'll see.
• 26:18
  George: Maybe I'm maybe wrong on it, but that's my take.
• 26:20
  Lowtax: Yeah. I mean, and, and other voting blocs within the Democratic Party listen to that voting block like they do. But very seriously, they do.
• 26:30
  George: But I think that's less important than just the math of, look, that's a lot of votes. Like if they all go the same way, there's just no other because, because no other block is, no other demographic or geographic block is as solid as that, as that, as that block is. So they're the kingmakers because no one else can get as coordinated as they do. And you know, this is a point I've made again and again on this podcast. But like, like that is to be respected and there is a very good historical reason for it and it is not way shape or form a criticism of those folks. They are maximizing their political power by doing that Anyhow, Sorry, go ahead. Pro.
• 27:04
  Propter: I agree, I agree that if we have like full consolidation of the Southern black vote in, in Carolina right off the bat, then that's probably game over. I, I, I say probably because I can see scenarios where you have somebody running as functionally a regional candidate and they do very well in the Southern black vote. And then we move on to the later states because the big, the big difference between this time and previous times is that we have a very, very early southern black state. That, that, that's, that's happening right off the bat before there's been a chance for any consolidation. So if what George is saying about consolidation happens, I agree with him that that's probably game over. But it's going to be harder to consolidate on a single candidate for the Southern black vote than it has been in years past. Because in years past they've had the benefit of some field winnowing before we get to there, which is how we wound up with things like Biden running away with it in, in Carolina, in, in, in 2020. That wouldn't have happened if we hadn't already had Iowa, if we hadn't already had New Hampshire, if we hadn't already had the early primary states. What we're saying is maybe it wouldn't have happened.
• 28:14
  Lowtax: What we're saying is that Gavin Newsom is going to run away with this.
• 28:20
  Propter: Yeah, I mean, that was, I mean you and I were talking about this on Speedrun Enjoyer on Bluesky earlier. But like, Newsom feels obviously cooked for 2028 at this point. Oh, yeah, at least to me, that, that, you know, it's always been kind of, I think the sense of the podcast that, that he was never really fully in it, but that, that, that, that his, his status as a, a front runner was entirely illusory. But I think that's become more obvious. He said some things about how he's not going to run if Harris runs. So that's, that's an argument for Harris running in my book. But, you know, it feels like whatever money was in on him was out. But anyway, to return to George's core point, yes. If somebody, if somebody wins 50 to 60% of the South Carolina primary vote, then it's pretty much over. It's hard to see anybody else knocking them off. If somebody wins the South Carolina primary with 25%, 30%, it's still a race. And then things go to other places and it gets interesting.
• 29:28
  Lowtax: Yeah, but if you've, if you've got only 25 or 30%, you haven't really consolidated the vote in South Carolina.
• 29:35
  Propter: So, but, but I mean, those are, those are typical Iowa numbers. Like, it's not common in, in a split field that somebody comes out of Iowa with, you know, 50, 60% of the vote.
• 29:48
  Lowtax: No, it's not.
• 29:51
  Propter: So, like, going first in some ways, I think blunts the impact of that, but at the same time, it allows for more granularity of choice by Southern black voters because I think what they can do is they can't stay away from people. And because there aren't a whole lot of Democrats in South Carolina who are not black, that means that if you're not picking up any of the, any of the Carolina black vote, it's going to be pretty hard to make a living in those early primaries.
• 30:18
  George: I will say, like, you know, as I mentioned earlier, there's more of the South Carolina Democratic electorate that are white than what, or Latino than was the case 15, 20 years ago. A lot more.
• 30:28
  Propter: Yeah, that is true. Yeah. So I mean, I mean, I think it hurts in, in some ways it hurts what was like the Elizabeth Warren Lane in the past that if you want, if you want educated white Dems, that's going to be a hard place to make a living in South Carolina in, in that initial primary. So, so, and that goes for, you know, educated urbanites just to an extent
• 30:57
  Lowtax: as well, because they're all, they're all either black or really dumb whites in South Carolina.
• 31:05
  Propter: I mean, the demographics are what they are. Right? Like, like it's not.
• 31:09
  Lowtax: I mean, I've said the media. The median voter in South Carolina is Dabo Swinney.
• 31:16
  George: No, but the median Democratic voter, like that educational polarization is playing out in South Carolina just as much as is anywhere else. Like, yeah, white folks in the i85 corridor look a lot more like folks in Charlotte than they do folks in. It's a good counter example, the panhandle of Florida. Right. Like, and that's because it's growing metros, it's raising its higher college educated percentages. You know, I mean Charleston's another good example. Right. Like, like Charleston's. There are a lot of college educated, like mass media, mass social media, Instagram influencers swanning around Charleston because it's the kind of place that appeals to college educated, Democratic leaning people.
• 32:05
  Propter: Right.
• 32:06
  George: As a percentage of the whole state, they're still irrelevant. Like their other, other, other demos are way more important. But as a, you know, within the South Carolina Democratic electorate, they're more important than they were in the past.
• 32:16
  Propter: Yeah. And you know, there are worse places to go hang out for a month than Charleston. So maybe, maybe that's where the candidates,
• 32:23
  Lowtax: not many, like Charleston is like a terrible tourist trap version of Savannah don't go.
• 32:33
  George: That's only true if you have really bad taste in food and don't know what you're talking about in that respect. It's like, it's like probably per capita it's the best food city in America. It is probably top five in absolute terms.
• 32:45
  Lowtax: That was George, for all.
• 32:48
  George: I'll defend it. I'll defend it. I'm sorry. Like, it, it's like New York, New York, Louisiana, San Francisco, Chicago and Charleston at. No one else really comes close. Like, like who else is going to be Charleston? I'm, I'm serious. Like the food scene in Charleston is nasty. It is wild how good it is.
• 33:05
  Lowtax: New Orleans.
• 33:07
  George: No, I'm sorry, no. Yes, New Orleans is good, but it's not as good as Charleston. It's not as diverse.
• 33:15
  Lowtax: Charleston has she crab soup. That said, I'm not talking about, I'm
• 33:19
  George: not talking about the, the traditional cuisine. I'm talking about going and having a prefix and just having your mind blown with every course. Because there's like six different places you can do that in Charleston. That's not true in New Orleans.
• 33:34
  Propter: Yeah, like the scene, the scene is kind of like Nashville for chefs. Like, yes, correct. That, that, that, that, that it's at the Right. Combo of cheap enough to be doable. That I guess that's not really true of Nashville for musicians anymore. But.
• 33:50
  Ed: But I was going to say quietly horrifying is more like natural speed.
• 33:55
  George: Restaurants are so interesting because you get these network effects that both. I mean, for a long time, Charlotte was on the opposite side of this, where we were a bad food city because we didn't have any chefs, and we didn't have any chefs because we were a bad food city that didn't have any chefs. Like, it's really interesting to see, you know, some. When you get to a big enough scale, like. Like a city like New York is always going to have phenomenal, incredible food. Like, it's a global city. Like, it's just. It. Don't overthink it. But the smaller cities where sort of small changes in some of those dynamics can make a huge difference. And Charleston is just the poster child for this. Where they went from, I mean, you know, 50 years ago or even 20 years ago, I think maybe 30. Low taxes point about she crab soup would have been entirely correct. Although, you know, low country cuisine is. Is pretty great Carolina cuisine.
• 34:45
  Lowtax: I like she crab soup. It's not a knock on Charleston, but
• 34:49
  George: it's not because of the. It's not because of the historic cuisine, though. It's because they hit the network effect just right. They nailed the tourism demand, and it took off because there were good restaurants there, so people went there, so there are more good restaurants there, so people go there, so there's more good restaurants there. And while also having enough labor supply that it works out and cheap enough real estate that you can make a pencil.
• 35:11
  Lowtax: I will say prefix no one cares. I mean, food that normal people eat.
• 35:19
  George: Sorry for your lack of taste.
• 35:21
  Propter: It's like other similarly organized industries. A lot of what you're creative where you have both. A, the economic side of it is heavily driven by word of mouth and recommendation, and B, you have a strong apprenticeship system where working in other people's shops is a big part of. Is a big part of the education. And you know, like, that's not exclusively creative industries. I think. I think you can make a fair case that that applies to software also, which is one reason why. Why we have. For something that has relatively little geographic poll like the. There's not a lot of reasons you need to have everybody in the same place to do collaborative work on software.
• 36:00
  George: Finance, law and medicine too. I think all apply similar dynamics.
• 36:04
  Propter: Yeah, I mean, having lots of firms makes a big difference because it means that you can Be in a city and you can switch firms from an elite firm to an, to, to another elite firm.
• 36:14
  Ed: Sure. But they're not there because of that. They're there because the money decamped to it. Right. Like Y Combinator started in Boston and then left. Right. Like they, because deal availability was out there, which is, which is a function of finance as well as, like, the actual, like the people who are there.
• 36:32
  Propter: Yeah, that's fair.
• 36:33
  Ed: I, I, I'm kind of down on this whole you have to be in the magic Bay Area thing. That, that the people who really like to.
• 36:42
  George: I don't, I don't think that's the, I don't think that's true.
• 36:44
  Ed: Propter is saying that. But like, they all tell themselves that.
• 36:47
  Propter: Oh, yeah, yeah.
• 36:48
  George: I guess. Because they're all idiots. But I, I think there's a difference between. Network effects have surprisingly strong geographic valence even in knowledge industries. It shouldn't be limited by geography. And that's the only thing that matters. No, it's not the only thing that matters. And again, I used in the example of restaurants.
• 37:04
  Ed: George, I'm just here, I'm just here to make fun of the Bay Area. Come on.
• 37:07
  George: Yeah, yeah, yeah. We all are rod from God immediately. Right into the middle of the San Francisco peninsula. We'd all be much better off anyhow.
• 37:14
  Lowtax: Would only take two nukes. That's it. It's not a big area.
• 37:19
  Ed: What about really, really big? Like Saw just. I, I understand that the Bugs Bunny thing is always about Florida, but what if we moved west?
• 37:29
  George: Yeah, it's, it's a much more doable thing.
• 37:31
  Ed: Yeah. You could just push it off into the ocean. They would probably like it. These libertarians could then go argue about age of consent all day long.
• 37:39
  George: Seasteading San Francisco edition. Like, literally San Francisco.
• 37:43
  Ed: You know about, you know about the cruise liners, right?
• 37:47
  Propter: I do not know about.
• 37:48
  Ed: There has.
• 37:48
  George: I don't want to have been multiple
• 37:49
  Ed: attempts over the years to like, have, have like international waters cruise liners off of San Francisco.
• 37:55
  Propter: Oh.
• 37:55
  Ed: For reasons. All right.
• 38:00
  Lowtax: Okay.
• 38:00
  Ed: Yeah.
• 38:01
  Lowtax: No, but what if we allowed fracking on the San Andreas fault line, but nowhere else?
• 38:08
  Propter: You know, California used to be a big oil state. That was a thing. Yeah, I've seen that where we blood
• 38:13
  Lowtax: oil state, I think.
• 38:16
  George: No, but the, what Propter said about the network effects being like that, that's a, that's a positive tailwind. They're not everything, though. And I think the Charlotte scene as a food scene is a really good example of this. When we first moved To Charlotte in 2019, this was like as bad like per capita adjusting for the size of the city of a food city as anywhere I've ever been. There was great stuff like you know, in any city in the United States because we are such a mosaic of different cultures. Like you could find really, really good ethnic cuisine of various kinds like you can anywhere, right? Like that was no different. But the high end food scene was trash, just awful. And it is not anymore. It's it. It's not. We've got a Michelin star restaurant in. In this city now which is wild. It's wild to. To. To know that. How. Knowing what it was like when we first moved here. So you can overcome the network effects if other stuff going on is strong enough. And it's not everything. You do not have to be in San Francisco if you're into tech, you do. And LA if you're doing film, like whatever industry you want to pick, but it just makes it harder.
• 39:25
  Ed: LA is rapidly being subsumed by Atlanta.
• 39:27
  George: Well, that's it. Yeah, of course. Yes.
• 39:31
  Propter: Yeah. It'll be interesting to see what, what the tax incentives, assuming that the film, the film federal tax incentive package passes. It'll be interesting to see what that does to that market because that moves things around a lot.
• 39:42
  Ed: I just looked it up to make sure that I had my, my, my names and dates correct. Any prizes for who was actually behind that whole park. Our startups off of the San Francisco coast. You only need one guess.
• 39:58
  Lowtax: Theo.
• 39:59
  Ed: Yeah, yeah, that was these.
• 40:02
  George: Peter Thiel knows about the Antichrist. Peter knows about the Antichrist.
• 40:09
  Lowtax: Peter Thiel. I know about the Antichrist. How is that guy so wet all the time?
• 40:19
  Ed: Oh God.
• 40:21
  Propter: Do you think he has like a grease boy follow him around?
• 40:23
  George: Yes, yes.
• 40:24
  Ed: Just one.
• 40:25
  Propter: Yeah, just to like, just to like re.
• 40:27
  Ed: Glisten.
• 40:28
  Lowtax: They're probably hooked up to each other with, with some needles so that he can refill his youth blood supply at all times.
• 40:38
  Propter: Anyway. Yeah, I mean, I think it's. Anyway after that, I mean I'd like to move on. I'm trying for a segue here. And we already used football in elections. I think it's an interesting question. How do you generate more. How do you generate more local scenes like that? How do you create a Nashville? How do you create a Charleston? How do you create a Bay Area in terms of an incubator area for an industry? You know, people think, I think correctly, that education is a big part of the picture. That if you have colleges that tends to spin off inexpensive young employees for Particularly knowledge worker industries.
• 41:25
  Ed: But he said inexpensive.
• 41:31
  Propter: Well, yeah, I mean, I. You can do much better hiring. Hiring people who are transitional in some way, who are just kind of hanging around and looking for a job in terms of. In terms of credentials and at least perceived quality in places that have a lot of universities than places where you don't. Boston does very well off this every time.
• 41:53
  Ed: My longest job in my career was three years. I get it.
• 41:59
  George: One good example of how you can do this is just the largesse of the federal government. Like Los Alamos is a really good example.
• 42:05
  Propter: Yeah.
• 42:05
  George: I mean, even something like Hanford to go into Propter's home territory, you know, like. Yeah, sure. That is a very large. For those who aren't familiar, a large amount of nuclear waste is stored at Hanford on. Near the Columbia river river in eastern Washington. Which just as a side note, like, given the fact that there are some very large and very undefended dams very far up the Columbia river basin above Hanford, we should probably not be storing that much nuclear material in a floodplain. But there actually was a sci fi, like a political thriller.
• 42:46
  Lowtax: Propter, y' all just love. Propter, y' all just love polluting the. Out of that state. You know that. Yeah, the nuclear.
• 42:53
  George: Hanford's not. No Hanford's. It's all well contained. Like, it's not leaking everywhere for now anymore. Right, right. If you. If you took out Micah Dam and you had, I think. I think it's like 100,000 acre feet behind Micah or something like that and that just sort of ping pong down the Columbia river reservoir and. Yeah, that would be a problem for Hanford.
• 43:12
  Lowtax: Then you have the state kind of bookended between. Between Hanford and the. The Tacoma smelter leftovers.
• 43:22
  Propter: Yeah, we talked about the Tacoma smelter before because it maybe produces serial killers. Unclear.
• 43:27
  Ed: Anyway, I really like living on the East Coast.
• 43:30
  Propter: Just gonna throw that out there.
• 43:33
  George: If you ever hear about Micah Dam taken off, then we really hope dear brother go like hell machine gets his ass out of Portland immediately because not gonna go well for him otherwise.
• 43:43
  Propter: Yeah. Yeah.
• 43:45
  George: The Columbia river thing is actually also a really interesting. I mentioned this before, but we can talk a little bit about about it now. The Columbia river thing's a really interesting international relations thing between the US and Canada that nobody knows about. Basically all agricultural industry in eastern Washington is premised on the idea that Canada will just sort of be nice about sending water down the Columbia river system, from which the headwaters of the Columbia river, for those who are unfamiliar, is like what's the reference here? It's like a little bit west of the Rocky Mountains in technically southeastern, but it's a long way north of the American border, British Columbia. And it sort of flows north and then does a big arc and comes down. And there are two very large Canadian dams in that or. Sorry, yeah, two very large Canadian dams in that system. And then it ducks down into the United States. And the Snake river is a tributary and there's, there's a bunch of other American dams down there. But a huge percentage of the total flow of the, of the Columbia river, which is, I think, the second largest river by flow in the continental United States.
• 44:52
  Propter: Yeah, there's, there's a reason they put the big dam on it.
• 44:55
  George: Yeah, well, not just one.
• 44:57
  Propter: Yeah, all the big dams.
• 44:58
  George: All the big dams it. So yeah, this is governed by a treaty and the treaty is under renegotiation. And you can imagine what kind of people at the State Department are in charge of river treaty negotiations right now. Not probably the ones that you'd like to see, so.
• 45:13
  Lowtax: And Canada's in a very agreeable mood right now, I'm sure.
• 45:17
  George: Precisely.
• 45:18
  Propter: Yeah. Yeah. Because we're doomed to give lessons on inland Northwest geography on this podcast on a regular basis. So you think of Washington State as being a very rainy place, and that's true in the western part of the state, but it is not particularly true in the eastern part of the state, which is relatively dry. So George is right that the agriculture in the northwest is really dependent what is ultimately water that the Canadians control. So anyway, lots of reasons to stay good buddies with our friends to the north.
• 45:54
  Ed: And as soon as Isaiah is elected, they are all going to die.
• 45:58
  George: He's from Nova Scotia. He's unelectable.
• 46:02
  Ed: Correct.
• 46:02
  George: Yeah. Although I just found out today a really fun blue sky follow up wanderlust arrow, pal, pull up the handle. But in the show notes airline reporter who likes taking oddball routes. And one of the oddball routes he took, he took this weekend was a daytime transatlantic, which is weird. There aren't that many of them. They exist, but they're rare. From Halifax to Lisbon, huh? Yep. Yeah, WestJet runs a daytime Halifax Lisbon flight. So if you want to connect to it, I think he said there's like one flight into Halifax that could be a feeder for this. But your best bet if you're from coming from the US would be to take a flight into Halifax, stay the night, you know, meet Isaiah at the pub, whatever, and then fly east during the day if you want to avoid the overnight thing.
• 46:54
  Ed: Yeah.
• 46:54
  Propter: Is that like a super weird seafood industry thing or what's. What's happening there?
• 46:59
  George: Basically there are not many available spots at spots at Lisbon. It's like notorious for not having very many landing spots. And if you have ever been through the Lisbon airport, immigration at high season, like, you know, it's, it's way under, like there's way more capacity, way more demand than there is capacity at that airport. It's actually quite a nice airport. They have lovely, lovely restrooms for kiddos if you're ever taking a kid through there. But it, and, and they do do the thing where, you know, if you have like a kid in a stroller, they're going to put you at the front of line. So can attest Portugal's lovely place to visit, but it's just a zoo. Like it's. There's just way more people coming through there than it was really designed for, especially international arrivals. So to get a slot, if you're, if you're. WestJet, which is Canada's sort of second run, second tier airline, the way you do it is you get a daytime slot because it's the, the arrivals or you get an evening slot, I guess because the arrivals from the overnight flights, they're more common from North America, Europe are all taken up.
• 47:58
  Ed: So that's why they're like some, some Halifax to like second and third tier in cities. I'm trying to remember which was it Leon? I can't remember but like I've flown through there a couple different times because it's the shortest connection. And, and that's me coming from friggin Logan. Right. Like, yeah, that's over there, but yeah,
• 48:19
  George: you can range it on 737 Max. Like at least. I don't know about the other ones, but certainly Halifax lives when you can, which is pretty crazy. Like you can't do that from New York, for instance. Yeah.
• 48:30
  Propter: So. All right. Anyway, so as we were saying elections, were we the.
• 48:54
  George: That was like half an hour ago.
• 48:57
  Propter: Or Tex Ortex still had a piece he wanted to do.
• 49:00
  Lowtax: Oh, yeah. So. So since Kamala. Oh, we haven't talked about aoc. We've talked about Kamala and we've talked about Gecko. We haven't talked about aoc. Friend of the show Cooper Lund is convinced that AOC is going to run for Senate rather than he's president. Yeah, probably right, because I had not realized how much time she was spending doing Bill's pervert shit upstate. Like, I'm not 100% sold yet. Until she jumps through a table or something.
• 49:30
  Ed: But are you sure that just isn't attempting to defect a Canada. It is, after all, Canada's team.
• 49:39
  Propter: I mean, you know, anything. Anything you can do to. To mend relations over Niagara Falls. I think it's your duty to. As the senator from New York.
• 49:47
  Ed: No, that's fair.
• 49:48
  Propter: But, but like, I think. I think that her default play here is to start off running for president and then she can pivot 100 of that war chest to Senate whenever she decides to hop over. So she can basically take a free role at president in the early, early primary and then go, nope, whoops, decided not to run for Senate in 2028.
• 50:10
  George: My hot take is that if she runs for either president or Senate, she's only running for the one. She's not gonna. She won't rollover. But that's my guess. I could be wrong, but that just like the. You're absolutely right, Propter. That like the incentives are aligned to make that move pay off very well. I think it's really contrary to her whole deal and I think it would. It would. She would lose appeal with a certain subset of voters that really like her.
• 50:38
  Lowtax: And she's not going be hurting for money.
• 50:41
  Ed: She already isn't. Yeah, she's.
• 50:44
  George: She is. She is an absolute monster online fundraiser. She.
• 50:50
  Propter: In, in.
• 50:50
  George: In a New York state election, she's gonna be unbeatable. Like, there's just. There's nobody. There's no plausible way to beat her in a Democratic primary in New York State. She's way too popular. She's got way too much juice on social media and she fundraises too well. It's just not. So my guess is she doesn't do the tiptoe into the presidency thing. Tiptoe into the presidential primary thing and then, and then pivot just because it will hurt her credibility with the kind of people that she is uniquely positioned to capture. Which is like the same as Mamdani, right? Like they. Yeah, it's the same kind of low info voter. And I, My guess is she just doesn't bother.
• 51:26
  Ed: You can just say Bluesky poster.
• 51:30
  George: Different kind of info voter.
• 51:31
  Propter: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, like, it's young people and that's true.
• 51:37
  Ed: There are none of those on Bluesky.
• 51:43
  Propter: Yeah, I mean, we're gonna have to start moving that, that, that 35 to 38 bracket up and up and up as. As time goes on. But I think that AOC. Well, so for 2028, obviously the first thing to get out of the way in New York Is. Is Chuck Schumer. And I don't think he's going to run again, but other people have had varying opinions about that. So maybe he decides he's still got one more in.
• 52:07
  George: For my money, AOC destroys him in a competitive primary. I think. I think the writings on the wall there.
• 52:12
  Ed: Oh, yeah, yeah.
• 52:13
  Lowtax: I think that's probably right.
• 52:15
  Propter: Yeah. And, you know, like, it really does take a toll on your numbers also to delete, to lead a caucus. That. That's. That's an effect that jumps out at you if you look at the caucus leaders for the Senate in particular over the past couple of decades, is that you've got these guys who have never had a contest, who've never had a G that's been closer than 40 points, and all of a sudden they're running at 15 points instead. Right. That. It. It doesn't mean. There. Doesn't mean they're going to lose because typically they're from places where they're being picked in part because they're not going to lose, but it makes you a lot more vulnerable. So. And, you know, like, sometimes you wriggle out of it, like Harry Reid did, but other times that doesn't happen. So.
• 53:01
  Lowtax: Yeah, yeah, we need to. We need to find a way to resuscitate Harry Reid. We need to take him to, like, the pet cemetery or something and reanimate him because those fuckers could not beat him in Vegas. Yep. And that was pretty much all you needed in Nevada.
• 53:25
  George: Most.
• 53:25
  Propter: Most urban. Most urban state in the country.
• 53:28
  Lowtax: Yes.
• 53:28
  Propter: Many people were surprised to find.
• 53:30
  Lowtax: Yes. Well, it helps when, you know, 99 of the state is federal land.
• 53:36
  Propter: Yeah.
• 53:37
  Lowtax: That has been irradiated for 80 years
• 53:41
  George: and would be uninhabitable anyway.
• 53:44
  Propter: Right.
• 53:44
  Lowtax: Yes.
• 53:47
  George: There's a great. The great Robin Williams bit about how the United States, like, does their nuclear bombs out in the. In the west and, you know, there's nothing out there anyways. Whereas the French. Sucking on a galois. No, us, we're doing Tahiti, the tropical paradise destroyed with nuclear weapon.
• 54:09
  Lowtax: Yeah. Although we did that, too. So, you know.
• 54:11
  George: Yeah, yeah, whatever. The French. There was a French idea first, I think.
• 54:15
  Lowtax: So anyway, with all this said, obviously it's going to be Ossoff now. And I have decided who Ossoff's administration should be.
• 54:25
  Ed: Okay.
• 54:26
  Lowtax: I have one for. One for each of you guys as a little treat. So, Vice president, I know we all think he's running for Secretary of State, but I think vice president should be Van Hollen.
• 54:37
  Propter: Interesting.
• 54:38
  Lowtax: With the condition that he is not allowed to run for president after the eight years because he will be 77 years old or something.
• 54:48
  Propter: So that's kind of the Biden play, right? I mean he bring in the old experienced hand.
• 54:52
  Ed: He won't run anyway because like people will go, who.
• 54:56
  Lowtax: Yes, there's that too. That we can't have a Dutch president again. Like we tried that once, it didn't
• 55:02
  George: work out, you know, fair.
• 55:06
  Lowtax: There's two people I cannot. Two types of people I can't stand. People who generalize about other people and the Dutch, the. Okay, so he doesn't get to be Secretary of State, but vice president is a pretty good parting gift for Secretary of State. I think you have to go with Abigail Spanberger. And I say this because many people, many people will say you should put her at DNI overseeing all the spooks. But actually at the State Department, they're the ones who are actually supposed to oversee all the spooks because they run all the embassies and it gives you plausible deniability. So that's where I'm putting Abigail Span.
• 55:44
  Ed: Is her reign of terror going to be complete in Virginia though?
• 55:47
  George: No, she, she, she's in office until 2030, so I, she's off the table, man. She's not gonna leave the governor's office two years early.
• 55:55
  Lowtax: You can't, you can't. She can't be in office in 2030 because it's only a one term governorship.
• 56:01
  George: Oh, sorry. 2029.
• 56:03
  Propter: Yeah.
• 56:03
  George: So she'd leave a year early from more than a year early. I don't, I don't see it.
• 56:10
  Lowtax: No.
• 56:11
  Ed: I just don't know if she will be done grinding Republicans faces into the dirt yet.
• 56:16
  George: Yeah, there's a lot of them.
• 56:17
  Lowtax: No, no, this is a better job. She'll do it, I suppose.
• 56:21
  Ed: And, and it means she can get out of Virginia and then sort of.
• 56:25
  Lowtax: The one, the one that is. That will make everyone mad is I would put Mayope at the Department of Defense.
• 56:35
  Propter: Interesting.
• 56:35
  George: No, that's a good idea. I like that. I like that a lot.
• 56:38
  Lowtax: Yeah, that's great because he. Because Hagseth tells us no beardos, no weirdos, blah, blah, blah stuff. And, and Pete is he, he has a beard. He is gay as the day is long. He is well organized. We're going to pair him up with friend of the show, Mike Black just so that we make, we make everybody on Bluesky maximally angry about this.
• 57:07
  George: No, but I, you know, who do you want to step in to completely clear house at a rotten organization that has just completely fallen out of its mission. Like, you obviously want a former consultant to do this. And who do you want to replace Pete Hegseth with? Obviously a gay man. So, yeah, this is. This is phenomenal. I could not be more on board with this. I am not. I am not a big fan of Mayo Pete. He is not. I see why people like him. Not for me, but this is brilliant. All day long and twice on Sunday.
• 57:41
  Lowtax: See, I actually do like Pete. Like, he wouldn't be my first choice, but I wouldn't be, like, incredibly angry if he were the guy.
• 57:48
  Ed: Yeah, he's fine, but, yeah, he's like everybody's third choice.
• 57:52
  Lowtax: I want. I want a consultant like him, but also I want him paired with Mike because Mike knows where all the bodies are buried and can be the evil bastard behind the scenes. And Pete can smile through the whole thing.
• 58:06
  Ed: It's true. The other thing that we're drafting people who listen to this podcast for seriously influential roles in the. In the federal government come 2029. Which leads me.
• 58:19
  Lowtax: Which leads me into the FBI, where detective.
• 58:23
  Propter: Detective Pikachu.
• 58:31
  Lowtax: Wow, that one is a joke. I wouldn't wish that on her.
• 58:37
  George: I do think it's worth thinking about what the next administration's approach to the Department of Defense is going to be. Because, look, there's not going to be the kind of fiscal environment that Obama or Biden had. And the Defense Department has proven that we are wasting incredibly large sums on whatever the hell they're supposed to be doing over there. Like, I. There has been all sorts of missteps with the Iran war, both in terms of the strategy, the fact that we're even involved in it, whatever. Given how much money we give these people, it shouldn't matter. They should be able to just get it done, and they can't. Like, not even close. It has just been a complete failure. And I think the case is going to be very easy to make that the trillions of dollars we pump into the defense industry is effectively wasted in a way that it really hasn't been in a long time. And I do think it's going to be pretty appealing to Democratically Democratic Party control Congress and the next Democratic president. Party president. To say, like, guys, you got a lot of money and you're not using it. Well, give it back. And that's going to make a lot of people piss and moan, and it's gonna be pretty funny. Mike. Mike Black actually will hate this observation on my part, which he's entitled to, but.
• 1:00:02
  Lowtax: Yeah, the only thing is that my Pete idea is, I admit, very West Wing brained.
• 1:00:08
  George: It's true.
• 1:00:09
  Propter: You're sorting very hard.
• 1:00:11
  George: Yeah, but unlike the West Wing, it's funny.
• 1:00:14
  Lowtax: That's true. I don't know. Toby and Josh had their moments on the West Wing.
• 1:00:21
  George: Let's not give Aaron Sorkin screenwriting any more credit than it absolutely deserves.
• 1:00:26
  Lowtax: I'm with you. I'm with you on that.
• 1:00:30
  Propter: We all, we all did some things in the, in the early 2000s we're not proud of.
• 1:00:36
  Ed: Look, I voted for Republican. I didn't watch that trash.
• 1:00:40
  Lowtax: Look, I mean, look, I bought the Velvet Revolver album. So we all have regrets, okay?
• 1:00:50
  Propter: They're no audio slave, that's for sure.
• 1:00:52
  Lowtax: No, they're not. If it had had Axle on it, it would have been good. Scott Whalen. No, he wasn't good on that.
• 1:01:01
  Propter: Yeah, it's weird. It feels like it should have worked on paper.
• 1:01:06
  Lowtax: It feels like many such cases. Yeah,
• 1:01:13
  Propter: There was, there was that great Scott Whalen quote to the effect of, you know, the Guns n Roses breakup always gets pinned on Axel being difficult. I've heard that story. But I've been in a band with Slash and I'm not so sure it's true now.
• 1:01:33
  Lowtax: No, I mean, they're all. If you know any of the Guns N Roses lore, you know, they were all psychos.
• 1:01:39
  Propter: Yeah, yeah, A terrible, terrible bunch of drug addled musicians. But they made one amazing album and a couple of other pretty good ones, so.
• 1:01:49
  Lowtax: Yes, that's right.
• 1:01:51
  George: Although as I said before, many such cases, the.
• 1:01:54
  Lowtax: The biggest psycho being Axel, though, I think still who was not the drug addict.
• 1:02:19
  George: So one of the geopolitical developments that I think we need to chat a little bit about involves a world leader whose brain is pouring out of his ears and has received very bad advice and just completely lost control of his military in a war of conquest that has just not gone well. And who seems to be sort of bouncing around and trying to find other stuff to lash out at. And, and, and folks, we are talking of course about Russia, not the United States, because same thing applies.
• 1:02:58
  Lowtax: But just remember, any, any country with sufficient Internet connection has in the last 20 years had its leaders brains completely fried by imported Anglo Saxon culture war.
• 1:03:11
  George: It's true, it's true. I mean, like, like Putin himself is such a fascinating case of like he totally lost his mind during COVID Like coming up, up until 2020, you're hard pressed to come up with a world leader who is more widely regarded as the smartest guy in the room. Right? And like evil super evil. Don't get me wrong. I'm not, I'm not. I'm not saying he was a good guy. I'm just saying, of course, like, completely calculating, highly strategic thinker, excellent risk taker as these things go. Right. Like. Like just knows when to push buttons and how to do it. And then covet happens and he's just completely lost his mind in part because of isolation during the pandemic. Likely, like, there was a lot of reporting that he was terrified of this virus and really was isolated from other people to a degree that was unusual even at the standards of the time. And his brain just broke. And that's how you get his invasion of Ukraine and all sorts of escalatory stuff since then.
• 1:04:18
  Lowtax: And it's how you get him going on television after a quarter of his generals die and going, I stand with J.K. rowling.
• 1:04:29
  George: Like, I'm sorry, you do not make it to the head of the KGB with that. With saying stuff like that like that. Doesn't it. That's just not how it works.
• 1:04:38
  Lowtax: Like that really had to rally the
• 1:04:41
  George: troops, you know, completely deranged. So this is not someone who is still in that same world of competent geopolitical risk taker and master tactician or strategist. This is. This is. We are long past that. We are a half decade past that at this point as the ongoing meat grinder of, let's not say, the flower of. Of Russia's middle classes, but certainly some part of the plant from Russia's middle classes. It's illustrated in Ukraine. I mean, it's just wholesale slaughter still years later. Yeah, but it appears that Putin is effectively expanding the war. Over the weekend, we got reports. This is. We're recording this on October 11th. Over the weekend, we got reports that he tried to assassinate the Prime Minister of Poland as well as the Defense Minister. There have been literally untold number of airspace violations, covert operations, targeting communications infrastructure, all sorts of different aggressive postures towards countries like Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, Sweden, Poland, Germany. I mean, he's really asking for a hot war with all of Western Europe when he can't even conquer Ukraine.
• 1:06:05
  Ed: He probably thinks they're easier.
• 1:06:09
  George: Well, he thought Ukraine was easy.
• 1:06:11
  Ed: Well, I mean, like, he clearly found out that the Ukrainians are. Are. Are far too.
• 1:06:15
  Propter: Are. Are far too.
• 1:06:16
  Ed: There is far too much fight in that dog. So, you know, what about those legendarily reserved people, the polls?
• 1:06:26
  Propter: So, like, to some extent what I think is happening here is that is. Is that Ukraine at this point is pretty hardened in the sense that it is defensible. But Ukraine is being backed up by the economic might of Europe writ large. Russia on the other hand, was for the early stages of the Ukraine war, mostly not being attacked. That is not true anymore that Ukraine has started flying and to take shots, take wax at bits of Russia's economic infrastructure instead of just previously where, you know, the play was to kind of let Russia spin the war machine.
• 1:07:02
  George: Not just bits either.
• 1:07:03
  Propter: Restraint. Yeah, no, I mean these are, these are, these are significant, these are significant nodes that it's not clear Russia can fully rebuild in some, in some cases that like, I don't think they've, I don't think they've really hit steel yet, have they? But other than that, like this, this is, is, this is.
• 1:07:18
  George: Most of biggest targets have been energy related. There has been other stuff, but it's energy and it's munitions. Those are the sort of big targets. And then they've now sort of started hitting some data centers too, which brilliant selection of soft target. Because you really don't have to do much to a data center to make it useless. Like these are very fragile machines.
• 1:07:38
  Ed: Yeah, just.
• 1:07:40
  Propter: They also went through and hit all of the, all of the, all of Wildberry. Russia's Amazon. They hit their distribution center. So like yeah, part of the goal here is to try to grind economic activity in Russia to a relative halt because that's, that's hitting Russia where, where they live and also will directly affect Russia's ability to, to prosecute the war now.
• 1:08:03
  Ed: Like, because Wild Berry like ships, flak vests to, to the front. Like they, they, they are not just like Amazon. You know, I, I do not think that you can buy grenades on Amazon often
• 1:08:19
  George: reliably.
• 1:08:20
  Propter: Amazon. No, yeah, that's, that's fair. And, and I think that if, if you want to make the case as Ukraine has made that Wild Berry is a legitimate military target, I think that's a makeable case for, for that reason among others. But there, there is like, there is a certain slide towards total war where in addition to trying to limit your adversary's ability to prosecute the war militarily, you're trying to cripple their economy, you're trying to cripple their logistics. You're, you're, you are fighting entire country against entire country or in the case of Europe, you know, entire, entire multi country polity against other entire multi country polity. And it would be bad if we moved further towards total war. A word you know, like that's, that wasn't fun the last time we did it? It's not going to be fun this time either. There are already other places where you're seeing moves towards it that, like, if you look in the Middle east, we've, we're now up to. I think it's, I think it's two major airports that have gotten hit by the Houthis in, in ksa.
• 1:09:34
  George: I mean, they've hit Riyadh's airport multiple times as well. There have been some other regional airports they've had too. I mean, I think it's, it's more than two, but, you know, and also Iran hit a bunch of civilian airport infrastructure over the course of the Iran war so far, so.
• 1:09:49
  Ed: Yeah.
• 1:09:50
  Propter: Yeah. And of course, energy infrastructure has been getting, been getting tagged pretty much from the jump. Yep. So, like, things that are, things that are expensive capital to rebuild right now are, are getting hit in a way that has not been characteristic of previous phases of either of these conflicts. I'm not sure we really have a good handle on how this plays out going forward. I mean, I think that in some sense Russia, Russia's analysis that they can't fight against what is increasingly unified European economic might sitting behind Ukraine, that, that in part because of the American pullback, that there has been greater, greater commitment by EU to backing Ukrainian arms.
• 1:10:38
  George: You should say that this stuff is wildly popular in Europe too. Like, this is not it. There is a lot of collective belief that this needs to be done. It's, I think Americans and to a degree, Brits, although in this case not relevant analysis because the UK has been a huge supporter of Ukraine. But like, there's this tendency to view the European project, the eu, the Eurozone, the, all this as sort of inherently fragile because it doesn't look like the centralized nation state that we're sort of familiar with as our unit of analysis. And it's wrong. It's just, it's just like hilariously wrong. Like, the Eurozone and the European Union are incredibly enduring institutions at just like polling, you know, electorate or population level. What do you think about this? Do you want to leave the euro? Even at the height of the Eurozone crisis, in the most impacted countries, there was no appetite to leave the Euro. I mean, obviously leaving the euro poll better in 2013 in Greece than it does now in Spain. But it just, there was never a significant majority of the population that said, yes, like, let's, let's, let's bail on. You know, certainly not the, not the Eurozone, not the common currency, but certainly not the eu. It is just these, these institutions are very slow moving, very frustrating to deal with because every country gets a veto. So it's just like, impossible. It's hurting cats. It's just so frustrating to deal with. But they're enduring, and they're enduring in ways that don't look like the way our institutions have their own momentum. Like, it's just a different unit of analysis. So I think it's a blind spot for a lot of Americans especially, that what looks to be less effective and it must therefore be weak. No, it's the other way around. It's, it's. The strength comes from the lack of effectiveness.
• 1:12:32
  Propter: You can't, you can't elect President Trump to the eu. That's not, that's not a thing that can happen.
• 1:12:38
  George: Right. I mean, even like, like Le Pen winning in France, Le Pen or her more handsome male alternative on the far right, who actually now leads the party that she, It's a whole thing. Anyhow, even that outcome, which would be very negative for France and for Eurotone and European Union cohesion, et cetera, et cetera. Like, like France isn't going to leave the Euro. Like, that's not, that's not on the table. Like, that's not a thing that's going to happen. So, you know, and that's sort of the nightmare scenario. Right? So, yeah, you know, to Propter's point, like, the Europeans are not just going to say, okay, Ukraine, you're on your own. Like, that's, that's not, that's not going to happen. There's no plausible react because Ukraine's security is Europe's security at this point.
• 1:13:22
  Propter: Yeah.
• 1:13:23
  George: Bringing Putin that much closer to the, to, to NATO states and to EU states that he could then strike directly from Ukraine. No, it's not going to happen. So there, there is an entirely rational self interest there. And they all understand, too, that again, Putin's nuts. Like, this is not a rational actor anymore. Does that mean he's going to invade Lithuania? No, not necessarily, but it's more in the probability distribution than it was two years ago.
• 1:14:04
  Propter: Yeah, it is.
• 1:14:05
  George: Also, it is very funny. Those reasonable people, the polls, like, what did he think, think assassinating the Prime Minister and Defense Minister was going to accomplish?
• 1:14:15
  Propter: Like, who's, who's next up? Are they going to be, are they going to be familiar to Russia?
• 1:14:19
  George: Right. Like, what is the analysis there? Like, oh, yeah, we'll knock off your, the leader of your government and then, like, everyone will be chill with us then. What are you talking about?
• 1:14:26
  Propter: Like, I mean, I mean, to be fair, we did Literally just try that in Iran.
• 1:14:31
  George: So, like, literally the exact same thing that worked the exact opposite way as anyone that could have looked at that and predicted it would have told you very stupid people.
• 1:14:45
  Propter: I, I don't think world war is inevitable at this point, but, like, we're sliding towards conventional world war in a way that I don't think we were a year ago.
• 1:14:56
  George: Put it that way, it wouldn't be a world war. Well, okay, let's put it this way. Russia has plowed as much of their national output as is politically feasible into conquering Ukraine for five years, and it's gotten them effectively nowhere. I mean, they've gained some territory, but it's tenuously held and it's extremely expensive for them to continue holding it. The idea that they could also then deal with, forget the US Just European militaries, as embarrassing as institutions like the Bundesweire are, like, no, Russia would get just corn cobbed.
• 1:15:39
  Lowtax: Just Poland. Yeah. I mean, if you had, if you had just. If Poland decided tomorrow, like, okay, we're done with this war. We're going in here, and you're not going to nuke us because the Brits and the French will nuke you back. Yes. This, the war in Ukraine would be over.
• 1:15:58
  Ed: Yeah.
• 1:15:59
  George: And, and that particular police action on the part of Poland would be the single most popular policy in the history of the country.
• 1:16:07
  Lowtax: Oh, yeah.
• 1:16:07
  Ed: Oh, yeah. No, like, like, they will, they're. They will be competing to decide who gets to declare war.
• 1:16:16
  George: And, and like, the other thing is, like, like, China's not going to bail this guy out. Xi Jinping is the opposite arc of Putin. Right. Like, if anything, he's gotten more calculating and more conservative and more like, strategically cohesive over the past five years. He is, he. The appetite from China to directly side with Russia in an armed conflict with anybody is effectively zero.
• 1:16:40
  Lowtax: We will allow. We will allow this. Poland with revision.
• 1:16:48
  Propter: Well, and I mean, also, I think just to some extent, this is, this, this is being limited by, by Red Sea closures right now. But, but, but I think that you're going to see more economic alignment between the largely coincident interests of China as not a petro state, and Europe as not petro states, as we, as we kind of move forward on that, you know, there's, there's a set of economic ties that could tighten there that. It's not obvious to me that Russia is necessarily a better ally for a rapidly decarbonifying China than Europe is that if you got to pick one from Beijing's perspective, it's not clear to me. You go with, you go with the, the state that doesn't buy a whole lot of your stuff because they're poor, but that.
• 1:17:49
  Ed: And shows absolutely no sign of getting less so. Right, right. They are not upwardly mobile.
• 1:17:57
  Propter: Yeah. And you know, particularly as China undergoes its economic transition, as they're, as they're moving, as they continue moving up the value chain. Like part of what they need is they need junior partners that can take the kinds of manufacturing that China used to do and take it elsewhere so that they can move into bigger and better manufacturing and move into, and move into services. Which has been kind of the arc of everybody.
• 1:18:26
  George: It's been the arc of everybody. But to be, to just push back on that thesis a little bit, China's shown no interest in doing that. They haven't abandoned market share for lower value add industries at the base of the manufacturing supply chain. Like, if anything, it's the other way around.
• 1:18:41
  Propter: So
• 1:18:43
  George: I don't know. I think you might, you're onto something that like China and Europe are more natural partners than China and Russia.
• 1:18:49
  Ed: But China kind of has like multiple, for lack of a better, better term, like it contains multiple countries though, like in terms of, in, in terms of like they, they can insource a lot of that because like western China is still there.
• 1:19:04
  Propter: Yeah, right.
• 1:19:05
  Lowtax: Right.
• 1:19:05
  Propter: Yeah.
• 1:19:07
  George: I, China is really interesting because they are the least proactive foreign policy, least, least outwardly proactive foreign policy in the entire world by like a hilarious margin. And yet they're one of the three most important actors. It's like, you know, like for all the American concern over being displaced by China, which my thesis for years now has been, that's just not true. You don't see a rising, you know, hegemon that has negative population growth. That's not how it works. But the, for all that concern, like China works very hard to not be aggressive in an outward facing way. In a way that, you know, compared to the United States and what we get up to is just hilarious to watch. Like it's, it couldn't be more different. So I don't know, their issue is that they have no internal demand, so it all needs to come from trade. So they need ever more countries, ever more consumers, ever more industries to buy their output. And there's just a limit to how much people will tolerate that. And I think it's unclear whether Beijing has realized this or not yet. But either way, Russia's not the solution to that problem because as noted, poor.
• 1:20:21
  Propter: I got a fantastic tie back to an earlier topic of conversation here, which is that this is kind of the same problem as how do you get better restaurants in a major city which is that you need a significant base of upper middle class incomes to support high end restaurants. You don't need a ton of rich, rich people, but you need enough upper middle class people who will go out to those restaurants occasionally to sustain it. That this is a case, this is a case where more incoming, where more income equality is better than having a few kind of like country feudal lords for holding up your restaurant scene. And typically what that means is professionalization. And you know, the case of Charlotte's burgeoning, burgeoning restaurant scene, I assume it has something to do with the number of banks you guys are rocking, correct? That that's the, that basically this is, this is whatever the Carolina version of a, of a New York finance salary buys you. That is, that is fueling the restaurant explosion. So like China's got that same problem which is that they need to figure out how to raising, raise internal demand. But to do that they need to greatly increase income equality. They need to flatten their curve between people who are applying way, way, way, way, way ahead and also you know, raise, raise the overall median income. But they're also going to be better off if in addition to raising that median income they can move to a higher, you know, whatever, whatever the mode of like, of like the, the about 70th to 90th percentile income bands are, that's the number that they need to move up big.
• 1:21:56
  George: Yeah, China's problem isn't necessarily like the absolute level of income inequality, although that is a problem. The problem is that the level of income inequality, quality is high relative to their economic development. And the reaction to that from the people who aren't the highest income households has been to just save like crazy. So you know, one of the solutions that gets bandied about is, you know, much better government underwriting of things like healthcare and pensions etc. You know, one solution that they attempted was to basically let people in to the private property game and for everyone to own homes. That, that has not gone well. Shocking nobody. You know, like the end of the day though, the things that would fix this paucity of internal demand, it all involve relatively large changes to the basic structure of how China's economy is managed. Instead of a production focused Marxist man, like they like building stuff, like they like factories, they don't like the people that buy the stuff from factories. And you need both, like instead of that you'd need something different and Again, I said earlier that Xi Jinping is like very smart, calculating, conservative on the global stage, small C conservative on the global stage. He's that way at home too, in ways that don't exactly, you would, you don't exactly want to see if you're trying to transition your economic model from one thing to another. Like you need someone who's willing to take some risks and he just isn't.
• 1:23:31
  Ed: There's also been a lot of, of less than great things going on with like the younger generation in general. Right. Like that conservatism has probably, I won't say broken, but like for those who don't know, my wife, my wife is, is a Chinese national. It sounds real grim over there for folks who are her age. Right. Like she's a little younger than me and like her, her cohort is not having a good time. And a lot of that kind of goes back to. There has sort of been a, there is, there has been a decent, a decent compromise. Right? Sit down, shut up, and you will have a better life than your parents. That is not happening right now. And I don't know how you get out of that and, and keep climbing up that ladder with, with a populace that is kind of, I mean I'm not going to say that this is, that this is like equivalent or anything, but like there is a lot of dropout culture that, that you hear about and it's hard to say how big it is, especially from the U.S. but like people talk about it pretty openly even on like WeChat. Right. Like it is, it is not something that is even really censored. Is, is kind of like the why, why should we try type of thing. And that's almost certainly not, you know, the population at large. But like that's not the sort of thing you want to hear coming out of a country that is trying to make that jump to like a service oriented economy that is trying to like continue to grow. Because if the people don't think they can grow, what are they going to do?
• 1:25:04
  George: Yeah. And again, like leaving cultural set factors aside, negative population growth and negative population growth as far into the future as it's worth projecting with no immigration of any kind. So I mean there are people that immigrate to China, but it's like an insanely small number. It's not even worth talking about.
• 1:25:20
  Ed: Yes. There are five YouTubers are who, who do videos about China who have moved there.
• 1:25:24
  George: Yes, correct, correct, correct. So you know, like a joke just though just those facts alone, like, like forget, forget all the political and cultural and et cetera, overlays that are all very real. Just that fact alone. You have a negative population growth and you don't have any immigrants coming in. Like that's going to be a big problem for society to digest for a really long time to come. And there are much more dynamic, much more policy entrepreneurial countries, namely Japan and Korea, that have been trying to get a handle on this for a long time with very limited success. Japan may have turned a corner on it. Korea probably hasn't yet. And I mean, I don't know, it's just the idea that this is the Chinese century, I think is is poorly informed, I'll put it that way.
• 1:26:17
  Ed: It crown and gutter. No one is picking it up still.
• 1:26:22
  George: Yeah, yeah. Only good can happen.
• 1:26:25
  Propter: Yeah. Nigeria in the Philippines, baby. Let's go.
• 1:26:29
  Ed: All right, all right.
• 1:26:33
  Propter: Got a show.
• 1:26:34
  George: Yeah, I think that's enough nonsense from us this week. So if you happen to listen to this podcast and think our ranting and raving is entertaining, worth listening to, or just generally not offensive enough to get worked up about, you can rate and review the podcast wherever you are listening to it. You can share us on your social media platform choice, George. Whether that platform is bluesky app or whatever else, that's probably where you found our dulcet tones the first time. And that's where you're probably going to do the least good by sharing us. Because we are the official podcast of blue sky.
• 1:27:11
  Ed: So only.
• 1:27:13
  Propter: Only anyhow.
• 1:27:15
  George: Yeah, well, yeah, pretty much. Okay, so rate, review, share. Send us to your boss. As long as your boss is not a Seahawks fan or a Dolphins fan Narc. Or a Commander's fan or a kiddies fan. For normal men. In Charlotte, I'm George.
• 1:27:36
  Propter: In Florida for a change, I'm Propter Gross.
• 1:27:40
  Lowtax: That's right, Propter discovered Martin County. Bless his heart.
• 1:27:44
  Ed: We did.
• 1:27:45
  Propter: We didn't even talk about Patriot Law. Yeah, no law.
• 1:27:48
  Lowtax: Patriot. I actually it is Law Patriot.
• 1:27:52
  Propter: Martin county the only just took the lead, baby.
• 1:27:55
  Lowtax: The the only county in South Florida that voted for McCain in 2008. Martin County. Even the even the New York PD chuds went for Obama. Anyway, in outer Florida, I am Lowtax Speedrun Enjoyer.
• 1:28:11
  Ed: And in Boston, I'm in far too
• 1:28:14
  George: much Florida on this episode today for my tastes. Stay normal y'.
• 1:28:17
  Propter: All.