0:05

Hello from Washington, I'm Chuck Todd and this

0:07

is the Chuck Todd cast. So President-elect Donald

0:10

Trump's return to the White House opens up

0:12

a ton of questions about the role the

0:14

U.S. will play in the world stage. Will

0:16

Trump finally make good on his threat to

0:19

leave NATO? Unlikely. What happens though in a

0:21

remained Middle East? And probably the biggest question

0:23

of all, what happens with the next global

0:25

rivalry between China and the United States. My

0:28

guest today is Ian Bremmer. He's president and

0:30

founder of Eurasia Eurasia group. And he's been

0:32

one of my favorite voices out there to

0:34

help us take stock of the world,

0:36

particularly sort of of the Western

0:38

world, the small d democratic world.

0:41

And Ian has his finger on

0:43

this pulse here and of sort

0:45

of the concern and sort of

0:47

real politique that everybody is sort

0:49

of addressing America this time around.

0:51

But before we get started, remember

0:53

to stick around for an audience

0:55

question and send us your suggestions

0:57

for any other topics you'd like

0:59

to see me tackle. over the

1:01

next few months. We want to

1:04

get in, we want to stay

1:06

in this reform-minded mindset that

1:08

we have been in on

1:10

that front. So do send

1:12

those ideas as well as

1:15

your generic questions as well.

1:17

Submit them to the Chuck

1:19

Toddcast@gmail.com. So with that, Ian Bremer,

1:21

welcome back to the Toddcast.

1:23

Love the Toddcast. Happ to

1:25

be on the Toddcast. I

1:27

appreciate it, brother. So, you know,

1:30

it's weird. It's weird to Just dive

1:32

right into this and not acknowledge

1:34

what's happening in Southern California. And the

1:36

reason I say that, Ian, is because

1:38

I just want to get your sort

1:41

of global take on this. I think

1:43

the rebuilding of Southern

1:45

California, I think the, I think this is

1:47

going to become more front and

1:49

center in America across the country

1:51

and for Washington than they

1:54

even realize yet. I don't think

1:56

Washington realizes how front and center

1:58

this is going to be. We're

2:00

going to be hosting the Olympics

2:02

in 2028 in a city that

2:04

is known as Los Angeles. There

2:06

is every national incentive in the

2:08

world to rebuild Los Angeles quickly.

2:11

There will be all this pressure.

2:13

There will be famous people applying

2:15

pressure. Does that extend globally? Is

2:17

it extended globally in terms of

2:19

what? Just the anxiousness about the

2:21

burning of Los Angeles? No. No,

2:23

I mean you travel in other

2:26

parts of the world and I've

2:28

been in the last week since

2:30

the fires have begun. I've spoken

2:32

with people that are, you know,

2:34

very much up to their eyeballs

2:36

in their own crises. I mean

2:39

for the Europeans, Russia, and Ukraine

2:41

matters a hell of a lot

2:43

more today than LA does. And

2:45

we as you might as I

2:47

would expect if you're in in

2:49

that part of your or the

2:52

Middle East or if you're Japan

2:54

or I mean South Korea is

2:56

in the middle of this incredible

2:58

craze double impeachment and martial law

3:00

and I mean this is a

3:02

blip now if you have relatives

3:05

friends in LA I assure you

3:07

It's playing in the same way

3:09

that in Canada, you know, if

3:11

you're an ethnic Ukrainian that originally

3:13

came from there, you care a

3:15

lot more about that. But no,

3:18

this is, right now, this is

3:20

really overwhelmingly about the United States

3:22

and to a degree Mexico. You

3:24

know, it's interesting how, when you

3:26

think about natural disasters that can

3:28

overwhelm a government, I know it's

3:31

happened in Pakistan, arguably a climate

3:33

induced. natural disaster. Give me a

3:35

sense, I think Haiti has arguably

3:37

been experienced this on and off

3:39

quite a bit. How many, you

3:41

know, this is now a regular

3:44

thing for, you know, if the

3:46

United States can be overwhelmed by

3:48

this, every country in the world

3:50

is going to be overwhelmed by

3:52

these natural disasters. Well, I mean,

3:54

first of all, there's no question

3:57

that LA is right now and

3:59

maybe California governance is being overwhelmed

4:01

by this and they're going... to

4:03

be, there'll be investigations and there'll

4:05

be, you know, sort of all

4:07

of that. But to say that

4:09

the U.S. is being overwhelmed by

4:12

it, the United States, too. No,

4:14

you know, and overwhelms are wrong,

4:16

but it's sort of, it's going

4:18

to be a, this isn't going

4:20

to be easy for the U.S.

4:22

to deal with, I'll be in

4:25

Davos next week with the CEOs

4:27

of the world's most important corporations

4:29

and banks and leaders and all

4:31

of that, and overwhelmingly... the conversations

4:33

that I am hearing going into

4:35

that is how incredibly well the

4:38

US economy is performing compared to

4:40

everyone else out there, compared to

4:42

the Japanese, the Europeans, compared to

4:44

the Chinese, all the big economies.

4:46

And that doesn't mean that climate

4:48

change doesn't matter and doesn't mean

4:51

natural disasters don't matter, it doesn't

4:53

mean that we as humanity aren't

4:55

encroaching in unsustainable ways. on the

4:57

natural resources that we have around

4:59

the world. We are, and we're

5:01

also developing technologies to try to

5:04

address it. But the US is

5:06

in such, the real story in

5:08

2025, despite the fact that right

5:10

now the headlines are overwhelmingly on

5:12

this enormous tragedy and as of

5:14

now over, I think over 20

5:17

have lost their lives, not to

5:19

mention all of these homes and

5:21

livelihoods that have been destroyed. But

5:23

the global story and the American

5:25

story is very far from that.

5:27

So let's pivot to that. The

5:30

Western world is not, seems to

5:32

be, well you describe it, are

5:34

they more comfortable with Trump or

5:36

they're just used to, they just

5:38

have more of an idea of

5:40

what to expect this time, which

5:42

is why there isn't the same

5:45

public trepidation. I bet the new

5:47

president. Oh my. So I would

5:49

say that most of the Western

5:51

world is more uncomfortable with Trump.

5:53

And with Trump and Elon, and

5:55

with Trump and a very cohesive

5:58

administration of loyalists, but there are

6:00

significant exceptions. There are significant governments

6:02

that are now in place that

6:04

are actively embracing Trumpism and aligning

6:06

with it, including in the West,

6:08

like Prime Minister Maloney in Italy,

6:11

for example, which she has, she

6:13

runs one of the strongest, most

6:15

stable governments in Europe right now.

6:17

But let's pause there. You just

6:19

described Italy as? Yes. One of

6:21

the, right now, I said right

6:24

now, I said right now, it's

6:26

unusual, it doesn't usually happen. I

6:28

mean, you know, we grew up

6:30

when we were in college and

6:32

it was always like the punchline

6:34

was, hey, the sun rose, who's

6:37

the Prime Minister of Italy today?

6:39

Yeah, since World War II, they've

6:41

had almost a government a year.

6:43

So it's very surprising. And yet,

6:45

it reflects. how much anti-establishment sentiment

6:47

there is in a lot of

6:50

countries around the world. But the

6:52

U.S. is also, it's a much

6:54

more consolidated government around Trump, so

6:56

a lot of those leaders know

6:58

they can't go around him, the

7:00

way they used to be able

7:03

to, and talk to Pence and

7:05

Pompeo and Gary Cohn and Mattis,

7:07

and Nikki Hillary. That's not this

7:09

administration this time. He's not allowing

7:11

that to happen. So, I mean,

7:13

on the one, so I would

7:16

say not only are they more

7:18

concerned, but they're also more proactive

7:20

in trying to make sure that

7:22

they don't get into a fight

7:24

with them. They're much more, I

7:26

mean, if you thought that Zuckerberg,

7:28

think about how fast Zuck was

7:31

kissing the ring, spending the money,

7:33

and changing his business model to

7:35

get on board with Trump. I

7:37

mean, that's what you're going to

7:39

see from a lot of prime

7:41

ministers and presidents around the West.

7:44

How much of this is driven

7:46

by just the typical needing to

7:48

have a good relationship with Trump.

7:50

And how much of this is

7:52

about, well, boy, dealing with Trump

7:54

will be easier than dealing with

7:57

Elon Musk? And maybe Trump can

7:59

help us tame Musk. Oh, I

8:01

don't know that that's separable. I

8:03

think that if you are particularly

8:05

the Europeans and the Canadians, and

8:07

by the way, their private polls

8:10

on Elon show that they really

8:12

despise him. They're very angry about

8:14

Elon in a way, and by

8:16

the way, Elon's quite popular in

8:18

the United States. I was just

8:20

gonna say, Elon is, he's basically

8:23

one to one, you know, he's

8:25

not, he's no different than any

8:27

other sort of what I would

8:29

say political leader in America that's

8:31

well known. Yeah. We're the one

8:33

favorable rating, you know? But that's

8:36

right. It's not the case in

8:38

Canada. Not the case in Canada.

8:40

Not the case in Canada. If

8:42

they're really angry with him, he's

8:44

supporting a lot of disinformation. He's

8:46

supporting a lot of leaders that

8:49

are very unpopular, very toxic inside

8:51

those countries, very issues that are

8:53

very toxic inside those countries. Those

8:55

countries are not America. They treat

8:57

free speech differently. but generally speaking

8:59

very different in terms of what

9:01

their countries what their people really

9:04

prioritize and value and the fact

9:06

that Elon who has spent more

9:08

time with Trump in the last

9:10

several weeks than any of his

9:12

other top advisors and is vastly

9:14

more personally powerful that he is

9:17

going out and attacking a lot

9:19

of these governments allied governments. The

9:21

presumption, and I think a correct

9:23

presumption, is that Trump is fully

9:25

on board with the actions of

9:27

his bomb thorough and chief. I'm

9:30

trying to think, I mean, Murdoch

9:32

at the height of his influence

9:34

in the late 80s, early 90s,

9:36

and places like the UK or

9:38

Australia, didn't have this kind of...

9:40

No way. We've not experienced it

9:43

in our lifetimes. Someone in the

9:45

private sector with this kind of

9:47

influence. It's, I mean, the closest

9:49

I can come to, it goes

9:51

back to the turn to the

9:53

turn of the, you know, you

9:56

know, you know, you know... the

9:58

original, essentially, barons. You know, we

10:00

called a marijuana barons today, they'd

10:02

be called oligarchs. But it took

10:04

a while for the politicians to...

10:06

side with the public who clearly

10:09

it was the public that soured

10:11

on these guys first and then

10:13

the politicians like Teddy Roosevelt oh

10:15

I'm gonna get in front of

10:17

this movement yeah I think the

10:19

Steve Bannon thing is really interesting

10:22

right I mean I'm sure you've

10:24

seen him in the last 48

10:26

hours because I think Chuck there's

10:28

a big difference between deep magga

10:30

and dark maga right and it's

10:32

an interest okay you know give

10:35

me your distinction between I think

10:37

I know where you're going but

10:39

give me your distinction between the

10:41

two so I mean Elon you

10:43

know who's really said I'm I'm

10:45

dark magga I'm like crypto and

10:47

we're winners and we're like you

10:50

know calling BS on all the

10:52

disinformation out there but but he's

10:54

he's an oligarch and he put

10:56

250 million dollars in he is

10:58

a two what Soros was to

11:00

the Democrats except he's far more

11:03

powerful than Soros and and he

11:05

supports more demands more from his

11:07

money like Soros didn't seem to

11:09

demand anything for his money well

11:11

I mean I don't know if

11:13

I would go that far well

11:16

I'm talking about first he wasn't

11:18

as active perhaps he wasn't it

11:20

was a part of his business

11:22

I guess yeah I mean I

11:24

think you know this is just

11:26

sort of directly transactional I guess

11:29

I don't know if I would

11:31

say that or there, Elon has

11:33

picked a whole bunch of fights

11:35

that are not aligned with his

11:37

business. Elon has picked a bunch

11:39

of fights that arguably a problem

11:42

at his business is. So I

11:44

don't know if I would necessarily

11:46

agree with that. Again, there aren't

11:48

many people that like both Elon

11:50

and Soros. So that's, it's the

11:52

overlap of those circles would be

11:55

very, very narrow. If there were,

11:57

the Bildaburgers actually mattered. Maybe you'd

11:59

find them there, but they don't.

12:01

And so even there, I think

12:03

you'd find really big differences. But,

12:05

you know, you've got... Megaa, which

12:08

I mean Elon is super interested

12:10

in leveraging that power to become

12:12

more powerful and we saw that

12:14

with the H1D visa thing. He's

12:16

like no this is how I'm

12:18

going to be more competitive and

12:21

by the way I'm going to

12:23

become the most. But it was

12:25

it was more proof he was

12:27

doing this for his own personal

12:29

business interest. Well again there's a

12:31

lot of that but I mean

12:33

what I would say is in

12:36

some ways Elon is now in

12:38

in his own person. the most

12:40

important part of the US military

12:42

industrial technological complex, which is an

12:44

astonishing thing and an incredibly powerful

12:46

position to be in. And then

12:49

you have deep magga, you know,

12:51

that really believes in the deep

12:53

state, that believes in these shadowy

12:55

forces that are behind pulling the

12:57

levers and they want to break

12:59

that and they want like, you

13:02

know, benefits for the average American.

13:04

They're like, no, we hate the

13:06

globalists. We hate these people that

13:08

are doing business with China and

13:10

offshoring American jobs and bringing in

13:12

talent for their own benefit because

13:15

that hasn't helped us. That's why

13:17

we don't support free trade, we

13:19

don't support wars in other countries,

13:21

we don't support promoting democracy because

13:23

that's been a bunch of hooey.

13:25

I mean all the people I

13:28

grew up with in the projects

13:30

were far more likely to be

13:32

deep magga. than dark magga, and

13:34

all the people I'm going to

13:36

see in Davos next week are

13:38

far more likely to be dark

13:41

magga than deep magga. Now there

13:43

is a fight there, and I

13:45

think it's a really interesting fight,

13:47

but I assume that deep magga

13:49

is going to lose. Well, look,

13:51

this keeps going back to, it's

13:54

the same, it's funny you call

13:56

it deep and versus dark. You

13:58

know, I talk about inside the

14:00

Republican Party that Donald Trump is

14:02

trying to create as one of

14:04

strong government. The Republican Party, he's

14:06

still trying to work with, when

14:09

you think of people like Chip

14:11

Roy, they still grew up with

14:13

the idea that they wanted to

14:15

make it small government, right? And

14:17

I think you even have that

14:19

tension. with dark and deep, right?

14:22

I think Steve Bannon wants strong

14:24

government. I don't think he necessarily

14:26

wants small government. I actually think

14:28

Elon wants a small government, right?

14:30

He wants a feckless government. He

14:32

wants a small government that is

14:35

basically just... That does his will.

14:37

That's right. It's bent to his

14:39

well, but you know, to give

14:41

him the benefit doubt, he would

14:43

just say, you know, to help

14:45

business succeed, right, to help me

14:48

and to sort of clear the

14:50

way for a free market. So

14:52

he actually does want a small

14:54

government. versus, and that's going to

14:56

come into conflict with people who

14:58

do expect government to help them.

15:01

Oh, yeah. And yeah, that's going

15:03

to say, well, that's a waste

15:05

of money and inefficient. That's right.

15:07

And when that comes, when that

15:09

clash comes, you know, I know

15:11

where Trump's going to go, I

15:14

think, but I'm going to, I'm

15:16

going to float a potential wild

15:18

card idea in a minute. I

15:20

think I know where Trump will

15:22

go because what's Trump's done in

15:24

the past, which is, you know,

15:27

you know, how big government gets

15:29

as long as he's in charge

15:31

of it. Yeah. He likes to

15:33

spend money. He doesn't care about

15:35

the deficit. He'll be dead when

15:37

the debt comes to fruition. And

15:40

I think that's how he thinks.

15:42

The biggest step away from election

15:44

promises so far has been Elon

15:46

in going from two trillion to

15:48

one trillion in savings, a headline

15:50

from Doge before they've even started.

15:52

Not that anyone thought that one

15:55

trillion was credible either, but I

15:57

mean, you know, there's nobody in

15:59

Congress other than Rand Paul who's

16:01

an actual deficit hawk at this

16:03

point. So I don't think that's

16:05

the direction they're headed. One thing

16:08

that I think is an un,

16:10

you know, I had a friend

16:12

of mine say the biggest mistake

16:14

we made during the first Trump

16:16

term term was failure of imagination,

16:18

and that frankly, it's the sort

16:21

of the, the, the, the, the,

16:23

the Trump era in general. failure

16:25

of imagination is sort of, you

16:27

could argue, has been one of

16:29

the key components of missing things.

16:31

One place where I'm starting to

16:34

wonder, I think Donald Trump is

16:36

trained. action by nature. Donald Trump's

16:38

never having to win another election

16:40

again. I don't know if Democrats

16:42

are clever enough to realize this,

16:44

but the opportunity to cut deals

16:47

with him is high. It's never

16:49

is very high. Absolutely. And if

16:51

you have a Republican party that

16:53

is just disagreeing on a direction,

16:55

Donald Trump just wants points on

16:57

the scoreboard, he will abandon these

17:00

guys faster than they realize. And

17:02

I think that this is something

17:04

again. I don't know how many

17:06

John Federmanes there are. I think

17:08

if they were clever they could

17:10

get a lot out of this

17:13

administration, but I don't know whether

17:15

they will, whether they will, whether

17:17

they will allow themselves to do

17:19

it, but if they do, I

17:21

think the opportunity is there, and

17:23

I think that's the highest risk

17:25

the Republican leadership in the House

17:28

has right now. I mean, they

17:30

had mansion, they had cinema, and

17:32

both of them are gone. Now

17:34

they have Federman, maybe they'll grab

17:36

a couple more. that Trump has

17:38

opportunities that will align with democratic

17:41

interests is very very high. You

17:43

know, especially because Trump won the

17:45

election by convincing people that the

17:47

Democrats were actually the party of

17:49

progressive urban educated elites. And the

17:51

average American who the Democrats are

17:54

trying to give something to and

17:56

align with and they do it

17:58

in theory But they don't necessarily

18:00

do it in practice. So illegal

18:02

immigration You know if you really

18:04

want to go after illegal immigration

18:07

Trump will do a bunch of

18:09

stuff that it feels bad from

18:11

a human rights perspective It's going

18:13

to round people up, but he

18:15

also should be interested in e-Verify

18:17

and hitting the corporates in you

18:20

know a construction and agriculture and

18:22

food packing that are taking advantage

18:24

of hiring illegal workers for nothing.

18:26

And they're lining their own pockets

18:28

and Democrats should absolutely sign up

18:30

for that. that fight with Trump.

18:33

They should be helpful. Because ultimately,

18:35

they should be in the targets

18:37

of the US government so that

18:39

average people that are here legally

18:41

have opportunities to get decent fair

18:43

paid jobs. I mean, the Democrats

18:46

lost the Teamsters. They lost all

18:48

of these unions whose average rank

18:50

and file decided to vote for

18:52

Trump. They've lost a lot of

18:54

legal immigrants in the United States,

18:56

Hispanics. They've lost. you know a

18:59

lot of people that should have

19:01

been voting for Democrats if the

19:03

Democrats actually walked their talk but

19:05

they haven't and that that's where

19:07

they need to find ways to

19:09

cooperate. Let's talk about the hot

19:11

spots around the world and I

19:14

want to start with one. Donald

19:16

Trump's chatter about Canada which is

19:18

tongue in cheek we know Greenland

19:20

which we know He's serious about

19:22

something with Greenland and we'll perhaps

19:24

get to that and the canal.

19:27

But I think about all that

19:29

rhetoric, what message does that send

19:31

to Putin with Ukraine and she

19:33

with Taiwan? Well, it certainly sends

19:35

a message that Trump feels like

19:37

he can really push around folks

19:40

that are much less powerful than

19:42

he is. And so... I thought

19:44

we looked down upon that as

19:46

a country. Well, we no longer,

19:48

we always in principle look down

19:50

on it as a country. We

19:53

frequently in reality did not look

19:55

down at it as a country,

19:57

which is why there have been

19:59

so many charges of hypocrisy, which

20:01

have really resonated especially across the

20:03

global south. I mean, when the

20:06

United States supported Israel against the

20:08

Palestinians, when after the Holocaust, everyone

20:10

got that, because this is an

20:12

unspeakable crime. and the US is

20:14

supporting the underdog and supporting rule

20:16

of law and territorial integrity and

20:19

all of that, democracy. When the

20:21

US is supporting the Israelis today

20:23

against the Palestinians, a lot of

20:25

people and the Israelis have by

20:27

far the most you know, the

20:29

staggering military in the region and

20:32

they can they can enforce their

20:34

own borders and rules and all

20:36

the rest when they're paying attention,

20:38

then people feel very differently. And

20:40

the same thing goes with, you

20:42

know, the Armenians and Harabakh and

20:44

the same thing goes with not

20:47

caring about Sudan and so on

20:49

so forth. So, you know, what

20:51

we thought America stood for, you

20:53

and I agree on that from

20:55

1989 and. hell even Vietnam, Cambodia,

20:57

Kissinger, Jesus Christ, Pinochet, you know,

21:00

Indonesia. I mean, how many examples

21:02

do you need me to give?

21:04

Like if Canada were as powerful

21:06

as the United States was, I

21:08

think we'd be more aligned with

21:10

rule of law, you know, not

21:13

the case. So I don't know.

21:15

What is it meant? The message

21:17

it sends. Let's first of all

21:19

keep in mind that Putin and

21:21

Xi Jinping both are happy to

21:23

throw American hypocrisy in our faces.

21:26

Oh, they love it. Yeah, no,

21:28

it really helps them with propaganda.

21:30

But they live by rule of

21:32

the jungle. What they actually do

21:34

is whoever's most powerful gets to

21:36

make the rules they want. And

21:39

what Trump is doing is saying,

21:41

you know what, I like your

21:43

worldview. I'm going to do what

21:45

you guys have done. I'm going

21:47

to embrace your worldview. I'm going

21:49

to do rule the jungle, too.

21:52

But by the way, I want

21:54

to make it very clear to

21:56

do this better than you. I

21:58

am more powerful than you. Don't

22:00

you try to get away with

22:02

this against me? And if you're

22:05

Putin, you know, maybe if Trump

22:07

doesn't care about Ukraine, it's okay.

22:09

But what if Trump does actually

22:11

care a little about Ukraine? What

22:13

if he's not prepared to have

22:15

a loss of Ukraine on his

22:18

watch? By the way, Trump is

22:20

the one who's been pushing the

22:22

Europeans to spend much more on

22:24

defense, or we're going to hurt

22:26

you. That's really not a message

22:28

Putin wants to hear. Putin doesn't

22:30

want the Europeans now spending 3%

22:33

of GDP on defense. I mean,

22:35

if Trump actually gets Greenland to

22:37

go independent... in part by offering

22:39

Greenland a lot more money and

22:41

saying that the US will have

22:43

an alliance with Greenland and will

22:46

station 5,000, 10,000 troops instead of

22:48

200 and we'll actually start doing

22:50

Arctic Basin because no one's pushing

22:52

back on the Russians who are

22:54

spending a billion on Arctic naval

22:56

fleet right now. I got to

22:59

tell you, Putin's not going to

23:01

like that. So I mean I

23:03

understand that the direction of your

23:05

question is Trump is now saying

23:07

stuff that frankly his arguments on

23:09

Panama Canal. are exactly the same

23:12

arguments Putin used on Crimea. So

23:14

I mean like the same. Yeah,

23:16

the same. So doesn't that completely

23:18

lose America's moral high ground? And

23:20

my argument is I would argue

23:22

that America's high ground has been

23:25

eroding for a long time, but

23:27

America's ability to enforce the rules

23:29

that it wants has actually been

23:31

going up. And how we balance

23:33

those things is very interesting. I'm

23:35

not comfortable with what that says

23:38

about the future of the global

23:40

order to be clear. I like,

23:42

I prefer a rule of common

23:44

norms and values and laws. Are

23:46

you a college football fan? I

23:48

am. Is the world order kind

23:51

of like conference realignment where there's

23:53

a lot of countries out there?

23:55

that have been traditionally with the

23:57

United States, or maybe traditionally with

23:59

wanting to be careful about alienating

24:01

China, or be careful about anything.

24:03

And nobody's quite sure where the

24:06

momentum is, right? The global south

24:08

is sort of, well, you don't

24:10

want to alienate the United States,

24:12

but we're dabbling with India and

24:14

China and over here and all

24:16

this stuff. How up for grabs

24:19

our alliances in general right now

24:21

in your mind? They are much

24:23

more up for grabs than at

24:25

any point in our lifetimes and

24:27

yet there are very severe constraints

24:29

on that. So you know one

24:32

big difference is that the Americans

24:34

dominate. I appreciate you humoring me

24:36

comparing this to conference real life.

24:38

Well also I thought you were

24:40

going to go with college students.

24:42

that not only are getting paid

24:45

so they're more transactional, but also

24:47

just going from college to college.

24:49

Right. Right. Right. Like so like.

24:51

Well, we may go online. Greenland

24:53

may. Well, this this month will

24:55

be with the United States. But

24:58

hey, maybe next month, there's a

25:00

better deal to be cut with

25:02

Canada. Yeah. So I mean, one

25:04

one point is that there are

25:06

a few countries that have absolutely

25:08

no choice. When Trump beats on

25:11

Mexico and says you got to

25:13

get the Chinese out, they will

25:15

get the Chinese out. Canada. the

25:17

Chinese can do the same thing

25:19

with Lao in Cambodia, right? So

25:21

there are a few exceptions to

25:24

the rule. Can they do it

25:26

with Vietnam? Vietnam's actually much more

25:28

capable of playing both sides. There's

25:30

also the reality that the United

25:32

States is utterly dominant in artificial

25:34

intelligence and the Chinese are utterly

25:37

dominant in post-carbon energy transition. And

25:39

probably becoming more so, given that

25:41

Trump doesn't really care as much

25:43

about that, and is going to

25:45

lean more heavily into fossil fuels,

25:47

if you are a different country

25:49

in the world, in any sector,

25:52

you need the Americans for AI,

25:54

for transition energy. So you can

25:56

only hedge so far. You can't

25:58

have a cold war. I mean,

26:00

you know, we... But a lot

26:02

of people worry that we're going

26:05

to have the US-China relationships getting

26:07

worse. We're going to decouple. And

26:09

we're banning TikTok. And we're hitting

26:11

them with heavier tariffs. And we're

26:13

doing export controls on semiconductors. A

26:15

lot of this feels like containment.

26:18

Well, you know, the last time

26:20

we did containment, the world's split

26:22

into two blocks this time. It

26:24

can't. It can't. That's really. interesting,

26:26

right? It's a very big difference.

26:28

So like let me give you

26:31

an, let me throw a country

26:33

out there who I'm sure is

26:35

playing everybody, every side, Erdogan, Turkey.

26:37

Yep, yep. Like he feels like

26:39

a guy that we'd love to

26:41

put more pressure on but he,

26:44

we need him as much as

26:46

he needs us. Yeah, I think

26:48

he is in probably one of

26:50

the best geopolitical positions in the

26:52

world today, maybe, you know, even

26:54

better than India because it... It

26:57

would have been my next, that

26:59

was my next ask on this

27:01

one, yeah. Well, because India, like,

27:03

is a big technology player and

27:05

they're going to do data centers

27:07

and they've got incredible human capital

27:10

and therefore data and they've got

27:12

scale. And while China is their

27:14

most important trading partner, they really

27:16

need to align with the Americans

27:18

on tech and that will increasingly

27:20

align them with the Americans on

27:22

security. Similar argument for the UAE,

27:25

for the UAE, for example, and

27:27

the Gulf, much smaller countries. going

27:29

to sell most of their oil

27:31

to the Chinese, but actually going

27:33

to be aligned with the Americans

27:35

on security and tech. Turkey is

27:38

much more a, their position, their

27:40

geopolitical strength is much more about

27:42

their geographic location, right? It's about

27:44

their influence in parts of the

27:46

world that are otherwise don't have

27:48

major powers that are driving outcomes.

27:51

It's about the fact that there

27:53

are millions of refugees that are

27:55

in Turkey that could otherwise go

27:57

into Europe. It's about their ability

27:59

to engage with players on every

28:01

side and therefore be critical on

28:04

potential peace negotiations, whether it was

28:06

on the Black Sea food deal

28:08

between the Russians and the Ukrainians,

28:10

or whether it's dealing with Syria

28:12

in the future and avoiding the

28:14

emergence of a caliphate. What happens

28:17

if they start bombing Kurds? What

28:19

do we do? Given that Trump

28:21

has said that the Turks are

28:23

the key in Syria, I suspect

28:25

he doesn't care as much as

28:27

a Biden administration would have. As

28:30

a Trump, as the first Trump

28:32

administration, at least parts of it

28:34

would have, Jim Mattis, those guys,

28:36

yeah. No, and parts of it

28:38

will this time around, but this

28:40

time around, those people are much

28:43

more loyal to Trump. So, I

28:45

mean, I have a lot of

28:47

personal respect for Marco Rubio and

28:49

Mike Waltz. I think they're both

28:51

capable and intelligent. I know them

28:53

both well. But they are not

28:56

independent from Trump, the way that

28:58

Tillerson or Pompeo or Bolton or

29:00

Nikki Haley or any of those

29:02

people were the first member. Hey,

29:04

I'm curious, when world leaders or

29:06

your international stage ask you, who's

29:08

got the upper hand? on American

29:11

foreign policy, the State Department or

29:13

the NSC. It clear to me

29:15

in Biden, Jake Sullivan was the

29:17

sort of the preeminent. No doubt

29:19

about it. I think it was

29:21

mostly, I felt that way during

29:24

the Obama years as well. Is

29:26

that the way you expect? I

29:28

mean, is Rubio more going to

29:30

be more like Lincoln here? Basically

29:32

a spokesperson for the administration? I

29:34

doubt it. I doubt it. In

29:37

part because, like, on the one

29:39

hand, it's more fragmented. On the

29:41

one hand, on things that Trump

29:43

cares about, being close to Trump

29:45

will matter immensely. Proximity is still

29:47

going to be everything on some

29:50

of these issues. So being in

29:52

the White House, as the NSA

29:54

is, matters a lot. So do

29:56

you expect him to sort of

29:58

more, the Middle East would be

30:00

more of a personal portfolio of

30:03

Trump's? versus Ukraine he might be

30:05

less personally engaged with? I wouldn't

30:07

yet say that. I mean, he

30:09

obviously has a great personal relationship

30:11

with the Gulf states, and he's

30:13

going to be very, very supportive

30:16

of Israel. But he also doesn't

30:18

want to have military involvement in

30:20

those places. And he was very

30:22

reluctant, for example, to listen to

30:24

the Gulfies and attack Iran in

30:26

his first term until right at

30:29

the end when he decided to

30:31

kill Sulamani. So it has more

30:33

to do with what... occupies him

30:35

on any given day. And on

30:37

those issues, you know, being Elon

30:39

and or being Mike Walsh, and

30:41

I suspect Elon matters more, but

30:44

nonetheless, that's going to be the

30:46

key order of the day. But

30:48

on an issue like Venezuela, for

30:50

example, I think Marco Rubio will

30:52

matter immensely. I think it's going

30:54

to be, I mean, Latin America,

30:57

I think that he cares about

30:59

it. And he's going to be.

31:01

what his advice will likely be

31:03

what they follow. And state just

31:05

has the resources and Marco is

31:07

actually a pretty capable manager. He's

31:10

very engaged on these very engaged

31:12

on these things and he knows

31:14

the senators and he'll be leading

31:16

bipartisan delegations to countries and he'll

31:18

be more engaged with the IMF

31:20

and the World Bank where I

31:23

mean Mark when I look at

31:25

Biden like Jake was running point

31:27

on everything in foreign policy and

31:29

cabinet was implementing. And that's the

31:31

way it worked. This is different.

31:33

How uncomfortable is Marco Rubius' relationship

31:36

going to be with China, considering

31:38

how he's been viewed as sort

31:40

of almost persona non grata as

31:42

a United States Senator? They're going

31:44

to, I assume they will be

31:46

more diplomatic with him? He will

31:49

be the first U.S. Secretary of

31:51

State that's been under sanction by

31:53

China. Yeah. Never happened before. I

31:55

expect that he will keep talking

31:57

about Uyghurs, for example, and Taiwan.

31:59

And look, on the one hand,

32:01

I think that the

32:04

Chinese are experiencing the

32:06

worst economic conditions right

32:08

now since at least the 90s.

32:10

And they would like to find a

32:12

way to do a deal with Trump

32:14

if it were possible. But very

32:16

few around Xi Jinping think it's

32:19

possible. Very few. Is there a

32:21

deal that looks like they taut

32:24

rather than a deal, by the

32:26

way? Between the US and China. The

32:28

Republicans in Congress

32:30

are so focused on decoupling.

32:32

They're so focused on putting

32:34

more export controls on the

32:36

Chinese, because Trump is so focused

32:39

on tariffs. And I do think he'll

32:41

put higher tariffs on Chinese goods,

32:43

maybe not the 60% across the

32:46

board, but something meaningful. Also, because

32:48

China is not going to be able

32:50

to sit when all that stuff happens.

32:53

They're not going to look too weak.

32:55

They're going to need to hit back.

32:57

So, I mean, it's interesting, when I was

32:59

in China last a couple months ago,

33:02

and I didn't meet with Xi, but

33:04

I did meet with Paulup euro members,

33:06

and I had a couple hours with

33:08

Wang Yi, who's the foreign minister, and

33:10

I got a lot of questions about,

33:13

hey, do you think Elon? Might be

33:15

able to help us keep things

33:17

stable because he's been over here.

33:19

He's got a lot of business

33:22

here The back channel Secretary of

33:24

State Elon Musk He presents himself

33:26

to the Chinese as look I can

33:29

help smooth things out And it's a

33:31

it's a very very interesting question now

33:33

if if Elon were to show up

33:35

on the first phone call that

33:37

Trump has With the Chinese

33:39

with she's and paying that

33:41

would be a very significant

33:44

message Trump is the first

33:46

president ever to invite any

33:48

Chinese leader to the inauguration

33:50

and the Chinese are going

33:52

to send a senior envoy

33:54

and it'll be very interesting

33:57

if Elon meets him and how

33:59

that goes. But as much as

34:01

I think that Elon is in

34:03

a unique position to influence policy

34:05

and to change, you know, sort

34:07

of other countries' policies, I don't

34:10

think he's going to put a

34:12

lot of chips on China. Because

34:14

it's too hard to do, and

34:16

I don't think he's going to

34:18

want to fail. All right, let

34:20

me ask you about three distinct,

34:22

three countries in what your sense

34:25

of what... The leadership of these

34:27

countries are going to look like

34:29

at the end of calendar year

34:31

25. Let me start with Iran.

34:33

I don't know how quickly Iran

34:35

will fall, but doesn't it feel

34:37

like it's going to fall? We

34:40

just don't know when? Yeah, I

34:42

wrote nine years ago, and I've

34:44

gotten crap for this publicly, that

34:46

within 10 years, the US-Iran relationship

34:48

would be closer than the US-

34:50

Saudi relationship. And one more year

34:53

to make that happen. One more

34:55

year. I doubt I'm going to

34:57

be right. But I think if

34:59

I had said that eventually you

35:01

might get there because there may

35:03

be a new regime. Yeah. Well,

35:05

that's the whole point is that

35:08

the Iranian people are overwhelmingly oriented

35:10

towards the US. They're very Western

35:12

oriented. There's a huge diaspora. There's

35:14

a lot of engagement and communication.

35:16

Women have a very strong role

35:18

there. There's civil society. All that

35:20

so when the Iran regime eventually

35:23

falls. It's going to be a

35:25

very, very new day for US-Iran

35:27

relations, where with Saudi Arabia, MBS

35:29

has done extraordinary things, but within

35:31

the context of an incredibly conservative

35:33

Petro state. So there's only so

35:36

fast that he can move the

35:38

population. There's only so fast he

35:40

can move the government, the country.

35:42

But I do think that there's

35:44

going to be pressure from Israel

35:46

and that in terms of direct

35:48

military strikes, espionage, all of that.

35:51

And there'll be pressure from Trump.

35:53

with maximum sanctions on Iran's oil

35:55

production and export. So they're going

35:57

to help nudge them. across the

35:59

finish line. Can you imagine their

36:01

nuclear facilities being attacked by any

36:03

entity other than the United States?

36:06

It wouldn't be effective against by

36:08

Israel. That's what I think, right?

36:10

The only way this happened is

36:12

if we do it. And I've

36:14

been convinced we will. I've been

36:16

convinced we will. You are convinced

36:18

we will. I am convinced we

36:21

will, because we're not going to

36:23

be able to stop Israel, and

36:25

we'd rather do it and not

36:27

let Israel basically fail at doing

36:29

anything. I think that Trump will

36:31

try lots of things before he's

36:34

willing to actually directly bomb nuclear

36:36

facilities. He, again, think about how

36:38

much he was willing to tolerate

36:40

Iran do all sorts of stupid

36:42

shit, including, you know, even attacks

36:44

on bases that the U.S. were

36:46

occupying in Iraq with American soldiers

36:49

getting hurt and didn't respond until

36:51

he finally... ordered the assassination of

36:53

Soleimani. And the Emirates and the

36:55

Saudis were so angry at Trump

36:57

at that point, because they felt

36:59

like, you know, we're getting attacked

37:01

by Iran in its proxies and

37:04

you're not doing anything. Remember, the

37:06

largest refinery in the world was

37:08

hit by Iranian drones and America

37:10

didn't do anything. So people were

37:12

really upset about that. Now, if

37:14

the US were to hit Iran's

37:17

nuclear facilities in that spectacular fashion,

37:19

it might bring down the regime,

37:21

but... before that happened, you would

37:23

see oil prices over 100. I

37:25

think you would see the straits

37:27

and for moves become impassable. And

37:29

I'm not sure that Trump wants

37:32

that on him. So that's the

37:34

question. Well, you're not, I think

37:36

that's a fair assessment. You're not

37:38

wrong about Trump's personal, right? How

37:40

much does he want to own

37:42

rattling markets? And you actually bring

37:44

me some, the greatest, the most

37:47

effective guardrail on Trump are going

37:49

to be markets, right? Yeah. That's

37:51

right. Should, well, most effective. It's

37:53

certainly. and effective. I mean, the

37:55

US economy is doing so well

37:57

right now that I think he

38:00

can tolerate market pushback on taking

38:02

out some illegal immigrants, deporting them.

38:04

He can tolerate it on some

38:06

tariffs before it moves them much.

38:08

So I think he has more

38:10

flexibility. But if suddenly we were

38:12

in a bare market because of

38:15

things that Trump obviously did, he

38:17

would not be happy about that.

38:19

That's pretty clear. All right. So

38:21

you sort of. It's just a

38:23

matter of when this happens in

38:25

Iran, maybe it's this year, maybe

38:27

it's like, you know, it's like

38:30

bankruptcy, right? It happens slowly, then

38:32

quickly. Exactly, like Syria, like what

38:34

we just saw with Assad, you're

38:36

like, yeah, I thought Syria was

38:38

going to last for longer and

38:40

then fell apart because the Turks

38:42

didn't want the rebels to overtake

38:45

Damascus and the Russians and Iranians

38:47

were there and yet it turned

38:49

out that two weeks and boom,

38:51

boom, so there you go. Germany.

38:54

What's that government look like a

38:56

year from now? Oh, that's easy.

38:58

That is a center-right, Frederick Mertz

39:01

led, Chancellor Led, Grand Coalition, closer

39:03

to Macron, close to EU leadership.

39:05

I have no... Hermit Cole? Is

39:08

this not since Cole? Will we

39:10

have that kind of ideology or

39:12

is that go back to them

39:14

further? I think that's right. And

39:17

I don't understand why Elon... has

39:19

been so public in saying the

39:21

AFD is going to win when

39:24

the AFD has literally no path

39:26

to power. I mean, literally none.

39:28

It doesn't, it does not. Well,

39:30

they even be part of the

39:33

governing coalition. No, absolutely not. They

39:35

refuse. They refuse to have AFD

39:37

be part of it. What's his,

39:40

I mean, this is where there's

39:42

a naivetator, Elon, right? It almost

39:44

looks like at times it's a

39:46

tantrum, but I assume there's some

39:49

method to this madness. are ideologically

39:51

aligned with them. They're the people

39:53

that say he's wonderful and most

39:56

of the country doesn't like him.

39:58

So they're the pro free speech

40:00

no matter what, right? I mean

40:02

like throw out the immigrants even

40:05

if they're citizens by the way,

40:07

they want deportation. of citizens that

40:09

haven't integrated the AFT said that.

40:12

I mean, this is some quite

40:14

serious stuff and Elon's very deeply

40:16

comfortable with that. So, I mean,

40:18

in some regards, Elon is more

40:21

ideologically consistent than Trump is. South

40:23

Korea, what, how did we get

40:25

to this? And why does it

40:28

look like polar, like our polarization,

40:30

but on steroid? A Democratic party

40:32

that will come back in, the

40:34

Democratic Party already has a majority

40:37

in Parliament, they won the last

40:39

parliamentary elections, they will now have

40:41

a consistent, consolidated leadership with the

40:44

new president that will eventually be

40:46

elected sometime in spring. That impeachment

40:48

will be upheld by the constitutional

40:50

court who have now had two

40:53

new appointees, they had three justices

40:55

that were not seated, and that

40:57

led to the impeachment of the

41:00

second president. Why is this happened?

41:02

Why is this happened? because they

41:04

have a horrible leader. This guy

41:06

was incompetent, he was unpopular, the

41:09

fact that he was leading a

41:11

government with a parliament that was

41:13

doing everything they could to oppose

41:16

him, including investigating his wife and

41:18

investigating like ministers of his cabinet,

41:20

and he was very brittle, he

41:22

didn't have any friends, he didn't

41:25

have good experience leading. How did

41:27

he get there? For somebody to

41:29

do this sort of... bad at

41:32

this. It's a funny story. How

41:34

the heck did this happen? If

41:36

you ever met him, he's a

41:38

very, very odd and uncomfortable non-retail

41:41

politician. Like if you think DeSantis

41:43

ended up being bad kissing babies,

41:45

he's nothing like June. But when

41:47

he ran, he used this AI

41:50

deep fake that became like the

41:52

June that was campaigning. And they

41:54

programmed that you to be more

41:57

charismatic, a little better looking, but

41:59

also to give better answers. You're

42:01

being serious. This was like a

42:03

fake. candidate. That was a fake

42:06

candidate and it turned out that

42:08

the fake candidate was quite popular

42:10

but the real person doesn't govern

42:13

for shit. Yeah. Wow. I mean

42:15

this is obviously the dystopian future

42:17

we all fear right that this

42:19

manufactured AI or whatever can start

42:22

to sort of create mythical figures

42:24

or mythical ideas. Has the

42:26

population recovered from this? Are they

42:28

put in safeguards to stop this?

42:31

They have safeguards. Is there any

42:33

movement to prevent a future version

42:35

of this? Well, not in terms

42:37

of how they campaign. But I

42:39

mean, the fact is he declared

42:41

martial law and the people overturned

42:43

it within six hours. That was

42:45

impressive. I mean, it does show

42:47

you it's a healthy democracy in

42:49

that. It's a strong democracy. The

42:51

military is professional and independent. The

42:54

UN managed to get the head

42:56

of the military to support him,

42:58

who then had to resign in

43:00

ignominy. I mean, South Korea's response

43:02

to this, like Brazil's response to

43:04

January 8th in that country, was

43:06

strong and resilient. There are problems

43:08

in both democracies, but ultimately, they've

43:10

done a better job in constraining

43:12

clearly extra legal behavior than the

43:14

Americans have. Generally. Is it fair

43:16

to say that the entire Western

43:19

small D democratic world has shifted

43:21

to the right? No. It's fair

43:23

to say that the entire small

43:25

D democratic world has shifted to

43:27

populism and anti-establishment sentiment. If I

43:29

look at Mexico, it's one of

43:31

the strongest leaders, most consolidated political

43:33

parties in the small D democratic

43:35

world today, Lopez Obrador. to shine

43:37

bomb and I mean they've got

43:39

a constitutional majority now right I

43:41

mean they control everything and that's

43:44

because the people thought that the

43:46

the oligarchs, the business interests, the

43:48

place that become a kleptocracy and

43:50

the narco gangs, and they voted

43:52

against it. It's more anti-establishment of

43:54

the right than anti-establishment of the

43:56

left, but you're seeing both. Chile,

43:58

did you saw the left? Now

44:00

the right's going to come back,

44:02

a lot of places. Feeling this

44:04

in Europe, I guess, then, is

44:07

more to the right other than

44:09

the UK, which was just sort

44:11

of reactionary to the conservative majority

44:13

there. Yeah, I mean, you know.

44:15

Let's, you'll see that in France,

44:17

I think with Le Pen, probably

44:19

doing much better in 2027. Germany,

44:21

not so much, the far left

44:23

and the far right, are both

44:25

making ground right now in Germany,

44:27

but the center is holding pretty

44:29

strong. Italy, it was, the far

44:32

right did better, but then the

44:34

far right moved towards the center

44:36

and has become much more pro-European

44:38

in terms of like Noah Tallexit.

44:40

and aligning with the Europeans on

44:42

Russia, other sorts of things. Poland,

44:44

much more pro-Europe and defeated what

44:46

was a far-right government there. So

44:48

again, I think you are probably,

44:50

maybe you have 7030, 7525, but

44:52

it's really an anti-establishment, right, depending

44:54

on where you are. So does

44:57

that mean that going, let's go

44:59

back, let's end where we began,

45:01

you. We joked about the Prime

45:03

Minister of Italy being sort of

45:05

the most stable and strongest leader

45:07

in Europe. Is she the leader

45:09

of Europe right now, in our

45:11

mind, the way Merkel had been

45:13

or Macron had sort of saw

45:15

themselves this way? No, the leader

45:17

of Europe is actually Ursula von

45:20

der Ley. Actually, the Europeans are

45:22

becoming European. They need, they know

45:24

they need. You feel like the

45:26

EU is really, really actually starting

45:28

to speak more for... All of

45:30

Europe. Yeah, at a time that

45:32

the United States increasingly are putting

45:34

power in one man, the Europeans

45:36

are putting power in a supernational

45:38

institutions. It's a radically different worldview.

45:40

It's not very productive. It's not

45:42

leading to a lot of economic

45:45

growth. I was just going to

45:47

say that seems to be the

45:49

frustration. That is the frustration. The

45:51

whole point of creating the EU

45:53

is to create an economic competitor

45:55

to the United States, wasn't it?

45:57

Part of it, I mean, part

45:59

of it was also not to

46:01

have Europeans go to war against

46:03

Europeans again. Fair enough. Right. There

46:05

was this dream of having this

46:07

great economic zone. Yes, and the

46:10

Europeans are much wealthier today than

46:12

they were, but they have fallen

46:14

way off from the Americans in

46:16

terms of per capita income and

46:18

productivity, and I expect that's going

46:20

to continue. But they are working

46:22

very hard on collective security vis-a-vis

46:24

Russia. They're working very hard on

46:26

collective economic policies, technology policies, and

46:28

the rest. And I think that

46:30

that is holding. And I think

46:33

that there are things that they

46:35

do, they do, they really admire

46:37

American growth. They're angry that they

46:39

can't have that productivity. admire American

46:41

kleptocracy. They do not admire American

46:43

political dysfunction. So, you know, it

46:45

is possible that the Europeans at

46:47

some level, the Europeans are prepared

46:49

to accept a trade that says

46:51

we're just not going to consume

46:53

as much as the Americans because

46:55

a consumption-led economy is a bad

46:58

society. There are, I mean, I

47:00

don't know if the Europeans would

47:02

be comfortable putting it quite as

47:04

starkly as I just did. But

47:06

I think that there is absolutely

47:08

that debate is playing out. And

47:10

finally, how would you assess America

47:12

if you weren't an American? The

47:14

democracy, its stability, and its reliability

47:16

as a partner? Far less reliable

47:18

as a partner, far more transactional,

47:20

but much more powerful in a

47:23

relational way. I would note that

47:25

America is not in decline in

47:27

any way other than its political

47:29

system and values. It's about the

47:31

only thing we're declining, right, where

47:33

our economy is booming, our security,

47:35

our... ability to fight war is

47:37

probably as good as ever. I

47:39

mean, we can, we'll find out

47:41

how technologically, you know, advanced we

47:43

get, but still. I mean, how

47:46

I would look at America, I

47:48

would say that I increasingly feel

47:50

like I'm living with the law

47:52

of the jungle, and I think

47:54

the Americans are the apex predator.

47:56

That's the way I would look

47:58

at the United States. And, you

48:00

know, it's a great place to

48:02

be an apex predator, but it's

48:04

real dangerous for everybody else. Well,

48:06

it's all dangerous for everybody else.

48:08

entire dinosaur population. I preferred your

48:11

college football analogy. That was a

48:13

better one. It's a better one.

48:15

It's friendlier. It's a little friendly.

48:17

What's your, who's your college football

48:19

team of choice? Look, I went

48:21

to two lane undergrad and I

48:23

mean, I see young people actually

48:25

wearing two lane shirts now and

48:27

I mean, you know. How about

48:29

the fact that your quarterback went

48:31

into the portal and got four

48:33

million from Duke? Yeah, it's a

48:36

whole new world brother. It's a

48:38

whole new world. They're going to

48:40

Oregon. They're going all over the

48:42

place. Yeah, I don't like that.

48:44

I think that I like them

48:46

making money. I don't, I, but

48:48

the thing, I like college football

48:50

more than NFL because there's so

48:52

much pride and excitement and support

48:54

for your team and that's breaking

48:56

down. And that's breaking down. Look,

48:59

I'm a fan of the free

49:01

market and the egalitarian, I'm glad

49:03

that the SEC can't stockpile talent.

49:05

And that what the NIL has,

49:07

what money has done is spread

49:09

it around, right? And we've seen

49:11

it. You know, Alabama can't have

49:13

three great quarterbacks in a row

49:15

like they did when they had

49:17

like Jaylon herds and two Mac

49:19

Joe. You just are not going

49:21

to have that. Those guys are

49:24

going to transfer and go make

49:26

money elsewhere. So that's why you

49:28

got Boise State showing up. And,

49:30

you know, so that's the part.

49:32

But they're fighting, it's so funny,

49:34

it's like the forces, the powerful

49:36

forces within college football are fighting

49:38

what's going to make it, what

49:40

could make it, what gives it

49:42

I think a competitive advantage over

49:44

the NFL. Yeah, yeah, it's true.

49:46

It is. I mean, you go

49:49

to one of those games and

49:51

100,000 crazy fans and they're there

49:53

and they're all like... an NFL

49:55

team that could draw 100,000 that

49:57

isn't the Super Bowl. Super Bowl

49:59

can't. But nobody else would. But

50:01

the fact is, there's 15 or

50:03

20 stadiums, and we know this,

50:05

that can grab 100. It doesn't.

50:07

And like everything else in the

50:09

United States, fragmentation, atomization, you know,

50:12

and when that's happening with our

50:14

citizens, it's happening with our teams.

50:16

No, it is. I always just,

50:18

college football is the closest thing

50:20

we have to European soccer. Yeah,

50:22

in America. They beat us to

50:24

that, though, at unruly fans. Oh,

50:26

no, no. They're definitely better. Both

50:28

Europeans and the South Americans, that's

50:30

for sure. Ian, it's a happy

50:32

new year, brother. Great to see

50:34

you. Okay. Tell you. Before we

50:37

go, here's a... Before we go,

50:39

here's a question from Chris in

50:41

Portland, Oregon. And Chris asked, as

50:43

a betting man, what do you

50:45

think the odds are that Trump

50:47

completes his term without being... a

50:49

fair point. Well, let's see, I'm

50:51

going to actually tackle this as

50:53

if I were fan dual, right?

50:55

And so what they would do

50:57

is that impeached, yes, impeached, no,

50:59

right? Is there going to be,

51:02

is it, you know, if the

51:04

odds are more likely that he

51:06

would be impeached, you'd have like

51:08

a minus number, and if you

51:10

think the odds are less likely

51:12

he would be impeached, then the

51:14

yes number would be a plus

51:16

number. I do think it's a

51:18

plus number. The fact that Donald

51:20

Trump is not going to be

51:22

on the ballot ever again, I

51:25

say this, Bill Clinton wasn't going

51:27

to be a ballot again and

51:29

yet House Republicans decided to impeach

51:31

him anyway after the 98 midterms,

51:33

when he only had two years

51:35

in office, which sort of at

51:37

the time, a lot of people

51:39

said, hey, at this point, just

51:41

let it go, let the public

51:43

make this decision, whether they want

51:45

to punish the party or not.

51:47

Or frankly, one would argue the

51:50

98 midterms. The public did speak

51:52

and they said, hey, don't do

51:54

this. Or they would have handed

51:56

Republicans more power than they actually

51:58

did after than I needed midterms.

52:00

So I guess I don't think

52:02

the appetite is there, but you

52:04

know, I don't think anybody thought

52:06

he'd be impeached twice in his

52:08

first term. Like that was not

52:10

going to be, that was a,

52:13

that was probably a plus 900

52:15

on your fan dual betting slip

52:17

there. That was not a, I

52:19

might, you know, I think maybe,

52:21

you know, filed the, you know,

52:23

impeachment, the house impeaching, maybe at

52:25

a certain level, he might have

52:27

had a 50-50-50 proposition there on

52:29

once. I think

52:31

given that it would be in the

52:34

last two years, given that if Democrats

52:36

win, they're more likely to win on

52:38

some economic issues or, you know, economic-related

52:40

issues like health care, then they are

52:43

just about it being about Donald Trump

52:45

and his fitness for office, and every

52:47

one of his three campaigns. And the

52:49

voters have spoken on that. So, um...

52:52

I think the only way he gets

52:54

impeached is if Republicans want to impeach

52:56

him. Like you are not going to

52:59

see a partisan impeachment of him this

53:01

time on that front. So you're asking

53:03

me the odds. I think they're plus

53:05

odds. You know, I think it's basically

53:08

in your, if you believe, there's probably

53:10

a 10% chance that happens because he

53:12

may, he may, you know, be so...

53:14

uninterested in following the norms. Maybe there's

53:17

a little bit of Matador in him.

53:19

He's almost like daring the bulls to

53:21

do it, that sort of thing. But,

53:23

you know, if you ask me, you

53:26

have the appetite of the party, the

53:28

Democratic side, probably kind of low, the

53:30

timing, not going to be on the

53:32

ballot again. So I'd put it at

53:35

a 10% chance or less. So I

53:37

think your actual odds are in the

53:39

plus 900 plus 1000 plus 1100. All

53:42

right, Chris. Appreciate that question. You can't

53:44

believe I do. to act I

53:46

was was Jeff mom. I'm, uh,

53:48

Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr.

53:51

President. You've got a guys

53:53

so much. let's be Chuck Todd.

53:55

And if a question? about

53:57

him. You've been as you

54:00

know by the Chuck Todd

54:02

been listening to

54:04

the Chuck Todd Today's episode

54:06

is Today's episode No, great.

54:09

Mark to Murray's wrap. Can you

54:11

use it for some be both

54:13

back. those videos? Thanks back.

54:15

for listening. I'm going

54:18

to be right

54:20

back. We'll back. We'll

54:22

back. back. We'll

54:25

We'll back. We'll back.

54:27

We'll back. We'll back.

54:33

back.