French Friday 2026 Predictions - CourtneyR.dev's 2nd Brain

French Friday: 2026 Predictions 🔗 **Source:** [French Friday: 2026 Predictions](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA9x33rpP2I) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: [predictions, politics, culture] > author: Phil Vischer > source: Holy Post Media > reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA9x33rpP2I > date created: 2024-12-28 10:30 > > # 🏷️ Title: French Friday: 2026 Predictions >  ## 🧰 Action Inbox - [H1] Monitor Supreme Court retirement announcements in June 2026 — potential for Trump's 4th appointment #politics - [H2] Watch for state-level social media youth bans similar to Australia's model — constitutional challenges likely #technology - [H3] Track constitutional amendment movement around pardon power reform — bipartisan momentum building #governance ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [📚 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🛡️ DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) ### 🔗 References - [Holy Post Media](https://holypost.com) - [French Friday Series](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqnQiEBzjEjKyRh6P-7_kl3PQJrp0H4) ## 📝 Summary Phil Vischer and David French engage in a predictions game for 2026, analyzing various cultural and political scenarios ranging from entertainment to constitutional amendments. They discuss movie blockbusters, political shifts in Texas, social media regulation, potential presidential succession, Supreme Court appointments, transgender identity trends, and constitutional reform around pardon powers. The conversation reveals bipartisan concerns about technology's impact on youth and growing consensus around certain regulatory issues. ## 📖 Main Content The hosts use a sports podcast format ("Overreaction Monday") to evaluate 2026 predictions across entertainment, politics, and culture. Key themes include Christopher Nolan's potential dominance with "The Odyssey," possible Democratic victories in traditionally red states, youth protection from harmful digital content, Trump administration dynamics, Supreme Court changes, demographic shifts in gender identity, and constitutional reform movements. ## 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:00](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=0) — [H1] Introduction to Predictions Format - Key idea: Using "Overreaction Monday" sports format to evaluate 2026 predictions - Evidence: "Rich says is that a fair assessment an overreaction and they kind of talk about" #### ⏱️ [04:32](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=272) — [H2] Christopher Nolan's "The Odyssey" as Biggest 2026 Hit - Key idea: Despite major sequels, Nolan's original take on ancient story could dominate - Evidence: "Oppenheimer grossed almost a billion roughly... it was a film... There wasn't any action in it" #### ⏱️ [08:45](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=525) — [H3] Texas Democratic Senator Possibility - Key idea: Potential for first Democratic Texas senator since 1988 depends on candidate matchup - Evidence: "lowest swing to the Democrats has been 13 points... all the rest were between like 16 and 28" #### ⏱️ [12:30](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=750) — [H2] Social Media Youth Bans Gaining Momentum - Key idea: States likely to follow Australia's model despite constitutional challenges - Evidence: "banning phones in schools is an 8020 issue... better outcomes academically, socially" #### ⏱️ [18:15](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=1095) — [H3] Sports Gambling and Pornography Harm Discussion - Key idea: Easy digital access transforms traditional vices into unprecedented social problems - Evidence: "combination of easy access to porn and sports gambling is doing a heck of a lot more to harm young men than ideological issues in schools" #### ⏱️ [25:40](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=1540) — [H1] JD Vance Presidential Succession Speculation - Key idea: Multiple scenarios could lead to Trump's departure and Vance's ascension - Evidence: "if there's a midterm wipeout and Trump is invisible decline... MAGA is just too full of ambitious scorpions" #### ⏱️ [32:20](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=1940) — [H3] Spielberg UFO Disclosure Theory - Key idea: New Spielberg film might coincide with government UFO technology admission - Evidence: "Spielberg has been working on this topic since the 1970s with Close Encounters" #### ⏱️ [38:50](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=2330) — [H2] Trump's Fourth Supreme Court Justice - Key idea: Aging Republican justices may retire before potential 2027 Democratic Senate - Evidence: "Thomas is 77 right now... if he didn't do it next term, he might not have an opportunity for a long time" #### ⏱️ [45:15](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=2715) — [H3] Transgender Identification Decline Continues - Key idea: Young adult transgender identification peaked in 2020 and continues dropping - Evidence: "Since peaking in 2020 at 8.6%, the number of young adults who identify as transgender will continue to decline" #### ⏱️ [52:30](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=3150) — [H2] Constitutional Amendment Movement on Pardons - Key idea: Bipartisan anger over pardon abuse could drive constitutional reform - Evidence: "we're just a few more pardons away maybe for it being located in the pardon power" ## 📚 References - [Holy Post Media](https://holypost.com) - [David French Substack](https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com) - [Rich Eisen Show](https://www.richeisenshow.com) - [Jonathan Haidt Research](https://jonathanhaidt.com) - [Ryan Burge Statistical Analysis](https://religioninpublic.blog) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase - Entertainment predictions favor Christopher Nolan's "The Odyssey" over franchise sequels due to his proven track record with serious films and audience appetite for original storytelling - Political forecasts suggest potential Democratic breakthroughs in red states like Texas, dependent on candidate quality and Republican primary outcomes - Cultural trends show declining transgender identification among youth and growing consensus around regulating harmful digital content for minors ## 📰 Newsletter **2026 Predictions: From Blockbusters to Constitutional Amendments** Phil and David's prediction game reveals fascinating insights about where our culture and politics might be headed. Key takeaways include growing bipartisan momentum around protecting youth from digital harms, potential political realignments in traditionally safe states, and the possibility of significant institutional changes. Most intriguing is their discussion of constitutional reform around pardon powers - suggesting Americans across political lines are reaching a breaking point with executive abuse. This could mark a return to meaningful constitutional amendments after decades of gridlock. For WordPress communities, the broader themes around digital regulation and youth protection are particularly relevant as platform policies continue evolving. Resources: [Digital Wellness](https://digitalwellness.org/), [Constitutional Convention Project](https://conventionofstates.com/), [Bipartisan Policy Center](https://bipartisanpolicy.org/) ## ✅ Action Items #### Community - Engagement: Monitor state-level social media regulation for youth protection precedents - Advocacy: Support bipartisan efforts around digital wellness and constitutional reform - Education: Promote media literacy and healthy technology use practices #### WordPress - Policy: Develop youth-friendly content moderation guidelines and age verification systems - Community: Create resources for parents and educators about digital wellness - Documentation: Update privacy and safety documentation to address emerging concerns ## 🧪 Hypotheses - Christopher Nolan's filmmaking reputation will overcome franchise fatigue in 2026 box office - Bipartisan anger over pardon abuse will drive constitutional amendment momentum - Youth transgender identification decline reflects cultural rather than intrinsic factors - Supreme Court retirements will occur before potential 2027 Democratic Senate control ### 📊 Methodology - Analyze box office trends and director performance data for entertainment predictions - Review polling data on constitutional amendment support across party lines - Examine demographic survey trends on gender identity over time - Study Supreme Court retirement patterns and political timing ### ❓ Questions - Will growing consensus on youth digital protection overcome constitutional free speech challenges? - How will changing media consumption habits affect traditional blockbuster predictions? - Can constitutional amendment processes adapt to address modern governance challenges? ### 🔮 Future Research - Track state-by-state social media regulation attempts and legal challenges - Monitor Supreme Court justice health and retirement signals - Analyze demographic trends in gender identity across different age cohorts ### 💡 Implications - Practice: Content creators should prepare for stricter youth protection regulations - Policy: Constitutional amendment procedures may see renewed relevance and use - Education: Digital literacy and media criticism become increasingly essential skills - Governance: Executive power limitations may face renewed scrutiny and reform ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment Reading level estimate: Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 12-14 #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: YouTube video format with visual engagement - Improve: Add charts showing demographic trends and political polling data #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: Full audio conversation with natural discussion flow - Improve: Add chapter markers for easy navigation to specific topics #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: Rich dialogue with detailed explanations and analogies - Improve: Include glossary of political and cultural terms discussed #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: Prediction game format encourages active engagement - Improve: Create interactive prediction tracking worksheet #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: Structured prediction format with reasoning and evidence - Improve: Add probability tables and decision trees for each prediction #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - Present: Conversational format between two hosts with different perspectives - Improve: Include discussion prompts for group prediction exercises #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - Present: Individual reflection opportunities within prediction framework - Improve: Add personal prediction tracking and reflection questions #### 🌿 Naturalistic learners - Present: Connections between cultural trends and broader social ecosystems - Improve: Explore environmental factors driving demographic and political changes ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: Clear chapter structure and topic headings in video - Improve: Add detailed audio descriptions for visual references #### Keyboard navigation - Present: Standard YouTube player controls accessible via keyboard - Improve: Provide transcript with timestamp navigation links #### Contrast and readability - Present: Standard YouTube player interface meets basic contrast requirements - Improve: Ensure any custom graphics meet WCAG 2.2 standards #### Text resizing and reflow - Present: YouTube interface responsive to browser zoom settings - Improve: Provide separate text-only transcript option #### Media and captions - Present: Auto-generated captions available through YouTube - Improve: Professional human-reviewed captions for accuracy #### Forms and interactions - Present: Basic video controls accessible - Improve: Add interactive prediction tracking features with proper labels ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: Discussion includes multiple regional and demographic perspectives - Improve: Include more diverse voices on cultural and political trends #### Inclusive language - Present: Generally respectful discussion of sensitive topics like gender identity - Improve: More explicit acknowledgment of different lived experiences #### Neurodiversity support - Present: Clear conversation structure with topic transitions - Improve: Add content warnings for potentially triggering political discussions #### Representation - Present: Two white male hosts discussing primarily American political landscape - Improve: Include perspectives from more diverse demographic backgrounds #### Psychological safety - Present: Respectful disagreement and acknowledgment of uncertainty - Improve: More explicit framing of predictions as speculation rather than certainty ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - Deductive strength: Well-structured if-then reasoning about political scenarios - Inductive strength: Good use of historical patterns and current trends for predictions - Causal reasoning: Clear connections drawn between demographic shifts and political outcomes - Analogical strength: Effective use of sports gambling/pornography comparison to social media #### Fallacies - Appeal to authority: Some reliance on unnamed "close observers" for Supreme Court predictions - Hasty generalization: Limited data points used to project broad cultural trends #### Tone of voice - Overall tone: Conversational, analytical, generally respectful with appropriate uncertainty acknowledgment ### 🛡️ DARVO Analysis - Deny: No significant denials or minimization patterns observed - Attack: No attacks on accusers present in this predictions discussion - Reverse victim/offender: Not applicable to this content type - Emotional cues and rhetoric: Balanced analytical discussion without manipulative emotional appeals ## 🎯 Conclusion The 2026 predictions reveal underlying currents of cultural and political change, particularly around technology regulation, institutional reform, and demographic shifts. The most significant insight is growing bipartisan consensus on issues like youth digital protection and executive power limitations, suggesting potential for meaningful governance reforms despite political polarization. These predictions serve as useful frameworks for understanding current trends and preparing for likely future developments. ## 🧱 Refactor Appendix ### 📚 Literature Split Pad Purpose: Stage CEE units that become Literature notes. Split level: H3 ### [H1] Entertainment predictions favor original storytelling over franchise content > [!quote] [French Friday: 2026 Predictions](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA9x33rpP2I) by [[Phil Vischer]] via [[Holy Post Media]]. Published 2024-12-28. Accessed 2024-12-28. > "Nolan's last movie, Oppenheimer, grossed almost a billion roughly... And it was a talk movie." Christopher Nolan's proven ability to make philosophical films financially successful suggests audience hunger for substantive content. [view highlight](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=272#H1) #entertainment #filmmaking ID:rw_nolan_odyssey ### [H2] Bipartisan momentum building for constitutional reform on pardon powers > [!quote] [French Friday: 2026 Predictions](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA9x33rpP2I) > "we're just a few more pardons away maybe for it being located in the pardon power" Cross-party anger over executive abuse of clemency could drive rare constitutional amendment. [view highlight](https://youtu.be/HA9x33rpP2I?t=3150#H2) #governance #constitution ID:rw_pardon_reform --- ### 🔖 Atomic Split Pad (Zettel Candidates) Purpose: Promote reusable claims into Atomic notes. Split level: H4 #### [Z1] Digital accessibility creates unprecedented addiction potential - Traditional vices become exponentially more harmful with smartphone access - Pointer to gambling/pornography discussion around 18:15 - Links: [[Digital-Wellness]] [[Youth-Protection]] #### [Z2] Primary voters skew toward populist extremes on both sides - Exhausted majority doesn't participate in primaries as much as activated bases - Pointer to Texas Senate race analysis around 12:30 - Links: [[Electoral-Dynamics]] [[Political-Polarization]] --- ### ✏️ Fleeting Queue Purpose: Capture quick actions for Fleeting notes. - [F1] Research Rich Eisen "Overreaction Monday" format for content ideas — effective discussion framework #fleeting #content - [F2] Track Supreme Court retirement announcements June 2 --- ## Full Transcript [00:01] Guess what day it is? [00:04] >> It's French fry day. It's French fry [00:06] day. So grab your prize and say hooray. [00:09] Drench is here to play on French Friday. [00:13] It's [music] French fry day. [00:17] >> Hello and welcome to French Friday [00:19] everyone. Brought to you by Holy Post [00:20] Media and Cyberdine Systems. I'm joined [00:23] by David French. [laughter] [00:25] >> Cyberdine Systems. I caught that. We're [00:28] talking about the future. Why not? [00:30] >> Love it. Yes. [00:32] >> Uh, good to see you, David. And the [00:34] holidays are upon us. We are recording [00:35] this before Christmas. This episode will [00:37] be coming out after Christmas. I was a [00:39] little concerned that with the speed [00:40] with which news is moving these days, [00:43] >> we record this and current events come [00:45] upon us and it's not it's going to be [00:47] irrelevant. So, I wanted to take a a [00:49] different approach to this week's or [00:51] this month's French Friday episode. So, [00:53] here's what we're going to do. I [00:55] occasionally watch or listen to the Rich [00:57] Eisen show. It's mostly sports, although [00:59] he gets into pop culture and other [01:01] things. And on his show, they do a [01:04] regular segment called Overreaction [01:06] Mondays. [01:07] >> Are you familiar with this? [01:08] >> I love it. [01:08] >> Uh yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Overreaction [01:10] Monday. [01:10] >> That's kind of a in sports podcasting. [01:13] That's sort of a whole thing. [01:14] >> It's a whole thing, right? In sports [01:15] podcasting. So they it's an idea where [01:16] after the weekend of sports particularly [01:19] football right now comes in and with one [01:21] of his co-hosts uh various ideas are [01:25] presented and then Rich says is that a [01:28] fair assessment an overreaction and they [01:31] kind of talk about so I thought being [01:33] the end of the year [01:34] >> we could kind of do a list of [01:37] predictions for 2026 that I will present [01:39] to you and then you can tell me whether [01:43] >> it's a good take it's a moderate take or [01:46] it's a total overreaction, nuts, crazy. [01:50] Shut up with that. You don't know what [01:51] you're talking about. Now, I'm not [01:52] necessarily advocating for all of these. [01:54] I'm using them more as topic starters so [01:57] that we it would generate conversation [01:59] as we anticipate what we have to look [02:01] forward to in 2026. Some of these are [02:03] more political, some of them are more [02:06] cultural, some are pop cultury. We'll [02:08] see how many we get to. So, David, would [02:10] you prefer to start with something [02:12] political or cultural? [02:15] >> Let's Let's go light and go cultural [02:18] first. [02:18] >> Okay, let's go light and [02:20] >> let's ease into this. Okay, here's my [02:22] first one. [02:24] >> Despite a slate of blockbuster sequels [02:26] coming out next year, including the Dune [02:29] Messiah movie, Avengers Doomsday, Toy [02:32] Story 5, a whole bunch of other familiar [02:34] ones. The biggest hit of 2026 will be [02:38] Christopher Nolan's The Odyssey. [02:43] >> I'm going to say [02:46] plausible to verging on probable. [02:48] >> Okay. All right. Have you seen much [02:50] coverage of this film yet? [02:52] >> I have seen I've consumed as much as I [02:54] possibly can consume. [02:56] >> And and the reason why I say plausible [02:58] to the point of probable is two reasons. [03:01] One, Avatar is coming out in the next [03:04] few days before 2026. So, if Avatar was [03:09] coming out in 2026, that would probably [03:10] be the biggest movie of the year. [03:12] >> Are you a fan of the Avatar movies? [03:14] >> I enjoy the heck out of them. I really [03:15] do. [03:15] >> I honestly haven't I I saw the first one [03:17] when it came out like, you know, 20 [03:19] years ago, but I I have not seen [03:21] anything since then. I mean, I don't [03:23] enjoy them to the point of like two [03:25] billion in box office, you know, like [03:27] that that the way the first one and the [03:29] second one are are number I believe one [03:32] in three all time. I don't think they're [03:35] one in three all time [03:37] >> in quality. Even if you say of sci-fi [03:39] quality. Um, but I really do enjoy them [03:42] and they are undeniable box office [03:44] juggernauts. But [03:46] >> putting aside Avatar, consider this. [03:49] Nolan's last movie, Oppenheimer, grossed [03:52] almost a billion roughly. I mean, a [03:54] billion adjacent to a billion dollars. [03:57] And it was a talk movie. [03:59] >> Yes. [04:01] >> With like it it was a it was a film. It [04:04] wasn't like a it wasn't like a movie. It [04:06] was like a film. [04:07] >> There wasn't any action in it. [04:08] >> No. No. And and it was almost a billion [04:11] and I was riveted to every single second [04:14] of it. I mean, it was phenomenal. And so [04:16] I think he's just special. He it's my my [04:20] question back to you would be you have [04:23] one director [04:25] and or you have to make a choice between [04:27] one director to direct the movie that [04:29] will be so awesome it saves the world. [04:32] Do you go with Nolan or Villanuv? [04:35] >> Oh, [04:35] >> and I think those are the only two [04:36] options. [04:37] >> You wouldn't even throw Spielberg into [04:38] the mix. [04:40] >> Uh Peak Spielberg, yes, but we're not in [04:42] the realm of Peak Spielberg. [04:43] >> Okay. Well, I have I have a different [04:44] Spielberg [04:46] >> one for you later in the day. I I I [04:48] mean, obviously, it's speculation. Who [04:50] knows what movie ends up capturing [04:52] everyone's imagination and and the water [04:53] cooler talk in 2026. The thing that [04:56] intrigues me about Odyssey is number [04:57] one, I will watch anything that [04:58] Christopher Nolan creates because I he [05:00] he's that good a filmmaker. [05:02] >> But I'm intrigued in a in a Hollywood [05:05] environment where everything is a [05:07] sequel, everything is a remake. They're [05:08] now doing a liveaction Moana. It's just [05:10] like what? There's no originality [05:12] anymore. The Odyssey is not exactly [05:15] original. is one of the oldest stories [05:16] in recorded human history, but no one's [05:19] ever really made a cinematic version of [05:22] this story before. And he's undertaken [05:24] something that a lot of people thought [05:25] was impossible with a great set of [05:28] actors. And apparently they're going to [05:30] be releasing instead of a normal trailer [05:32] the first six minutes of the film or [05:34] some sixinute extended preview of the [05:37] battle of Troy or something like that. [05:39] that oh man [05:40] >> early reactions from people who've seen [05:41] it are like it's unlike anything we've [05:44] ever seen put to film before and so I [05:47] think he's a brilliant filmmaker. I [05:48] trust his storytelling abilities. He's [05:51] tackling one of the most influential [05:54] stories in human history. [05:56] I what's not to like about it? It's [05:58] going to be great. I I I don't think [06:00] this is an overreaction on my part. 2026 [06:02] is going to be a tremendous movie year [06:05] like uh Dune part 3. We're going to [06:09] have, you know, the new Spielberg [06:12] coming. You got [06:14] >> Nolan. I mean, when you have a summer [06:16] with a Nolan and a Villanuv movie at the [06:18] same time and then a fresh Spielberg [06:20] joint and I mean, come on. [06:22] >> Oh, we'll get to that later. [06:24] >> Okay. [06:25] >> Okay. Well, I'm glad to know that you [06:26] are as excited for that one as I am. All [06:27] right. Let's go to a political one. [06:28] We'll kind of we'll we'll volley back [06:30] and forth here. [06:32] Uh, which one should I start with here? [06:33] Okay, how about this? For the first time [06:36] since 1988, [06:38] Texas will elect a Democratic senator. [06:43] Ooh, I Oh, this is a good one. [06:46] Plausible. Not probable. Okay. [06:48] Plausible, [06:48] >> but not an overreaction. [06:50] >> Not an overreaction. [06:51] >> So, you think this overreaction? [06:53] >> Okay. There are two uh candidates [06:55] running for the Democratic [06:57] um nomination in Texas. One who's been [07:00] on this show before is James Telerico [07:03] and the other fairly new to the race is [07:06] I'm blanking on her name. Um, [07:09] oh shoot, what is her name? Why didn't I [07:10] look this up? [07:11] >> Jasmine Crockett. [07:11] >> Jasmine Crockett. Thank you. They they [07:13] sort of represent two fundamentally [07:15] different approaches to politics in the [07:17] Democratic party right now. two [07:18] different approaches to the Trump era [07:20] >> with James Telerico really uh presenting [07:23] a cool, collected, smart [07:27] >> uh and civic-minded sort of uh Christian [07:31] forward posture of malice towards none [07:36] um an inclusivity. I mean, he's [07:38] certainly a Democrat in his politics and [07:40] progressive views, but his his tone is [07:42] very consiliatory and open. Whereas [07:46] Jasmine Crockett, I think she's the one [07:48] who said, "When they go low, we go to [07:50] the gutter." Like, [07:51] >> oh, well, she's the one who really came [07:53] to prominence after Marjorie Taylor [07:55] Green went after her big time. [07:57] >> Yeah. [07:58] >> She did something, what was it? [08:00] bad butch built body something like she [08:04] did this string and it became shortened [08:06] to B6 and she sold merchandise like B6 [08:09] merchandise because she every word she [08:11] used to describe I believe it's Marjorie [08:13] Taylor Green began with a B [08:15] >> and and so yeah she was a viral star and [08:18] it really does go to sort of this [08:20] problem we have with primary voters [08:22] right now Sky is that [08:24] >> on both the right and the left primary [08:26] voters are your most activated most [08:30] energized the exhausted majority isn't [08:32] participating in primaries nearly as [08:34] much and so you kind of get this skew [08:37] where coming out of the primary it tends [08:40] to go towards the more angry populist [08:42] voice and that's not where Taler Rico is [08:45] going to thrive. He's much more of a [08:46] what I would think of as a general [08:48] election candidate, [08:49] >> right? [08:50] >> But I went back and I looked at Cruz's [08:53] and Cornin's margin of victory. And so [08:56] Cornin in 2020, if he wins the primary, [08:59] his margin of victory was 53.5 to 43.87 [09:04] in a pretty blue year of 2020. [09:08] But consider this. This is why I say [09:10] it's plausible, if not probable, is that [09:14] so far in the special elections we've [09:16] seen, the lowest swing to the Democrats [09:19] has been 13 points. [09:21] >> Wow. [09:22] >> The lowest. And that was in my old [09:24] congressional district, district 7 in [09:26] Tennessee outside of Nashville. And so [09:28] that's at the congressional level. [09:29] That's different from Senate. [09:31] >> I, you know, I'm not naive. I know [09:33] that's different from Senate. But when [09:34] you're dealing with the lowest swing [09:36] >> was 13. All the rest were between like [09:39] 16 and 28. Um, then you realize the [09:43] peril that Republicans see themselves [09:45] in. And then when you add to the fact [09:47] that let's the primary voter problem [09:49] goes both ways. Um, Ken Paxton is [09:52] challenging Senator Cornin. I think if [09:54] Senator Cornin is the nominee, his [09:57] victory is almost certain against [10:00] Jasmine Crockett. I would say virtually [10:03] certain. Mhm. [10:04] >> Um, but if Paxton is the nominee, [10:07] >> I think he loses to Taler Rico and I [10:10] think he might even lose to Jasmine [10:11] Crockett to be honest because Paxton, as [10:14] Sarah Isker, my uh advisory opinions [10:17] comrade, has said, might be the most [10:19] corrupt politician in America [10:21] >> and that's including Donald Trump in the [10:23] equation. Um, and so, [10:25] >> wow, [10:26] >> he is spectacularly [10:29] dishonest and corrupt. And so, but he's [10:31] also a a darling of the hardcore MAGA, [10:34] right? So, he may get the nomination. [10:36] >> It sounds like in order for this to not [10:38] be an overreaction, the Republicans [10:40] would need to nominate a pretty terrible [10:43] candidate in Paxton. And the Democrats [10:46] would have to nominate a moderate [10:48] general election candidate like [10:49] Telerico. That's the combination that [10:51] could get the Democrats a win in the [10:53] Senate there. But if either of those [10:54] things doesn't happen, you think it's [10:57] going to go to the Republicans, [10:58] >> right? That's why I say it's plausible, [11:00] not probable. [11:02] >> Okay, fair enough. I agree with you. I [11:04] think that that is accurate analysis. I [11:07] will say this though, if Texas does [11:09] democratic [11:11] senator for the first time in 40 years [11:13] almost, [11:14] that will send shock waves through the [11:16] whole Republican party. Like, will they [11:18] will they at that point admit that maybe [11:20] Trump was a mistake? [11:22] >> If the if if there's a Democratic [11:24] senator from Texas, that will be an [11:26] earthquake. That will be the story. The [11:29] story. Unless the only way it would not [11:31] be the story is if the earthquake is [11:33] even bigger. [11:34] >> Yeah, I got some of those on my list [11:36] coming up. [11:36] >> Yeah. Okay, let's uh tech back over to [11:41] not exactly pop culture, but little [11:44] slightly less political. [11:46] At least one state will pass a near [11:49] total ban on social media for youth [11:51] similar to what was done in Australia. [11:55] probable almost. I mean [11:59] >> Utah has passed I mean there have been [12:01] some pretty big [12:03] >> sweeping laws passed already. I I will [12:06] say I will say probable with a asterisk [12:09] because um there's real constitutional [12:12] issues with flat bans uh on social media [12:16] for even for minors [12:17] >> really [12:18] >> um that do not exist for pornography [12:21] >> uh that age gate age gating for [12:24] pornography we now know you know from [12:26] Supreme Court opinion [12:27] >> uh is entirely is legal. Um, however, [12:31] the difference between porn and [12:35] say a 16-year-old ranting about Israel [12:38] and Gaza on TikTok is that you have no [12:42] constitutional right to see porn as a [12:45] kid. you still have constitutional [12:48] rights to speak as a child on other [12:51] matters and to so there is a there's a [12:54] infringement there on a constitutional [12:57] right that does not exist when it comes [12:59] to access to [13:00] >> okay put putting the constitutional [13:02] right aside because that will take some [13:03] time perhaps years for the courts to [13:05] really figure all those things out there [13:08] it seems to me that there is a growing [13:10] momentum towards the harm caused by [13:13] social media particularly for youth and [13:15] now that we're seeing entire countries [13:17] like Australia banning it and local [13:20] school districts, other communities. [13:22] There's just Jonathan Height's been huge [13:24] on this. It feels a little bit to me [13:27] like when I was young and there was this [13:29] broad cultural awareness of the harm of [13:31] cigarettes. [13:33] >> And it wasn't just that you were [13:34] slapping warning labels on cigarettes [13:36] anymore, but there was this tipping [13:37] point where the culture reached a [13:39] consensus that we don't want this [13:42] permeating our world anymore. And I [13:44] wonder if we're getting closer to that [13:45] point with social media and kids. And [13:48] yeah, we got to figure out the legality [13:50] of all this, but the popular momentum is [13:53] going to lead some lawmakers to push [13:55] through these bans in one form or [13:57] another, leaving the courts up to figure [13:59] out how this gets implemented. [14:02] >> Yeah. You know, I here's here's why I [14:05] say it's probable is I'm complete [14:09] agreement with you on this guy. I I [14:11] think that Jonathan Height's work and [14:14] he's not the only one but he's been sort [14:15] of the principal one combined with the [14:18] just experience of millions of us [14:21] >> uh and and the millions of parents is [14:24] that okay yeah there there is this grow [14:27] ground swell that we have to do [14:28] something so for example one thing that [14:31] I think would be most lay down easy [14:33] prediction of all is we're going to see [14:35] a lot more bands of uh phones in schools [14:37] I mean that you you want to talk about [14:39] an 8020 20 issue. [14:40] >> Yeah, [14:41] >> banning phones in schools is an 8020 [14:43] issue. I mean, in the in the early [14:45] empirical results of b of school phone [14:48] uh bans is really they're really good. [14:51] Um better outcomes academically, [14:53] socially, etc. I I think banning phones [14:55] in schools is a layup. I think you're [14:56] going to see more age gating of porn [14:59] sites. There's just a growing consensus [15:01] that young men in particular, porn and [15:04] sports gambling. I that was one of the [15:06] things I was thinking about putting on [15:07] this list is will 2026 see the the [15:11] rhetoric around sports gambling [15:13] especially in the church or Christian [15:15] communities [15:16] >> become parallel to the discussion we've [15:17] had for many years about online [15:19] pornography. [15:20] >> Yeah. And well I I have an announcement [15:23] to make here on the Holy Post. I'm [15:25] debating Chris Christie next year on [15:28] sports gambling at Chicago Institute of [15:30] Politics University of Chicago. [15:32] >> When is that happening? [15:34] >> Oh gosh. I have the date. I can't [15:35] remember. [15:36] >> Well, you can share with me later, but I [15:37] want to be I assume he's on the pro [15:40] sports gambling end of this. [15:41] >> He's on the pro sports gambling side and [15:43] I'm on the ante and and I'm a relatively [15:46] new convert. I mean, I'm I have [15:48] generally libertarian instincts, guy. [15:50] You've got to show me I'm just not going [15:52] to [15:53] >> say, "Oh, I don't like something. Let's [15:54] have the government ban it." That you've [15:56] got to show me on a costbenefit [15:58] analysis. And you know, hyperreulation [16:02] needs to be justified. um it's shouldn't [16:04] be the default sort of position when [16:07] dealing with social problems. But I will [16:09] say this, I think the evidence is in on [16:12] sports gambling. I mean, think about [16:14] this guy. I would say, and and maybe [16:16] this is controversial to some folks, but [16:18] I would say that [16:20] the combination of easy access to porn [16:23] and sports gambling is doing a heck of a [16:25] lot more to harm young men than [16:28] ideological issues in schools. [16:30] >> I agree. [16:32] >> I I really do. I I it's not that I don't [16:34] think that ideological issues are are in [16:37] unimportant. Um but you know, like you [16:40] talk about like my son's peers and and [16:44] PE, you know, if you're growing up in in [16:46] suburban Nashville or rural Tennessee, [16:49] you're exposed to minimal wokeness, but [16:53] giant amounts of gambling, porn, etc. [16:57] You know, it's one of the reasons why I [16:59] think if you're looking at young men [17:00] struggling, I don't think you see that [17:02] young men struggle more around clustered [17:06] blue areas, [17:07] >> right? [17:07] >> They're just struggling in general. I [17:09] think and I think this is a reason. [17:11] >> Well, what what we have not yet figured [17:13] out uh culturally and certainly in [17:15] government is pornography has always [17:18] existed, literally always existed. [17:20] >> Yes. [17:21] >> Gambling has as well. [17:22] >> And gambling has as well. The difference [17:24] is we haven't wrestled with the [17:26] accessibility of these things through [17:28] digital technology in all of our [17:30] pockets. And the assumption was in a [17:33] more libertine society where adults are [17:35] responsible for their own [17:36] self-regulation, we shouldn't have the [17:38] government preventing access to [17:40] pornography or preventing access to [17:42] gambling. Well, okay. If you used to [17:45] have to go to some gambling [17:46] establishment to access gambling, that [17:49] maybe made sense. or if you had to risk [17:51] social um shame by going to a strip club [17:55] or something to access those kinds of of [17:58] things and maybe there was some natural [18:01] barrier there. But now where there are [18:03] no barriers and it's instantaneous, [18:06] we just haven't factored in the cost to [18:08] society and to individual lives and [18:10] families and households and on and on [18:11] and on that these things that are known [18:13] to be addictive and destructive [18:16] behaviors. So yeah, um I mean we could [18:19] go on a rabbit trail here about other [18:21] addictive things like substances and [18:23] drugs. The Trump administration has been [18:26] making this kind of pathetic argument [18:27] that they're justified in in blowing up [18:29] these boats in the Caribbean and in the [18:31] Pacific because they're bringing drugs [18:33] into the country. Imagine if those drugs [18:35] were instantaneously available to every [18:37] single American on their phone. [18:39] >> Right. Right. Right. And and it's not [18:41] just an access issue, it's an evolution [18:43] issue of gambling itself and of [18:45] pornography. I mean, um, pornography is [18:49] depraved, [18:51] uh, at now at a level that like kids who [18:54] grew up, um, trying to find their [18:56] grandfather's Playboy stash under the [18:58] bed, like you can't grasp. Like the the [19:02] sheer depravity of of what's being put [19:04] out there is horrifying beyond words. [19:07] So, you have access to something that [19:09] massive access to something that is [19:11] increasingly depraved and that that's a [19:14] huge problem. And then on gambling, it's [19:16] a very simil similar thing. You have [19:17] massive access [19:19] >> to a product that's evolving in a very [19:21] particular way with these prop bets, [19:23] >> right? [19:24] >> Where you can bet, you could maybe cast [19:26] in a if you want to go all in, I would [19:29] bet in a a single football game while [19:31] you're watching it, you could cast 20, [19:33] 30 bets on the action as it unfolds. It [19:36] would creates a kind of this slot [19:37] machine effect. [19:38] >> Yep. where you're just looking at your [19:40] screen and put hitting your buttons and [19:43] and it's it's terrible. I mean, Sky, [19:47] we're there are so many issues that if [19:49] we had a functional government that you [19:51] could actually get some real stuff done. [19:54] Um, and gambling, I think, is another [19:56] one of those areas in which there is an [19:58] actual bipartisan sense of rising [20:00] consensus that [20:03] wait a minute, we've we've gone really [20:06] far here and it's got really negative [20:08] and terrible consequences. [20:10] >> Yeah. Uh, one one more thing on that [20:12] front. Apart from the way it destroys [20:14] the users of these things, [20:17] there's real harm being done to those [20:19] involved in the industry itself. [20:21] Obviously, if you're being trafficked [20:23] and you're being exploited for the the [20:26] creation of pornography, that's a [20:27] horrific level to that industry. But I [20:30] think there's mounting evidence that [20:32] sports betting is actually hurting [20:34] professional sports [20:36] >> and and risks the future of these [20:38] leagues that are also making a lot of [20:40] money on the sports betting. But we're [20:42] seeing more scandals emerging now from [20:44] people in [20:45] >> professional sports around this stuff. [20:48] Oh, even when people in sports are not [20:50] being corrupted, and many people are. I [20:52] mean, we've seen pitchers, we've seen [20:53] basketball players, we've seen coaches. [20:55] I mean, the indict and no one should [20:57] ever think for a moment that we've seen [20:59] the last of the indictments. It's all [21:01] been rooted out. It's, you know, in all [21:03] likelihood, tip of the iceberg stuff. [21:05] So, you even if that there's no [21:07] corruption, the experience of playing is [21:10] changing and coaching is changing [21:12] because people are getting death threats [21:14] over prop bets. They're getting death [21:16] threats over point spreads in a way that [21:19] at a scale and in a way they didn't used [21:21] to. So here you have innocent people [21:23] being impacted by this in a profound [21:25] way. Similarly with porn. One of the [21:27] most sobering pieces that the times has [21:29] run in the last two to three years is um [21:33] a piece talking about the rise of [21:35] choking in sex amongst younger people [21:38] that it's just ubiquitous now. Just [21:41] ubiquitous. Why? Why is that happening? [21:44] Pornography. So you have [21:46] >> young women who are being subjected to [21:48] these really brutal and degrading sexual [21:50] practices because young men are growing [21:53] up thinking that is [21:57] growing up thinking that you know that's [21:59] what a sexual relationship is. And so [22:02] again you know the some of these things [22:04] are really truly honestly when you dig [22:07] down in them just consensus bipartisan [22:10] sensible [22:12] concerns that people have. [22:13] >> Right. So this all started because I [22:15] proposed that at least one state will [22:16] pass a new total ban on social media for [22:18] for for young people. [22:19] >> We went down a rabbit. [22:20] >> We did. But I think the broader reality [22:22] is there maybe we are reaching a tipping [22:25] point where enough Americans are seeing [22:27] the the shadow side of all this [22:29] technology and media [22:32] that their anger will be directed toward [22:35] the right places which is one the lack [22:36] of regulation from the government and [22:38] two the profitering and exploitation of [22:41] these media companies that are [22:42] destroying lives especially young people [22:45] for the sake of their profits. I don't [22:47] know if that means it's going to pass a [22:48] bill somewhere in some state house, but [22:51] I'm hoping 2026 sees a tipping point [22:53] where we see real action on this stuff. [22:55] Okay. [22:55] >> Yeah. [22:56] >> Back to politics. This might be my most [22:58] controversial one I want to throw at [22:59] you. [22:59] >> All right. [23:01] >> In 2026, JD Vance will become the 48th [23:04] president of the United States. H [23:08] um highly improbable to implausible. [23:14] If you had said 27, I an eyebrow would [23:17] raise more. If you'd said 28, the [23:19] eyebrow. [23:20] >> Yeah. I mean, the actuarial tables are [23:22] such that that gets there. I mean, [23:24] obviously, there are probably only three [23:27] ways he becomes president. [23:30] Donald Trump is removed from office [23:31] either by the 25th amendment or [23:33] impeachment. Donald Trump dies and he's [23:38] not getting any younger. And there's all [23:39] kinds of news reports about speculation [23:41] on his health. Um, I guess those are the [23:45] only two. The 25th Amendment 25th [23:46] Amendment. [23:47] >> 25th Amendment is one. Impeachment's [23:48] another or or uh death. So, or I guess [23:51] the fourth one would be Donald Trump [23:52] just resigns like he voluntarily steps [23:54] off the presidency. [23:56] >> I don't see that happening. [23:58] >> I Let me put it this way if and when [24:01] because we don't know, you know, some [24:02] people, you know, I I think it's very [24:04] obvious he's lost more than a few steps. [24:07] Um, I think it's also pretty obvious [24:09] that he's still more vigorous than Biden [24:12] was at the end. Um, but he's definitely [24:15] >> to be fair, it's also harder to tell if [24:18] Trump is actually experiencing mental [24:19] decline. [24:21] >> Yeah, true. I mean, he's word salad. [24:23] Exactly. For years, [24:24] >> right? [24:25] >> But I I think to me just, you know, he [24:28] has lost his step. His schedule is [24:30] lighter. His travel is less. I mean, [24:32] there are signs, but you know, as [24:36] frustrating and irritating as it was and [24:38] and ultimately just deeply historically [24:40] consequential [24:42] >> that Biden hung on too long and that the [24:45] Biden team closed rates around him and [24:47] actively really deceived America about [24:49] his true condition. [24:52] >> One prediction I have, here would be my [24:53] prediction back to you. If and when [24:55] Trump does go into the kind of [24:57] Bidenesque precipitous decline, the [25:00] Trump team will close ranks in such a [25:02] way that it will make the Biden team [25:04] look open and transparent. [25:06] >> Okay, I here's the I I agree with you on [25:09] that. But here's the difference. [25:13] By the time Biden had closed ranks, his [25:15] administration had closed ranks [25:16] significantly, it [clears throat] was in [25:18] the final year of his first term. And [25:21] the problem was he had to he chose to [25:23] run for re-election. And obviously that [25:24] blew up in their face at the [25:25] >> horrific debate he had. [25:28] >> This is only going to be Trump's second [25:30] year [25:31] >> and they have a they have three years to [25:33] go here that they have to [25:34] >> He's also a lame duck. [25:35] >> He's also a lame duck. But and and this [25:37] is the the piece that I think makes a [25:38] real difference is you're already [25:40] >> I might be already retracting what [25:41] >> you're already beginning to see some [25:43] Republicans break rank with Trump. I [25:45] mean, you mentioned Marjorie Taylor [25:46] Green. Just today in the House, there [25:49] were a bunch of Republicans that broke [25:50] with Mike Johnson in order to try to get [25:53] a vote on extending subsidies to [25:56] Obamacare. Like, you're Indiana voted [25:59] against what Trump wanted to do in [26:00] redistricting. Like, I think there's [26:03] blood in the water and other Republicans [26:04] are realizing maybe my political future [26:06] is not as hitched to Donald Trump as it [26:09] once was. if they start to see [26:11] significant cognitive and physical [26:13] decline in the president, you might see [26:15] a ground swell of people going, "Hey, [26:17] this is our chance. Let's let's be done [26:18] with him and whether it's 25th amendment [26:21] or or just pressure on him to resign or [26:23] something in a way that I don't think [26:26] Democrats were talking that way in 2024 [26:29] about Biden." [26:30] >> You're right. I think you're clearly [26:31] right. I'm clearly wrong that if there [26:34] is a midterm wipeout [26:38] >> and there is visible decline, [26:41] it there will be it will be unlike [26:43] anything we've seen, you know, unlike [26:48] any, you know, it will be there will be [26:50] the sharks will circle and and there [26:52] will be, you know, chum in the water, so [26:54] to speak, without question. I think what [26:56] I'm thinking about is let's imagine the [27:00] midterms are fine, that they're much [27:02] better for Republicans than you might [27:04] think, which was one of the in seeds of [27:06] the Biden, [27:07] >> right, [27:07] >> disaster was [27:10] >> had it, oddly enough, had there been a [27:12] red wave in 2022. We might not have [27:15] President Trump in 2024. Biden would [27:17] have taken that as a cue to [27:19] >> depart, Republicans would have seen a [27:21] future without Donald Trump. Mhm. And [27:24] maybe history is very different. So if I [27:26] feel like if Republicans hang on and [27:28] Trump gets the same boost internally [27:30] that Biden gave himself in 2022, like [27:33] look, you know, I'm still I'm in [27:36] command. I'm large and in charge. We're [27:38] doing well, full steam ahead. That's one [27:40] area where I think that people would [27:42] circle their wagons around Trump. But if [27:44] it's the opposite, if there's a midterm [27:46] wipeout and Trump is invisible decline, [27:49] I then I I agree with you completely. [27:51] Uh, MAGA is just too full of ambitious [27:53] scorpions [27:55] >> for one of them not to take make their [27:57] move, man. No question. [27:59] >> Yeah. And I [28:03] I'm I don't watch the president [28:04] regularly. I try not to, but the times I [28:07] do see him, he just seems significantly [28:11] slower than he was a year ago [28:13] >> during the following election and and [28:16] the beginning of his second [28:17] administration. And for anybody who has [28:20] watched somebody age and slowly decline, [28:23] that tends not to slow down. So, I can [28:27] only imagine a year from now what [28:31] condition he might be in. And I think [28:33] you're you're right if if uh there's no [28:36] indication right now that the [28:37] Republicans are going to have a very [28:38] good 2026 midcycle election. Uh and I I [28:43] think the knives will be out for him. [28:44] And I think JD Vance is a particularly [28:46] ambitious and [28:48] unprincipled political actor. So I I [28:51] could very much see him trying to figure [28:53] out a way to to pull a Brutus, but [28:58] [laughter] [28:59] we'll see. [28:59] >> Well, we'll we'll clarify politically. [29:02] Politically politically, [29:03] >> yeah, I am by no means calling for any [29:05] kind of political violence. [29:12] >> Okay. Uh, back to culture. This one's a [29:15] little weird. I had I had to get nerdy [29:17] on these. [29:18] >> The weirder the better. Let's do it. [29:20] >> The release of Stephen Spielberg's new [29:22] film, Disclosure Day in June will [29:24] coincide with the first official [29:26] acknowledgement from the US government [29:27] that it possesses technology of [29:29] non-human origin. [29:34] Okay, [29:36] love this question. Okay, how about [29:40] this? implausible, but I really want it [29:43] to be probable. [29:45] >> Like I I'm I'm all in on wanting there [29:48] to be UFOs. Uh you know, I I would I now [29:53] listen to me say that and then it [29:54] actually happened and then you go [29:55] through an a a cascading series of oh [29:58] crud, what does this mean? But in [30:01] theory, in concept, like [30:03] >> that would be amazing. That would be [30:05] fascinating. I've never thought that it [30:07] creation is exclusive [30:10] to mankind. Like I've never had that [30:12] that conception that it's exclusive to I [30:15] even wrote an entire Sunday newsletter [30:16] that's like what will Christians think [30:19] when the aliens arrive. I didn't even [30:21] say if I said when guy but [30:24] >> but I have let me put it this way. Uh [30:27] there's a new a new movie out and [30:29] documentary that a lot of people are [30:30] raving about and I read a a critical [30:33] review of it and they said something [30:35] that's very interesting which is at some [30:37] point somebody's got to produce [30:39] something other than their own [30:42] eyewitness testimony. [30:43] >> That's right. [30:44] >> And and we there has been that to an [30:47] extent. We have seen the the some of the [30:49] camera footage from Navy fighters for [30:51] example and that's done more than any of [30:54] the eyewitness testimony to convince me. [30:57] >> Yeah. But there's even [30:58] >> something weird going on. [31:00] >> The eyewitness testimony of a Navy [31:02] fighter pilot is pretty high on my on my [31:06] you know criteria of credibility for [31:08] sure. [31:09] >> Yeah. So you know I eyewitness testimony [31:12] is evidence. There's no question. Like [31:14] when people say testimony is more [31:15] credible than others though. Exactly. [31:17] >> Yeah. [31:18] >> But then when you buttress eyewitness [31:19] test, you know, when the UFO report was [31:21] released not long ago, there was a whole [31:23] discussion that there's things that were [31:26] recorded with other sensors. [31:28] >> In other words, not just your human eyes [31:30] or ears, but other sensors recorded [31:33] things they couldn't quite explain. So, [31:35] there's definitely a mystery. But [31:38] there's two things that the skeptic said [31:40] that I thought were fascinating. [31:42] one was look at some point you got to [31:46] produce some stuff right um and so far [31:50] nobody has and and it's really [31:52] headscratching given the sheer number of [31:54] people that according to the [31:56] conspiracists [31:56] >> right [31:57] >> have had access to the information [31:59] technology there's people make claims [32:01] that there's alien remains and then [32:04] there was this other point which I'd [32:05] never really thought of before which was [32:09] why is it always the case that in these [32:11] in this telling that people have [32:14] traveled trillions of miles, you know, [32:16] not people, but something someone has [32:18] traveled trillions of miles safely only [32:21] to invariably land here in the earth and [32:24] crash. [32:24] >> Right. Yeah. [laughter] [32:26] >> So, we've transversed 300 light years [32:29] with the most advanced technology so [32:32] advanced that human beings can't [32:33] possibly conceive of how we did this. [32:35] And then as soon as we hit the [32:36] atmosphere, it's like, we've got [32:38] turbulence, Captain. We're going down. [32:41] And so there's always, it always seems [32:43] to be, well, we had a crash. Really? [32:46] Really? [32:47] >> Yeah. [32:47] >> Wait a minute. Hold on. [32:49] >> I I mean, I tend to be skeptical about a [32:51] lot of this stuff. [32:53] >> And [clears throat] it I think my the [32:55] best argument I've heard against any of [32:57] this is if if any of this is true, [33:00] >> you're talking about [33:01] >> the most significant conspiracy cover up [33:05] in human history, right? And I think as [33:07] a species, we don't have a great track [33:09] record of keeping secrets. [33:12] And then the number of people that would [33:13] have to be involved in something like [33:15] this over multiple generations would be [33:17] so enormous. It would be shocking that [33:20] more hadn't leaked out or more credible [33:22] witnesses or or some material evidence [33:24] hadn't leaked out. So I that I put all [33:27] in the category of yeah, this is [33:28] probably unlikely. On the other side, [33:31] especially in recent years, there's been [33:32] a prepoundonderance of testimony and [33:34] evidence and admissions from official [33:36] government [33:38] agencies saying, "Yeah, this is a thing. [33:40] We don't know what it is." So, I here, [33:43] okay, this this whole [33:45] idea for [33:46] >> we're losing. We're losing extreme [33:49] speeds, guys. I'm all into this. [33:51] >> This This is the craziest thing I'll [33:52] say. I came across a conspiracy theory [33:55] recently about Spielberg's new movie [33:58] that was basically saying Spielberg has [34:00] been working on this topic since the [34:03] 1970s with Close Encounters of the Third [34:05] Kind. And throughout all the different [34:08] alien movies he's made, ET uh I forget [34:11] what other ones he's done, but he has [34:13] had consultants on these movies who are [34:16] people that whose names are familiar in [34:18] kind of the UFO world or who work for [34:20] government agencies or whatever it might [34:22] be. And the conspiracy theory is [34:24] essentially wink wink, Spielberg's been [34:26] in the know throughout his career and [34:29] he's been dropping these cultural seeds [34:32] to prepare the world for what he is [34:36] finally going to reveal in this film in [34:39] 2026 [34:40] and it's kind of the capstone of his [34:42] career and it is going to have more [34:44] congruency with reality than we might be [34:47] comfortable with. But it's all been part [34:49] of a plan. I think that's kind of [34:51] farfetched, but I also find it really [34:53] intriguing. I It's like one of those [34:55] things like not not real, but I wish it [34:58] it would be cool if it was real. But I'm [35:01] with you, Sky. I think the idea that [35:02] we're going to have some reveal like in [35:04] the movie Independence Day where they [35:05] get to Area 51 and they have a ship that [35:08] had crashed, right, and they that they [35:11] refurbish and and launch out there to [35:13] take on the aliens or that they had an [35:14] alien body like that. The fact that [35:16] that's I don't think that's out there. I [35:18] think what is more likely is sort of we [35:22] are just really stumped by the following [35:24] things for the following reason and that [35:28] that to me is much more interesting and [35:30] and potential and we've already kind of [35:32] done this [35:34] >> we've had government officials on the [35:35] record say there are things that we are [35:37] encountering that we cannot explain but [35:40] that's as far as they go. [35:41] >> Yeah. Yep. And I think I think that that [35:44] is we'll I think that will continue and [35:47] it may even increase. Uh but as far as [35:52] like here's here's the alien body. [35:54] Here's Bob. We named him Bob. No. [35:56] >> Well, I would I I'm not willing to go [35:59] that far either. That's why I said the [36:01] government will just admit that they [36:02] have technology of nonhuman origin. I [36:05] think that's a safer way to go. Saying [36:07] we have this material, we don't know [36:09] what it is or we this what? I don't [36:10] know. something like that. I don't think [36:12] they're going to roll out a body and be [36:15] like, "Here's the Roswell crash victims [36:16] from 1947 or whatever it was, but uh [36:20] we'll see." Okay. Um, back to politics. [36:23] And this is right in your wheelhouse. [36:26] In 2026, Donald Trump will appoint his [36:28] fourth justice to the Supreme Court. [36:32] I'm going to say probably yes. Okay. My [36:36] thought was, tell me if I'm got this [36:37] analysis wrong. Uh it's very likely that [36:40] the Democrats could win the Senate in [36:44] 2026 when those the new uh Congress [36:47] comes into session in 2027. So if you [36:50] are an aging Republican on the Supreme [36:53] Court, you might think this is my last [36:55] chance to retire and have my replacement [37:00] selected by a Republican president and [37:02] confirmed by a Republican Senate. like [37:05] this is your window to get out because [37:07] in 2027 [37:09] it's going to be a lot harder for a [37:10] staunch conservative to get nominated [37:12] and appointed. So is it Clarence Thomas [37:16] is I think he's the oldest serving [37:17] justice right now. Correct. [37:19] >> Yes, he is. Uh yes, he's the oldest [37:22] oldest serving justice. [37:23] >> So would it make sense for at the end of [37:25] this um court term in June, [37:29] all the cases are decided, all the [37:31] opinions are out. Thomas announces, "I'm [37:33] retiring." And that gives Trump and the [37:36] Republicans a couple of months to find [37:37] someone and get them through the Senate [37:39] before the election in November. That's [37:41] the scenario I'm thinking is most [37:43] likely. [37:45] >> Yeah, I I agree. Although I I would be [37:50] actually a little surprised if it was [37:51] Thomas. [37:52] >> Really? [37:53] >> Yeah. [37:53] >> Who do you think it is? [37:55] >> Alto. Alto would actually I I I wouldn't [37:58] fall out of my chair in shock if it was [38:00] Thomas. I would [38:02] in shock if it was Thomas and Alto. [38:05] >> Um, could you imagine if five of the [38:07] justices on the Supreme Court were all [38:09] appointed by Donald Trump? That'd be [38:11] crazy. [38:12] >> Oh, I know. But the what you just walked [38:14] through Sky um is I think on might be on [38:19] their minds because if you are a [38:22] Republican if appointed justice and you [38:24] want to retire and you want to be [38:26] replaced by a Republican [38:27] >> appointed justice then well if the if [38:32] the Republicans lose the Senate you're [38:34] going to have to wait and see in the [38:35] outcome of the next presidential [38:36] election and if a Republican doesn't win [38:38] then you know so Thomas is 77 right now [38:41] um and So it would not be un [38:44] inconceivable that if he didn't do it [38:47] next term, he might not have an [38:49] opportunity for a long time and he could [38:52] end up in a situation, you know, the [38:54] Ruth Bader Ginsburg situation where [38:56] you're waiting for the right moment to [38:58] retire and because of unexpected [39:00] political events, the right moment [39:01] doesn't occur, [39:03] >> right? [39:03] >> And so you just stay in and in and in. [39:06] And you know, so I I do think I'm going [39:09] to Yeah, I think probable. I think [39:12] probable. I I it would actually surprise [39:15] me if there was no retirement. It [39:18] >> Why do you think Alto is more likely [39:20] than Thomas? [39:21] >> Um you know, this is just pure take. [39:24] This is this is um he's 75, so he's [39:30] almost as old as Thomas. And [39:34] it's, [39:35] how shall I put this? It's sort of in [39:38] the air maybe that he might not love it [39:42] as much and, you know, might not love [39:45] being on the court at this point in his [39:47] life as much as maybe some other people [39:48] do. [39:49] >> Okay, [39:49] >> I don't know if that's true. I don't [39:51] know if that's true, but there is this [39:52] weird level of consensus that I've seen [39:55] around very very close and I consider [39:58] myself a close Supreme Court watcher, [40:00] but I'm not as close as some people who [40:03] are live in Washington are one degree [40:06] removed from family members and things [40:08] like that. There's just something in the [40:11] air that says amongst close observers, [40:15] if somebody's going to retire, it's [40:16] probably going to be Alto before Thomas. [40:18] Now, doesn't make any sense on the basis [40:20] of age, doesn't make any sense on the [40:22] basis of any objective external factors [40:24] that you can see, but I will just say [40:27] there's just something in the air uh [40:29] that I always hear from people who are [40:31] like one degree closer than I am. So, [40:33] >> well, you're certainly much closer than [40:35] I am. So, I I I trust that. Uh, last [40:38] thing related to this. I think from what [40:41] I've heard you say and some of the [40:43] things you've written, you you're pretty [40:45] happy with the three justices that Trump [40:47] appointed in his last term, which were [40:49] Barrett, Kavanaaugh, and Gorsuch. [40:52] >> Would you anticipate another justice of [40:54] their ilk, or is this a different Trump [40:57] administration? And does he have a [40:59] different attitude towards the court, [41:01] which might result in a very different [41:02] kind of nominee? [41:04] Um, oh that so I'm much more worried [41:09] right now than I was last term without [41:13] question because for a couple reasons. [41:14] One, [41:15] >> Trump has gone out of his way to kind of [41:17] declare war on Leonard Leo and the [41:19] Federalist Society and sort of the whole [41:21] infrastructure that brought him his [41:23] first three justices. Number two, he's [41:25] angry at those justices because they [41:28] didn't [41:29] >> support his bid to stay in power in [41:30] 2020. Number three, that anger has even [41:33] extended into parts of MAGA. You know, [41:36] um, Dantis, incredibly enough, ran [41:40] saying, "I'm not going to pick people [41:41] like Gorsuch and Barrett." And I'm like, [41:43] "Wait, what? Has the right radicalized [41:47] so much that Gorsuch and Barrett are too [41:50] squished now?" So, you have multiple [41:52] factors all indicating that they might [41:54] go with somebody much more extreme. [41:58] Also, you have the uh selection of Emil [42:00] Boove to the third circuit, who is a [42:02] really what I would call one of the very [42:05] few truly MAGA judges uh that we've seen [42:08] him appoint. So, there's a lot of [42:10] factors that are sort of pointing in the [42:12] direction that this could be different, [42:14] but also many of his other nominees have [42:16] been excellent uh from my perspective. [42:19] And so, he's still out there nominating [42:22] uh Court of Appeals appointees that are [42:24] very, very solid. But at the same time, [42:27] we've seen the whole record of the rest [42:29] of his uh administration. Now, the [42:32] interesting thing is if he's weakening [42:35] Mhm. Um how much would [42:39] uh say, you know, h how much would the [42:43] Senate confirm Justice Bondi, right? I [42:46] mean, [42:47] >> or canon, [42:50] >> Justice Canon, right? So, I do think [42:52] that as he weakens his ability to just [42:55] ram through anybody, um, and and we'll [42:58] know by, you know, next summer a lot [43:01] more about sort of the state of play for [43:02] the midterms and if senators who are [43:06] facing tough reelections are being asked [43:09] as a part of the package of what they're [43:11] walking into November with to confirm an [43:14] outofcontrol fringe nominee. [43:17] I think some of them are going to say no [43:19] to that. And so, you know, especially [43:21] people who might be having tough races [43:23] because if the if present trends [43:26] continue, giant if we don't know Trump [43:28] can, you know, Trump can turn things [43:30] around in theory. Um, if present trends [43:33] continue, the Republicans are going to [43:34] be really worried, really worried by [43:38] June, July, August of next year. And I [43:40] don't know that they'd be willing to [43:41] rubber stamp Trump. [43:43] >> Okay. I agree. I agree. We'll see. I [43:45] mean, once this term is over in the [43:47] summer, I'm going to be fascinated to [43:48] see if one or two justices decide to [43:50] retire. I'd be shock wouldn't it be [43:51] unprecedented to have two vacancies at [43:54] the same time? [43:56] >> Um, I don't know unpre I don't think [43:58] unprecedented, but it would be very [44:00] unusual. [44:01] >> Very unusual. Okay. Um, back to more [44:05] cultural stuff. And this this one I'm [44:07] informed by thing I read recently from [44:09] Ryan Burge, who does all kinds of stats [44:11] on interesting topics around faith and [44:14] culture. [44:15] Since peaking in 2020 at 8.6%, [44:19] the number of young adults who identify [44:21] as transgender will continue to decline [44:23] in 2026. [44:26] >> Yes, high confidence in that that [44:29] response. [44:30] >> Okay. So, Ryan published this piece [44:32] recently where he looked at the data of [44:34] the number of young people and this is [44:35] defined as people 18 to 22. So, college [44:38] age young people who identify as [44:40] transgender. In 2020, it was nearly 9%. [44:44] >> Yeah. Which is very high. But every year [44:48] since then, it has been declining [44:50] precipitously. And there's been all [44:51] kinds of speculation like why why did it [44:55] spike in 2020? Why has it been going [44:56] down? Especially when you consider that [44:58] so much of the rhetoric around sexual [45:00] identity coming from progressives is [45:03] that this is an immutable quality. [45:06] All right. Well, apparently in the [45:09] surveys, people who in 2020 said that [45:11] they were transgender are no longer [45:13] identifying that way, which either they [45:15] weren't telling the truth then or [45:17] they're not now or they're being [45:20] influenced by something else. And I [45:22] think the argument I'm hearing from [45:23] people on the left is they don't feel [45:25] safe anymore in the in the cultural [45:27] climate to identify themselves as uh [45:30] transgender. Or there could be another [45:33] thing which is some of what's going on [45:34] with young people in our country and [45:36] gender identity has been culturally [45:38] influenced more than intrinsically part [45:42] of their identity. [45:43] >> Yeah. So [45:46] you know one of the things that happened [45:48] in all of these debates is a lot of [45:49] terms got kind of mashed together. you [45:52] know, so gender dysphoria, having if you [45:54] have gender dysphoria, that's not the [45:56] same thing as being quoteunquote gender [45:58] queer or non-binary or and so there were [46:03] a lot of different concepts that were [46:05] sort of being all plunged into the T and [46:08] the plus of LGBT plus, [46:12] >> right? And then it just all kind of got [46:14] subsumed under the headline trans which [46:18] is not exactly right you know and so you [46:21] you had a so I do think that there are [46:24] sort of an irreducible minimum number of [46:26] people a certain set number of people [46:28] who have gender dysphoria [46:30] >> that and that number exists and uh [46:33] sometimes people feel more comfortable [46:35] coming forward into the culture or not [46:37] who possess gender dysphoria based on [46:39] external conditions and so you are going [46:41] to have some fluctuation in that number [46:44] of people who have gender dysphoria who [46:46] are comfortable sharing and expressing [46:48] that based on cultural trends. I do [46:50] think that that is true. But at the same [46:52] time, we're not talking anywhere near 9% [46:55] of America. Nowhere within shouting [46:58] distance of 9% of America. And there was [47:00] this really interesting survey done [47:02] several years ago that found that a [47:04] number of people who identified [47:06] themselves as bisexual or even gay or [47:09] non-binary [47:10] had never done anything to I externally [47:13] they had never engaged in same-sex [47:15] sexual behavior. They had never engaged [47:17] in any sort of quote unquote gender [47:19] affirming care etc. if this really was I [47:23] think for some people it became a kind [47:25] of political cultural act of dissent [47:30] and or a kind of a political cultural [47:33] kind of expression that was intimately [47:35] related to the moment in time that we [47:37] were in at that period. And and so [47:41] nothing about this surprises me. And it [47:43] and in fact when you go back and you [47:45] really look at some of the controversies [47:47] that really ripped us to shreds like our [47:50] country to shreds like the controversy [47:53] on youth gender affirming care [47:56] which you actually then when you peel [47:58] back and you look at the actual numbers [48:00] of people who received the hormone [48:02] treatment much less surgery [48:05] far fewer than the prominence of the [48:09] issue would suggest. I'm not saying it's [48:11] an insignificant number, right? [48:13] >> I'm just saying it's a much smaller [48:15] number. So, we're never talking about a [48:17] movement that was really large when it [48:20] came to actual medical steps. That was [48:25] never a big movement. What was the [48:27] really big movement, the 9% movement, [48:30] was much broader into sort of the [48:32] non-binary, gender queer, you name it. [48:35] That was not the same as gender [48:38] dysphoria. And so we just have to [48:41] distinguish between gender dysphoria and [48:43] the whole rest of the argument and the [48:46] spectrum and the conversation because a [48:48] lot of these other categories are just [48:50] proving to be much more malleable. [48:53] I agree and part of I think what fueled [48:57] a lot of this in the last number of [48:59] years is it it it was latched on to by [49:02] political actors on both sides. The [49:04] Republicans saw this as a wedge issue [49:06] that they could scare their voters with [49:08] and Democrats saw it as a justice issue [49:10] that they could plate their voters with. [49:13] And uh whether it's gender affirming [49:16] care for for children or the whole [49:19] controversy over trans girls and women [49:22] in women's sports, like it's been [49:25] fascinating to watch how quickly the [49:26] Democrats coming out of 2024 have run [49:29] away from that issue. And Gavin Newsome, [49:31] Governor of California, who has clear [49:34] presidential aspirations for 2028, has [49:36] already said he does not support trans [49:39] women and girls in female sports. So, [49:42] they're they recognize this is a losing [49:44] issue for them. They want it to go away. [49:46] They don't want to put the spotlight on [49:48] this anymore. It it bit Kla Harris [49:51] really badly in that ad that the Trump [49:53] campaign run ran. So I I think on that [49:56] front, on the cultural and political [49:57] front, no one wants to go near this [49:59] issue anymore. And it's just the the [50:02] spotlight, the air, whatever you want to [50:04] say, is just deflating out of this [50:06] thing. And I think we're going to [50:08] hopefully continue to see it not be the [50:11] distraction that it has been. All the [50:13] while, I agree with you, there is a set [50:15] number of people who are have gender [50:19] dysphoria and ought to be treated with [50:21] dignity, respect, and and get the [50:23] appropriate care that they need. [50:24] >> Exactly. Right. [50:26] >> Okay. Last one. Uh, and this is in the [50:29] sort of political but maybe cultural [50:32] thing. 2026 will see the coalescing of a [50:36] movement to amend the constitution that [50:38] will become a central issue in the 2028 [50:40] presidential campaign. [50:44] I'm going to say yes, probable. Okay. Um [50:49] because it's already moving. It's [50:51] already happening. And I I think we're [50:54] just a few more pardons away maybe for [50:56] it being located in the pardon power. [50:58] >> I that's what I was speculating that [51:00] that's going to be the the thing that [51:02] galvanizes Americans across the spectrum [51:04] politically to be like, yeah, this is a [51:06] mess and this just just shouldn't [51:08] happen. [51:09] Because again, you know, if Trump is [51:11] wiped out in 20 if the Republicans are [51:13] wiped out in 2026, [51:16] it's interesting how many of our whatifs [51:19] there there is a pivot point and that [51:21] pivot point is next November and we [51:22] don't know how this is going to happen. [51:23] We know where the trends are heading, [51:25] but we don't know how this is going to [51:26] happen. But if [51:28] present trends continue and he's wiped [51:30] out and he's viewed as a drag, a [51:32] liability, and then he does what I fully [51:35] expect him to do, which is a continue to [51:38] pardon extremely corrupt people who've, [51:40] you know, enriched his family or sucked [51:43] up to him in some way and then b engages [51:47] in mass pardons on his way out the door [51:50] in late 2028, early 2029. [51:53] Um, I think there's going to be a real [51:55] ground swell because Republicans are [51:58] still mad about Biden's pardons and many [52:00] of Biden's pardons were a real problem. [52:02] Yes, a real problem. We remember [52:05] Clinton's pardons, a real problem. [52:08] >> You know, the the January 6 by the time [52:11] in all likelihood by the time uh, you [52:14] know, Trump's term ends, a lot more of [52:15] these J6ers will have committed fresh [52:18] crimes, [52:19] >> right? I mean, this wasn't a class of [52:22] America's finest who had been pardoned [52:24] after January 6th, and some of them have [52:26] gone on to reaffend already. And so, I [52:29] think we're looking going to be looking [52:31] at a real reckoning about the Trump [52:33] years. And and one of the least popular [52:37] things he will have done in all of his [52:40] two terms is this string of incredibly [52:43] corrupt pardons. [52:44] >> Yeah, I I agree. I think the [52:48] it's unlikely. We haven't done a [52:49] significant constitutional amendment in [52:51] a long time in this country and you're [52:54] going to need an issue that has [52:55] bipartisan support. I think there's [52:57] enough Republicans who saw the abuse of [53:00] the pardon power by Joe Biden that they [53:02] might get on board with this and there's [53:04] obviously a ton of Democrats who see the [53:05] Trump administration is abusing this. Uh [53:08] so it might get to the point where [53:10] enough Americans go, "Yeah, yeah, let's [53:11] do this." And I hope if that happens, it [53:13] sort of reawakens America's memory that, [53:15] oh yeah, I forgot we can amend the [53:17] Constitution. There's things that we can [53:19] do. And maybe it begins a new a new era [53:22] where we do that with some uh [53:23] regularity. The the part that I wonder [53:26] about though when it comes to Trump and [53:28] the pardon power is we know a couple [53:32] things about this man having been in the [53:33] the political world for the last 10 [53:35] years. One, he's not particularly loyal [53:38] to the people around him. two, he's [53:40] always looking for scapegoats to blame [53:43] for whatever failures he or his [53:45] administration has made. Which makes me [53:46] wonder if he gets to the end of his [53:49] term, will he actually give a blanket [53:52] pardon to everyone? Or will, I mean, [53:54] there was so much turnover in his first [53:56] administration, so many people that he [53:58] said, I, you know, hire only the best [54:00] people and six, nine, 12 months later, [54:03] they're the worst. and he has nothing [54:05] positive to say about General Kelly or [54:07] Mark Millie or anyone else that he had [54:09] in his first, will he actually withhold [54:12] the pardon from people in his current [54:14] administration because he's going to use [54:15] them as scapegoats for everything that [54:17] went wrong or if one of the other [54:20] scenarios plays out that I mentioned [54:22] earlier where he leaves office not [54:24] voluntarily, [54:26] will it essentially fall to JD Vance or [54:29] whoever comes in after Trump to decide [54:31] whether or not am I going to pardon [54:33] everybody almost like Gerald Ford [54:34] situation to clean up this mess and will [54:37] it destroy the Republican party again? [54:40] >> I think JD Vance is at this point I [54:43] don't know that there's much moral [54:44] daylight between Trump and Vance uh at [54:48] all. Uh I think Vance is a pretty [54:50] vindictive person and a extremely um he [54:55] places a high premium on political [54:57] loyalty and he's also extremely [54:59] vindictive. So for my friends everything [55:02] for my enemies of the law is a kind of [55:04] you know that's the way JD Vance has [55:06] been evolving for a while. So I could [55:08] easily see him, let's say, if they're [55:10] his buddies or people who've been loyal [55:12] to the administration from day one, not [55:15] you know, General Millie and others, [55:17] they were they didn't owe everything to [55:20] Trump. You know, the these were people [55:22] who and a lot of the people in his first [55:24] term he turned on, they were not MAGA. [55:27] They were never MAGA. But if you have a [55:29] Pete Hexith, if you have a Cash Patel, [55:31] Cash Patel wrote children's books [55:34] praising Donald Trump. [55:35] >> Yeah. But look at Marjorie Taylor Green. [55:37] She was a loyal Trump follower and he [55:40] turned on her real quick, [55:42] >> but she turned but he didn't turn on her [55:45] be before. [55:46] >> Yeah. [55:47] >> You know, there [55:48] >> I just wonder if there's enough heat [55:50] that comes down on a Pete Hegsth or a [55:52] Bondi or whoever for mishandling these [55:54] files or the prosecution of these [55:56] attacks on boats in the C whatever that [55:58] Trump is just gonna say, "Well, it's all [56:00] them. It's not me." And he just lets [56:02] them out to dry. I do think he has a [56:05] little bit of that mob boss in him that [56:07] you're like, uh, you know, Paulie, [56:10] Paulie, he's you can take you can count [56:12] on old Paulie. He's going to go to [56:14] prison. As long as we take care of his [56:15] family, he's going to be all right. You [56:17] know, so I think he's got a little bit [56:18] of that where he's like, Pete, Pete's [56:21] always had my back. Pete gets a pardon. [56:23] Cash has always had my back. Cash gets a [56:25] pardon. Even if he fires Pete or fires [56:28] Cash, I do wonder about that because a [56:31] lot of the people in his administration [56:33] are acting as if they're getting [56:35] pardons. [56:36] >> Exactly. [56:37] >> They are not acting like they're going [56:38] to be held to any kind of accountability [56:41] at all. Not at all. And so that's that [56:46] speaks volumes to me when people are [56:48] acting as if that they are not going to [56:51] face any accountability, that they're [56:52] not going to face any consequences. It [56:55] makes me feel like asurances have been [56:56] made or at le either explicit or [56:59] implicit and and I'm very worried about [57:01] this. [57:01] >> It is remarkable because if you are in [57:03] one of those cabinet positions or [57:05] whatever position it might be, you know [57:08] that your your ability to stay out of [57:11] jail, frankly, completely hinges on one [57:14] person liking you. [57:16] >> Yeah. And so you have no incentive to [57:18] ever, no matter what order he gives you, [57:21] no matter how unconstitutional or [57:23] illegal it might be, you have no [57:25] incentive not to follow it because he [57:28] could cut you loose and you could spend [57:29] the rest of your life in jail or in some [57:32] horrific situation because you're [57:33] depending on a pardon from him. So it is [57:35] very much a mob mentality where you are [57:37] in his debt and there's no way out of [57:40] that unless you follow him loyally to [57:42] the very end. And what a creepy way to [57:45] run a government. Um [57:48] well on on that lovely note. [laughter] [57:51] I gotta run. So David, uh we're gonna [57:54] catch up here soon because you're going [57:55] to be coming with Nancy to the Holy Post [57:56] Christmas party in a few nights. We're [57:58] looking forward to that. Grateful to [57:59] have you. Thank you for all that you've [58:00] contributed to French Fridays over this [58:03] past year. Uh your wisdom, your writing, [58:06] your insights, your perspective been the [58:08] beneficiary of it as has everyone who [58:10] listens to this. So thank you for that. [58:12] Look, the fact that Phil Viser wrote a [58:14] theme song for me is all the thanks that [58:17] I need. [58:18] >> Wow, you're [laughter] a cheap date. [58:21] >> I know. Hey, I mean this, if you had [58:24] gone back 25 years when I'm watching Bob [58:26] the Tomato and Larry Cucumber and say, [58:28] you know, that voice there's going to be [58:30] it's French Friday. I'm Hey, there you [58:32] go. [58:33] >> That's [58:33] >> I would have been preemptively a hero in [58:35] the eyes of my kids. So [58:37] >> nice. All right. Well, everybody, thank [58:39] you for being a Holy Post Plus [58:40] supporter. Thank you for uh tuning in [58:42] and making it possible for us to do this [58:44] work. Hope you have a wonderful holiday [58:45] and New Year and Christmas and we will [58:47] catch you in January. [58:50] French Friday is a production of Holy [58:52] Post Media featuring David French and me [58:55] Sky Jatani. [music] Music and theme song [58:58] by Phil Viser. This show is made [59:00] possible by Holy Post patrons. To find [59:03] out how you can become a Holy Post [59:04] patron and to find more Common Good [59:06] Christian content, go to holyost.com.