拜登胜选、辉瑞疫苗与市场狂欢：特朗普的下一步与疫情终局

Jason Calacanis (00:00:00): Hey, everybody. Welcome to another all in podcast. This is an all bestie. No guestie. episode of all in. The last time you heard from the besties, it was election night, and it was a Chamath Palihapitiya (00:00:15): shit show. Jason Calacanis (00:00:16): a fucking crazy shit show. Let's be honest. I mean, we if we go back and look at that historical document, we had moments where we thought Trump was gonna absolutely crush. Then we had moments of confusion, And now here we are. And I think we have to give a couple of besty kudos to first off Chamath Pointing out Pennsylvania was gonna be big. And then second, when we went through the possible scenarios of who what what could possibly happen? A big giant blue wave, Trump winning it all, and then maybe something in the middle. Option 3 came through, and that was Saksipoo nailed it. I think that was your The soft -- -- assumption, Saks. The soft landing. David Sacks (00:01:07): The soft landing. Yeah. Jason Calacanis (00:01:08): So why don't we just for the people who didn't tune in live, Chamath Palihapitiya (00:01:12): Sorry, Jason. Can I ask a question? Saksipoo. Saksipoo. Was that your, like, projection, or was it from that from that guy who lives in his dad's basement his mom's basement that Jason Calacanis (00:01:24): you buy. David Sacks (00:01:25): My my researcher. Well, Newman Newman works for me. So we -- Newman Newman Yeah. Neumann Neumann and I work work together on on those takes. But, yeah, the the the take that we thought was was possible, but probably unlikely but could represent a really good scenario was the the soft landing where you get a split decision. And I think that's what the American people voted for. You you know, you had the the democratic frame on the election was that we needed to return to normalcy and decency. The Republican frame was that the radical left cannot be trusted with and voters basically said they were both right. They sort of surgically removed Donald Trump while thwarting the radical left dream of total control in Washington. And what the electorate seems to be saying is they want the parties now to work together instead of voting for extreme ideology. David Friedberg (00:02:15): But TBD Sachs, I mean, Georgia still up for grabs. They're gonna go after it hard. Right? I mean, this Chamath Palihapitiya (00:02:22): could -- They filed in Pennsylvania. Yeah. David Sacks (00:02:25): So I think there's a series of of court challenges we can talk about. I think that they're unlikely to prevail very, very unlikely. I think Joe Biden will be the next president. we can kinda compare this to, you know, Bushvie Gore from Jason Calacanis (00:02:40): 2000. David Sacks (00:02:41): And if you you wanna compare Trump's case to worst case, it's weaker in every respect. I mean, first of all, with Bush V Gore, Gore only had to overturn one state, which was Florida, whereas Trump has to now contest an overturned 3 or 4 states simultaneously. 2nd, you know, Gore was within a few hundred votes of Bush. It was extremely close. Trump is no closer than about 12,000 votes in in Georgia. That's the closest one. 3rd, you know, Gore or or or or Bush never trailed Gore in in any in any recount and and and and Trump has that problem that he's never And he he's very far behind Gore as well. So you look at those 3 things and you'd say, you know, Gore couldn't overcome it and he had a closer situation than this. And, of course, I'd say, finally, you know, a w had the velvet hammer James Baker working for him, whereas Trump frankly has Rudy Giuliani, who's touring press conferences in the parking lot of forces and landscaping between a a dildo shop and a crematorium. And, I mean, you can't make this stuff up. I think some somebody was tweeting, you know, it's this is perfect because, you know, they they were saying they wanted Rudy fuck off and die. So there's just it was so appropriate that this press conference was held between a dealer shop and a crematorium. So You know, it's not exactly the a team that Trump's got playing for him here in in the courts. But Jason Calacanis (00:04:07): -- Chamath Palihapitiya (00:04:08): I mean, David Bossy, by the way, David Bossy, who was in charge of the whole fight. David Bosie has not been a lawyer, and then he gets COVID. So now he's on the sidelines. Jason Calacanis (00:04:17): I'm I mean, just there's so many angles we can take here, including the fact that am I correct that Trump's campaign adviser got COVID, like, the day after? Or is no. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:04:33): No. No. Mark Meadows. chief of staff. David Friedberg (00:04:34): Mark Meadows. Jason Calacanis (00:04:35): chief of staff got it. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:04:36): But David Bossie who's in charge of this whole recount process got COVID as well. Jason Calacanis (00:04:41): Okay. So I wanna just shift us now to what could so many things went right for the Democrats. But there was also something very clear here that happened, which is the what I call the HSP, the historical Socialist Party of America, I think was dealt a death blow. If you look, this was very close. And so You know? Even if we wanna talk talk about the electoral college, etcetera, these are still very low numbers. I believe If the Pfizer news comes out last week, Trump wins, or if any combination of AOC Biden AOC Bernie or Warren were in any way involved in this election process. and warrant pushed to the side. The squad was squashed because we knew that if they got any kind of play, Trump sells into victory. So when we look at what happens going forward, and I'll I'll I'll let anyone of the 3 who take this, What does this say about the historical socialist party, the HSP, the squad, the Bernie Bros? What does it say about them? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:06:00): Well, you have a you have a look. You have a you have a loud group of people on both sides. And the reality is that both streams of both parties actually after this election have very little to stand on that's unique. Because if you think about what the plurality of Americans want is actually just a common decent centrist do no harm alternative. And they're going to pick that more times than they're not going to pick it. It's only when things get extreme like in 2016 in order to send a message, will they do it? And until it's resolved, they tried to do it again now. So we should actually talk about that. I don't think that this was, you know, a runaway It was way too close on too many dimensions that actually matter for the future prosperity of America. But that being said, what does it mean for the future? I think the future is, like, a Pete Buttigieg must be high fiving, you know, the people in his camp right now because a common decent thoughtful centrist platform win. For example, like, let's just say you believe in gay rights. Guess what? You don't need to be at the fringes to believe in that. That's Main Street. You believe in, like, a reasonable form of health care. That's mainstream. If you believe in climate change, it's mainstream. You start to go and tick off the things that the extremes would wanna believe, there's very little room for them to stand on. So one party is going to be basically about, like, a federalized nanny state, and the other party will be a bunch of conspiracy theorists crazies. And I think it's gonna force more and more people to the I think that's the future. To me, that's that's a much safer place to be than I think where we could have been if, you know, Trump had won or if the extreme left had basically been been validated with a candidate that won. David Sacks (00:07:48): Right. And I I would add to that that the the the proof of that, the proof of the electorate's desire to attack towards the center is you look at the down ballot election. So you know, in the Senate, the Republicans are still holding on to majority pending the Florida a runoff. But the the Democrats failed to take out Susan Collins, Tom Tillis, Steve Danes, these were 3 incumbent Republicans who were way behind in the polls heading into election day. They didn't come close to taking out Lindsay Graham or Mitch call despite spending Jason Calacanis (00:08:18): -- How did Lady G get out of this one alive? Explain that. David Sacks (00:08:21): Susan Collins? Jason Calacanis (00:08:22): No. Lady G. Lindsay Graham. David Sacks (00:08:25): Oh, I see. You know, Lindsay Graham, they said that it was neck and neck, and he actually ended up winning that state by, like, fourteen points. It wasn't close. the polls were wildly off. And and you saw that across across the board. In the house too, Democrats expected a gain of 10 to 15 seats. Instead, they've lost about 10 seats, they failed to defeat a a single GOP incumbent. The GOP house members ran about two or three points ahead of President Trump. And that and then the Democrats were completely shut out in Texas, which was supposed to be going purple. There were 8 open GOP seats. Democrats won none of them. So this you know? So anyway, I'm providing some support to the idea that this was a split decision election. The voters voted to remove both of the or to voted against the extremes of both parties. Jason Calacanis (00:09:14): So, Friedberg, when you look at this, you see, I think, an absolute just people don't wanna deal with Trump anymore. How much of this do you think is Trump arrangement system syndrome and what got Trump into office eventually taking him out, which is the guy just takes up too much oxygen in the room, and that's coming from me. And the guy is just incredibly annoying to have to deal with day to day. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:09:46): That's also coming from you. Jason Calacanis (00:09:47): And that's also coming from me. Freeberg, what do you think? David Friedberg (00:09:50): I I think we've I think we've been at a rave for 4 years, and everyone's, like, coming down from the Molly, and you're not gonna go to our Marilyn Manson concert, like, right after being in a raid. Like, You wanna go sit in the parking lot? And you just wanna chill out a little bit, and we all just wanna, like, have a beer and relax. You know? Like, I mean, I think that's the Jason Calacanis (00:10:08): -- -- need some 5 HTP and a banana. David Friedberg (00:10:11): You just yeah. You you you you wanna go sit in the 711 parking lot at 4 in the morning, and you wanna, like, go get a fucking sweet cappachate smoke a cigarette and relax. Like, it's been it's been too much. And I think it's like, everyone's just kinda ready to chill out a bit, and so this whole fucking swinging back to the, you know, to the concert across the road sounds just as bad as what we've just been through. So let's just, you know, let's just Live our lives a little bit. And, you know, we'll come back in 4 years and figure out how to fuck things up again. I I think that's kind of the psyche. David Sacks (00:10:39): That's right. I think I think voters want a presidency they can forget about. You know, I think Trump's sort of Achilles heel as he demanded too much of the voters constant time and attention. There was, like, this psychic cost to it. It obviously antagonized the other side and drove turnout for the Democrats. But but I it's it it seems like voters are saying, look. Just leave us alone. We wanna just forget about what's happening in Washington 4 years. And now they can because, you know, pending the Georgia runoff, it looks like Mitch McConnell and Joe Biden will have to be in a power sharing arrangement and nothing gets done unless the 2 of them agree. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:11:11): And by the way, just on that, there was a great tweet by Paul Graham. He said, the day after the election something to the effect of. It feels like some background process in my computer had was just killed that was consuming 5% of my CPU. And it's Jason Calacanis (00:11:27): and it's so it's so true. -- that Mac operating system spinning wheel of death. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:11:32): But it's it's David is so right. It's like, you know, it's been this omnipresent thing in all of our lives over the last 4 years, and it's just exhausting. And, you know, there wasn't that much value that came from paying so much attention and worrying so much. And so it's just a great opportunity to come off the sugar high and reset ourselves and take a nap. Jason Calacanis (00:11:56): I think that's a various due point, Shamoff, in that. What what it was gained from this Trump derangement, from this Trump sucking all of the attention and constantly tweeting. And, you know, I think the big win here, Friedberg, is if you look, the proof is in the pudding. Trump, we we find out on Saturday morning that Trump is you know, has lost and Biden has won. And 48 hours later, we find out Pfizer has 90% efficacy on their vaccine. Obviously, these two things are highly correlated. Biden has already delivered the vaccine in just 48 hours. And then today, we got the rapid testing that's been approved by the FDA. I mean, look at this by if at at this rate, Biden's gonna cure global warming by the end of the year. David Friedberg (00:12:50): Look. First off, I I think it's a little Jason Calacanis (00:12:53): -- It it is pretty David Friedberg (00:12:56): paradoxical Yeah. Jason Calacanis (00:12:57): The vaccine news came 48 hours. Yeah. David Sacks (00:13:00): And and -- -- paradoxical. I mean, that was crazy. I mean, You know, there's supposed to be an October surprise, not a November surprise. I think if Trump has any legitimate argument about being done dirty in this election. It is over this vaccine news because, you know, the the Chinese announced that 3 hours after Biden's declared president Pfizer announces it a day after Biden's declared president. I mean, you know, when Trump went around this, the you know, was campaigning, saying a vaccine was mere weeks away, everyone thought that was bullshit. But as it turns out, he was telling the truth. And if those guys had announced it, Jason, like you were saying 2 weeks before the election, it might have changed this thing. Jason Calacanis (00:13:37): But you guys might have a 100% 100%. David Sacks (00:13:40): And and this is not something he can go to the courts. It's not like he can go to the courts and get the election recounted overturned because of this. So it's not something that's legally actionable, but I do think that on this news alone, Trump in 4 years, we'll be able to claim on some level that this was a stolen election. David Friedberg (00:13:58): But couldn't the same be said about Hillary's email server. Right? So, like -- Yes. Jason Calacanis (00:14:02): 100%. -- David Friedberg (00:14:02): that new came out, like, oh, and it was, like, timed around the election. And I do think that there was a concerted effort to not let you know, the progress with COVID get in the way of the election in any way, you know, biased it either way. And I think it it's, like, pretty reasonable and fair to say, like, let's just not make part of the new cycle leading into the election. And this was expected. Like, if you guys go back a couple of podcasts like you had a prediction on when we would have a vaccine. I I think I predicted end of September because of the way that they set up the the production cycle in parallel with the testing cycle and the way that they were fast tracking a lot of the testing in a way that wasn't normal for this sort of a a development. And it was it was gonna happen this fall. if I'm an executive at one of these companies, I don't want my vaccine to become a politicized event. Right? Like, I just wanna be like, I think it's it's the reasonable thing to say, like, let's put it on hold, but deal with it all after the election. We're still moving forward. We're not holding anything up in terms of production and getting this thing across the finish line. It's just the announcement of where we are. So why make that part of the new cycle? You know? And I think, like, people learned their lesson with Hillary's server last time. It's like this one use you know, Bombshell drops in the news cycle, spins up and she loses the election. Everyone blames her losing the election for that coming out. No one wants to be culpable for that. Right? I'm a Pfizer exec. I'm just trying to make fucking medicine. I don't wanna be on the the hook for Jason Calacanis (00:15:22): -- Said another way. David Friedberg (00:15:23): Someone's waiting on election. Jason Calacanis (00:15:25): You said another way, Shamoff. Nobody wants to go to a warriors finals game, versus the Lakers and have the refs call you know, decide the game in the final couple of minutes. So do you think Shamoff This is if you were running Pfizer, if you were on the board of Pfizer and you have this information and you know it can come out in this 2 week window at any time, What decision would you make term of? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:15:52): Well, just imagine that the vaccine was 90% ineffective, and it was announced 2 weeks before the election. You'd have an entire cohort of people saying this was meant to basically sabotage the election into the other direction. So the point is it's a no win situation. The only answer is to wait until after the election. because that's the only way that you can actually say, you know, we were not we were being impartial. So I'm sympathetic to this idea that all the news had to wait 2 or 3 days or maybe it was 2 or 3 weeks. Now knowing in advance what the answer was, Obviously, you can read into that. But I think even if it was 90% ineffective, it should have waited till after the elections will. David Sacks (00:16:40): Zach, do you agree with that? Jason Calacanis (00:16:41): I don't get the sense that you do agree with that, Zach. David Sacks (00:16:44): Well, let let's put it this way. I mean, we we know from our time working in large companies that it takes them weeks to even approve a a press release. And so Pfizer had this news weeks ago Now I understand their reason for not wanting to appear to be influencing the outcome of the election. So I I that's why they held onto it. I think everybody saw the way that Facebook was scapegoated 4 years ago for the election, and no one wants to no corporation wants to put themselves in that position of being accused of affecting the election outcome one way or another. I'm sure that's why they did it as opposed to a conspiracy against Trump. But, you know, this news was available. I think we will find out weeks ago, And so I guess you would have to blame or or there'd be some culpability on the part of Trump's election team or, you know, his his head of the FDA or or what have you, they must have known some of this information, and you would think they would have done a better job getting it out there. Jason Calacanis (00:17:41): No. He did say it every rally. It's just around the corner. David Sacks (00:17:45): It's just around Jason Calacanis (00:17:45): the corner. We're rounding the corner. And and David Sacks (00:17:47): and we all thought it was bullshit. You thought it was bullshit. We thought it was bull bullshit. Right? Jason Calacanis (00:17:50): And you know why we thought it was bullshit? David Sacks (00:17:52): Well, because Trump Trump does have a tendency towards hyperbole. Jason Calacanis (00:17:56): Hyperbal on Trump's most honest day, he's hyperbolic. on Trump's average day, he is lying incessantly. So if anything, if he was right and he was right that we were turning the corner in the was coming, and it was gonna be beautiful, a beautiful perfect vaccine, and everybody was gonna get it. He's paying the price for being a liar for 4 years. David Sacks (00:18:20): Right. But it's the kind of thing. Jason Calacanis (00:18:21): You know? He's a boy who cried wolf. David Sacks (00:18:24): Well and so does the media, by the way. But But yeah. Look. I in order for a piece of news this big to be believed before the election, it can't come from a candidate. And it's it's it's pretty amazing that none of this news got out there through some other source. You would think that some of the people on the care task force that Trump appointed might have been, you know, surfacing this or paying attention to it. Maybe Pfizer did a really good job of hiding it. I don't know. But It is pretty amazing that it didn't come out sooner. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:18:55): Well, the the other crazy thing is, like, you know, even the Pfizer team didn't exactly know what was going on. The chief the the head of vaccine research, she said we're not part of the federal government's, you know, warp speed program. And then 2 days later, Pfizer was like, actually, we are part of the warp speed program. It's just that, you know, we're a supplier. The whole point is that I'm not sure that Pfizer actually knew 2 weeks in advance, David. I think that they were probably trickling stuff together, and they probably had a sense of it at the end of the last week. I'm surprised it didn't leak, to be quite honest. That's the more shocking thing, which means that It was probably something that very, very, very few people knew about. David Sacks (00:19:43): Well, the CEO the CEO put out a statement saying that he would be first in line to take the new vaccine, which I thought was, you know, a great statement because a lot of people questioning whether, you know, how real it was or how rushed it was. But in order for him to do that and and no order just to get, like, a press release announced, I don't think that's the kind of thing that comes together in the, you know, 1 or 2 day period between the announcement of Joe Biden winning the election and and their and their announcement. So, you know, I I just think they had to know weeks ago. Jason Calacanis (00:20:15): I just wanna say to my Greek brother Alberto Borlos, the CEO a Pfizer, a great Greek, who has led to the saving of the Speaker 5 (00:20:31): world Jason Calacanis (00:20:34): Oopa. Coconus. Saganaki is on me. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:20:40): If you if you if you take a 90% efficacy, and you assume at most in the United States, 40% of people will take the actual vaccination. You'll have 36% of the population covered, which is still not enough to get the r naught less than Jason Calacanis (00:20:55): 1. Is that correct, Friedberg? What do you think? David Friedberg (00:20:58): I don't know. I'm not an epidemiologist. I'd have to Jason Calacanis (00:21:01): Look. I mean, does it sound directionally correct to you that -- I don't I don't. -- the states are gonna take it? I mean -- I think -- -- take it. Isn't this like a -- David Sacks (00:21:09): Well, the the everyone who's high risk will take it David Friedberg (00:21:11): Yeah. And as of about 2 months ago, you know, it was estimated that 30% of people on the East Coast had already developed immunity due to the seroprevalence studies that that showed antibodies. On the West Coast, it was much lower, to the 3%. You could estimate based on the growth in cases since then and assuming we're kinda missing a bunch. We're probably on a national basis, we're at 10% back then. On a national basis, you're probably up to 20% right now of Americans have already Speaker 5 (00:21:40): been effectively immunized by getting the virus. David Friedberg (00:21:40): So, you know, if that's true, then you're at 55%, and you're getting pretty close to, Speaker 5 (00:21:49): you know, an ability to kind of inhibit this David Friedberg (00:21:49): thing from from spreading rapidly Speaker 5 (00:21:53): again. Jason Calacanis (00:21:55): So So how do we each feel? I'll just go around the horn. How do we each feel about the COVID 19 end game. When will we see all schools open? All NBA arenas open with no distancing. give us a quarter in 2021 when in America, enough vaccines will have been delivered and distributed rapid testing, that life goes back to, let's call it, 85% of normal. David Friedberg (00:22:29): I don't think you ever get there. I mean, it's like we talked about this a couple episodes ago, but it's after 9:11, you know, the TSA emerged And American travel never went back to the way it was before. And I think there'll be a lot about the way we live that's gonna be, you know, kind of permanently scarred and permanently changed here for a while, whether it is taking people's temperatures at football games, wearing masks, and, you know, farmers markets. Who knows? There's gonna be all these weird rules they're gonna pop up. They're gonna last for years regardless of how much immunization takes place regardless of how cheap and available testing is. We're gonna have the scar for a long time in terms of how we live as a society. I don't think we should kid ourselves that we're gonna go back to quote unquote normal And I do think kids are gonna get tested, and schools are gonna be, like, this frigging, you know, almost like TSAs now. You know? are gonna go into school and get tested regularly, and they're gonna do all sorts of stuff that we would have never dreamed imaginable in a in a free country a year ago. And I think that's permanent. I think, you know, we're gonna you're already seeing people going nuts at bars and restaurants and people that have had it or out there partying and living their life again. So there's certainly a Jason Calacanis (00:23:42): lot of -- Don't you think if you get the vaccine? You're just gonna be like, Yolo. I've had enough of this. David Friedberg (00:23:47): Yeah. But I don't think that that systems are gonna change back to normal. I think systems have changed to the point that we've now got a way of living that we think is safer, that we think is we we we are now kind of inhibited because of the system. Jason Calacanis (00:24:00): Shamoff, you agree? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:24:02): Yeah. There'll be a lot fewer is what Dave Chapelle said on Saturday. There'll be a lot fewer mass shootings. The pandemic has done a great job of keeping the whites at home. So I think that Jason Calacanis (00:24:11): -- We watched it together. All you fucking nice. -- 4 besties watched it together. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:24:16): All you all you guys go down your mass shooting rampage is you know, the whites are at home. They're frustrated, but they're at home. Thank god. So I think there'll be some advantages. Jason Calacanis (00:24:24): Well, I mean but let's talk about it, Jamath. Does does 2021 mean kids go back to school 2021, September. No problem. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:24:31): No. I think Friedberg' right. I think that the best we'll get back to is sort of this 80% state, and I don't think it happens until probably 2022 and maybe 2023, but probably 2022 because you have to remember, like, we have to ramp up now billions of vaccine production. Like, it's this is a nontrivial path from here to quote unquote mass market. And that takes a long time I think we have to figure out how we're gonna administer it. By the way, it's and and the way that the Pfizer vaccine works and maybe these other folks is you get the shot and then you know, 3 months, 3 weeks later, I think you get a booster. So you have to take 2 cycles of this thing. David Friedberg (00:25:08): And it's not gonna last forever. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:25:09): and it's not gonna last forever. So this is Friedberg is right. It's the beginning of a very different way of living. I think I think that the the good part about it is that, you know, we've made a lot of changes that makes our lives a lot more efficient. The bad part about it is we're even more detached from our neighbors. And we're probably even more likely to be a little bit more separated if we don't make an effort to be together. Jason Calacanis (00:25:36): Sachs, do you buy this? Because I get the sense that you might be more optimistic than Friedberg. Yeah. Jama? David Sacks (00:25:44): I guess I guess I am. I think COVID's gonna be a dismembery by next summer. I think we'll have one to two quarters of transition, but I think that once the VAC scenes widely available, plus the treatment and the testings for the people who slip through the cracks. Yeah. I I kinda think things are gonna snap back very fast and COVID will just be this bad memory, a very distant bad memory. And I think, in fact, I think things may bounce back the other way. Everyone having been cooped up and afraid of getting some life threatening illness are gonna come out of this really wanting to party, I think the whole world's gonna be like Tel Aviv for, you know, a few months or something. And yeah. I mean, I really do think it's gonna bounce back. I think to the point politically, where a few years from now, people could ask, wait. Why why was it again that Trump lost? You know? You know, this COVID thing will be it will be so in the rearview mirror that we'll wonder why we were so afraid of it. Speaker 5 (00:26:44): I Jason Calacanis (00:26:44): think this is I'm gonna go with David Sachs's position here because of the simple fact that we had a 130 1000 confirmed cases, you know, up until this election period the last week or so. And deaths still Not spiking. It's a little just a made a minor uptick. You know, we had a day with, like, I think, maybe 1500, but still staying in that you know, a 1000 range even with cases spiking. And I think that we were so incompetent with test and trace in this country that we didn't see exactly what happens in an authoritarian country or a country that is lucky enough to island and has easy borders, which we almost do. I mean, we basically have 2 borders. We're we're, like, 2 thirds of 2 you know, 50% island. But Hawaii Taiwan, Japan, and Australia, all quarantine people on the way in. They tested them, and they had extremely, extremely low death counts and extremely low case counts with the vaccine being half as effective as, you know, they claim and rapid testing, which some of us have no some of us know people who have experienced rapid testing at homes, that combination, I believe, is gonna make this go so low And the people who are high risk are still gonna be scared staying home. I think, like David, Come the summer of next summer people are going to be at a rave with Friedberg, you know, custom made Molly or whatever he's making during this downtime going absolutely bonkers. I think Burning Man next year becomes like the the greatest burning man ever. It'll be it'll be the burn of of of all burns. Why was let's shift a bit over to the economy. What rip Did we see when that Pfizer I mean, the election in Pfizer this week led to a huge rip? Obviously, there's a little bit of cyclical movement, the tech stocks were the big winners. Now people are starting to buy Disney back up to a 140, I guess. People assume the parks will reopen. What's our outlook for the stock market in David Saxes, you know, scenario 3? You know? I don't wanna say gridlock government, but forced to compromise government. Jason Calacanis (00:29:17): What do we think the markets look like the next 2 years? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:29:19): I think you have to Go ahead, Sucksy Boot. No. Speaker 5 (00:29:22): Go ahead, Sucksy. David Sacks (00:29:22): I was gonna say gridlock is great for the markets. Both when Bill Clinton was president with a Republican house and when Obama was president and there was a Republican house and, I guess, Senator for a period of time. gridlock is great for the markets, especially given the amount of stimulus that's taken place. I mean, you had the Trump tax cuts, especially those corporate tax cuts, really set the market on fire, and then you've got this pumping by the Fed and the treasury, all the stimulus money for COVID. I mean, those conditions And then, you Jason Calacanis (00:29:55): know -- Why is gridlock good? We didn't explain that here. Well, because -- Playing to somebody who doesn't understand why gridlock is good, why gridlock is David Sacks (00:30:02): Well, because it creates predictability for business, and it means that Washington's not gonna get in the way and do something to screw up the good times. I mean, we have fundamentally, you know, great underlying conditions for economic growth, which is we have now pretty low taxes, and we had this for better or worse, we had this tremendous amount of stimulus, fiscal stimulus. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:30:21): what we know historically is over the past 100 years, right, since the twenties, independent of Republican administrations or democratic administrations, you know, more progressive progressive, more conservative, less conservative during world wars, not during world wars, the markets go up 8% a year. So the do no harm solution is that things inflate naturally by 8%, especially if those things are public stocks. So, you know, the markets love the fact that there's nothing that could theoretically get in the way of that natural 8%. And then when you layer on top of it, As David said, all this free money that's just like rocket fuel, jet fuel. But, you know, but you saw though that there was a a rotation. Right? There is a rotation out of these high growth software names, particularly the work from home bid kind of got crushed. You know? I mean, I think Zoom is off 25% over 2 days or some crazy thing like that. Meanwhile, sort of all of these theme park stocks and cruise lines and airlines, all of a sudden ripped So I mean, look, the reality is the scary thing about all of this is if any of that stuff actually comes to pass, we're going to see inflation. And the reason is because if you start going out and spending a bunch of money on tickets and vacations and flights and this and that and pumping money into the economy and taking all that stimulus money, and putting it back to work, prices will go up. And by the way, that's not such a bad thing for the economy, which which needs a little bit of it. So All of this is, I think, generally very, very good news. Jason Calacanis (00:31:55): Friedberg, do you have a position on what you think will happen in the coming Let's let I would I would think the midterm is what people care most about. So that would be, let's call it, two to six quarters. 6 -- Speaker 5 (00:32:08): There's there's David Friedberg (00:32:08): one there's one potential speed bump still, which is what I mentioned at the beginning, which is Georgia. The the Democrats could still win both runoffs in Georgia for senate. And they could because Kamala Harris would then have the breaking vote, it would be a 50 Republican, 50 Democrats Senate, and and the vice president would would would break any ties. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:32:31): The question is if you have that same turnout, where do the libertarians break? because I think the variants were almost 2% of the vote. David Friedberg (00:32:37): Well, I think yeah. What's interesting is the I don't know if you guys have, but I've gotten emails from a lot of people asking me to donate money for this runoff campaign in Georgia. I think we're Jason Calacanis (00:32:49): -- Speaker 5 (00:32:49): Oh god. Jason Calacanis (00:32:49): I got so men so many VCs. David Friedberg (00:32:50): So -- I think we're gonna I think we're gonna see literally the biggest the the biggest funding for a senate runoff race in history by far. Don't you think Saks? Like, probably north of a $100,000,000 being spent, maybe a 100 to $200,000,000 being spent on advertisements in Georgia to try and get people to go vote one way or the other. The Democrats think they have a real run at this. They think it's make or break 2 years to kinda get their, you know, history changing policies in effect. Republicans think it saved the the nation time. So everyone's rushing to Georgia right now. So the markets are gonna have a very close eye on what's going on over there. I think. I'm, you know, I'm I'm very nervous about it. If the Democrats look like they're getting much more money into the state, and they're actually gonna, you know, get people to the polls and to the voting booths and actually get into this runoff on January 5th and actually flip get both of those seats to be to be blue, it's gonna be a very different market environment. I mean, you could see the market drop by 30, 40% in the next Jason Calacanis (00:33:53): 6 months. -- have we have a situation where it's 4848. There are two seats up for grabs. Those two seats are in a runoff. These and I wanna get into the -- Let David Sacks (00:34:01): me correct that, Jason. It's Jason Calacanis (00:34:01): -- David Friedberg (00:34:02): It's 4850. Yeah. David Sacks (00:34:03): It's their Republicans have a Jason Calacanis (00:34:04): 50 David Sacks (00:34:04): to 48 advantage with 2 open seats in the runoff. Actually, sorry. One one seat has opened the other. it has an incumbent Purdue who's facing Ossip. Purdue won in the last election. He got, like, Jason Calacanis (00:34:18): 40 9.9%. -- 50. David Sacks (00:34:20): Yeah. You have to get 50%, you get kicked to this runoff in January. Jason Calacanis (00:34:23): Georgia, the only place that has this where you have to get to 50 in order to win. David Sacks (00:34:28): It's crazy. David Friedberg (00:34:28): It's crazy. Jason Calacanis (00:34:29): So weird. The is this just they want the extra attention, or who came up with this idea? This seems just like -- David Friedberg (00:34:35): Every state's got its own history. It's crazy. Jason Calacanis (00:34:38): It is one of the unique things about living in the United States of America as opposed to America. Let's talk about exit polls. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:34:46): Well, this is what's incredible here. Let me tee this up for you. So in in Jason Calacanis (00:34:50): 2020, Chamath Palihapitiya (00:34:53): Biden got 80% of the black vote. Trump got 6. This is aggregate. So we could break this down by men and group and you can it looks even even more interesting. Latinos, Biden got Jason Calacanis (00:35:06): 67 Chamath Palihapitiya (00:35:08): Trump got 22% of the Latino vote. Between the ages of 18 to 34 so boomers or sorry pardon me, Gen Z And Millennials. Again, I would have thought a 100% Biden. It was on it was 62% Biden, 23% went for Trump, 1 in 4. Amongst women and again, you know, we thought, oh, okay. you know, suburban women are are breaking Biden eightytwenty. It turned out Biden got 58% of women Trump got 35% of all the female vote and the coup de grace whites with a degree again you would have thought this would have been 80 20, 90 10 and said it was 53% Biden, Jason Calacanis (00:35:56): 38% Speaker 5 (00:35:57): Trump. Jason Calacanis (00:35:59): So this really was something if we look at this if we look back on this, the pollsters were completely wrong in thinking, once again, that these groups of people are monolithic. And then I think the the most the most mind boggling to me and I and I had a candid discussion about this was The term Latin X is a a a catchall term for people who are of Latino Spanish speaking, descent. And what somebody told me who is in this Latinx group is that it's the most insulting thing they've ever been told. It's almost as a term like the term saying oriental to describe people from Asia. You're you're just grouping us all into one thing people from Cuba, Venezuela, and Mexico all think the same. This is the absolute end game of identity politics, which is we have to put you in a corner. We own you. We own your opinion. and you belong to our party. Whichever party it is. Oh, you don't have a degree? You're a GOP hillbilly. Oh, you you you're Latinx. Okay. Well, then we own you. You're a democrat. David, what and and and I know that this is an area where, you know, you have a lot of expertise. What do what are your thoughts? David Sacks (00:37:30): Well, as it turns out, promoting socialism of people who fled Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to escape it, turns out not to be a great election strategy. And And so, yeah, it's this this idea that Latinx is is one block. It's not. It consists of a bunch of different of immigrants from a bunch of different nations. And the ones who fled socialism are not eager to reenact it in the United States. The Republicans flipped to house seats in South Florida where there's a lot of Cuban Americans. And even in the the heavily Mexican American Counties in along the Rio Grande and Texas. Trump improved Let's see. He looks like he improved Jason Calacanis (00:38:20): 59 30 David Sacks (00:38:21): per 39% respectively over his 2016 showing. So this is not just some fluke of the exit polls. It seems like Trump really made progress in a lot of these groups that seem to defy their you know, what what the promoters of identity politics the way that they wanted them to vote. Gay Americans were another Jason Calacanis (00:38:41): 1. David Sacks (00:38:42): I think Trump improved his share of the gay vote from 14% in 2016 to 28% this year. So, I mean, really, it's it's pretty amazing. People are not voting the way that they're supposed to vote. Trump also improved from 12 to 18% with black men. And 4 to 8% of black women, I mean, those are still pretty low numbers, but there was improvement there. And I think part of the reason is that not all of the African American community is on board with defunding the police. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:39:11): Well, I also think what it means is identity politics is a stupid strategy. Forget whether you're offended by it or not. At this point, what's clear is it's a stupid fucking strategy. it doesn't work. It's a path to losing. Because the more and more you do it, the more and more you're going to disenfranchise individuals who want to be judged sort of of sound mind and body. Right? I mean, if he took a 1000 Sri Lankans and put him in a room and said, Jamal, I'm gonna judge you as a Sri Lankan vote. I would tell you to go fuck yourself. And I would be deeply offended by that. David Sacks (00:39:43): And and and this is where I think the radical left is gonna have to retool because their theory of how they take power in America was always that demographics is destiny that, you know, as the country simply becomes more diverse, we're gonna they're they're automatically gonna vote for us. And there's a lot of data in this election to show that that's not what's gonna happen. You actually have to run on issues that Jason Calacanis (00:40:04): -- Speaker 5 (00:40:05): Yeah. Jason Calacanis (00:40:05): -- David Sacks (00:40:05): people care about. David Friedberg (00:40:06): Let's think about this in the context of Internet advertising. Right? The the the the world prior to Internet advertising you had, you know, channels, and you would have an audience that was estimated to to be made up of some demographic set on that channel, and you would buy an ad spot on that channel, and that's who you would reach, and so you would create a message for that. Now today, we can create personalized ads and personalized messages And Internet advertisers are much more thoughtful about targeting, targeting based on psychographic profiling, behavioral targeting, And I think that's where politics has to head in the United States. It's kinda keeping up with this personalization of both products also of media and and ads. And and I think that's what we're gonna see. If you listen to James Cargill who's, like, you know, a classic kind of democratic campaign adviser, And he did a a podcast just leading up to the election. And if you listen to this podcast, these guys are very old school. It's like the white gonna do this, and the blacks are gonna do that, and the the the college educator are gonna do this, and the others are gonna do that. And they don't realize that the segmentation that's possible today, I think, reveals a lot more about the character of the of the population. Jason Calacanis (00:41:15): They're basically I think it's such an astute point, Freiberg. They're basically living in the level of granularity -- David Friedberg (00:41:22): Of network TV. It's like cable TV. Yeah. Like, it's like they Jason Calacanis (00:41:25): got to cable TV, and they're Okay. BET ESPN NASCAR. David Friedberg (00:41:29): And guess what? Like like, we're the world is much more complex. Individuals have found their own personal voice, and they found their own personal voice through social via, through Instagram, through this ability to kind of define themselves, not fit within a cohort. And I think that's what Jason Calacanis (00:41:43): -- Maybe they always did feel that way, and we just had never had the technology to get there. David Friedberg (00:41:47): Yeah. But I I think it's I think it's also that people like, people have complex points of view. You know? The four of us that and none of neither of us none of us identify as a party anymore. We all identify with with certain points that we think are important to us individually, and then we have a point of view on those points. And I think that's the case for the majority of the population in the United States. I don't think people are like, I'm just a fucking democrat no matter what. I'm a Republican no matter what. care more deeply in a more complex way. And I think politics needs to resolve to that. And and that's gonna require shift in how you communicate, how you message, how you get feedback, how you drive blocks for voting, and it's gonna it's gonna, you know, be a really interesting change over the next 15 to 20 years, and it may be what saves the republic. Jason Calacanis (00:42:30): I I I think this is an incredible observation. I think you it might be the observation of the episode. And I just wanna point to a tweet I did because I this is this election has really led to me doing 2 things. 1, I've been just thinking deeply about what do I actually understand about Americans in America. And then I also, you know, There's all these red pills around, so I decided I would crush up a red pill. And I would just, you know, put a little on my finger, and I try a little red pill for a second. and everybody told me I've been red billed now on Twitter. I met him with Trump fan. I am not. I hate the guy. It's horrible. But I I I did this quick survey here. I said, if you voted for Trump, I wanna understand what percentage of your vote was based on the combination of a, cancel culture, b identity politics, c Socialism, d, coastal elites telling you how to live, explain other issues that contributed in a reply IE spending, immigration, SC, the Supreme Court, etcetera. And I just said 0% 1 to 25, 26 to 50 at over 50. And and I got 12,000 votes, go ahead and look at the results, not the replies, but go ahead and vote. And it doesn't matter which one you pick. over 50% of people who voted for Trump. But I know this is unscientific. It's my followers, but it definitely feels directionally correct. the people who felt 26 to over 50% was part of the canceled culture identity culture was what they were trying to communicate with their vote. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:44:02): Well, this is this is such an important thing because I think this is what we're fighting over. The every single policy. Jason Calacanis (00:44:07): -- percent of them. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:44:08): Every single election going forward, like, if you if you put this on top of the 70 odd million people that voted, this kind of roughly makes sense, which is that you know, there's probably about Jason Calacanis (00:44:19): 20,000,000 Chamath Palihapitiya (00:44:21): people who will completely vote Democrat no matter what and 20,000,000 people who will completely vote Republican no what. They're they're just eyes are closed. Their ears are closed. They don't care. But when you take those people out, there's this enormous amount of people in the middle who have the ability to vote a split ticket. You know? And as and as and as Saksipoo said, like, they'll vote a a Democrat into the White House, but then down ballot, they'll vote a bunch of Republicans and they'll just make sure there's a balance of power. So they've been telling us about this kind of centricity for years. And so if you wanna win an election, you do 2 things. Part 1 is you understand this dynamic that centricism wins, and part 2 is what Friedberg says, which is you understand that we need to enter sort of the Google CPC world of political advertising. And really, cater, not just the ads, but also the message to individual people and stop the, you know, the cat the the gross high level categorization which isn't working anymore. David Sacks (00:45:25): Yeah. And and and, Jason, let me can I can I add the the connection between cancel culture and and the selection? So you know, obviously, the pollsters got everything completely wrong. And -- Again. Jason Calacanis (00:45:37): -- David Sacks (00:45:37): again. And but the reason is because of cancel culture, so in exit polling, 45 percent of Republicans with college degrees express fear that their careers could be at risk if their views became known. compared to only 23% of Democrats saying that. And so there were these, you know, quote, unquote, shy Trump voters who are afraid to tell pollsters what they really think. Now it wasn't the Trump voters that you think of when you see the pickup trucks and the convoys go by or the rallies. sort of the those the the those were the voters from 2016 who weren't counted. It was sort of the non college blue collar voters. The Michael Moore you know, people who turned out for Trump and big numbers and weren't properly counted 4 years ago. The pollsters actually counted those people correctly this time. The people they completely underestimated was actually the white college vote who swung for a lot of swung from Denver to Republican. They voted for Trump because of this issue, and they were afraid to say anything about it because they're afraid of getting canceled. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:46:36): And by the way, they they are every other person, everybody listening to this podcast works with. And so deal with that one. Speaker 5 (00:46:44): Right. David Sacks (00:46:44): Exactly. anybody who's not actively virtue signaling on Twitter for Biden is a Trump voter. Speaker 5 (00:46:53): Not a lot. Jason Calacanis (00:46:53): -- sure that's exactly correct, but David Sacks (00:46:55): I don't think it's wrong. Roughly. You you know, if people aren't ex if people in tech, aren't explicitly endorsing Biden on Twitter. They're probably closet Trump voters. Jason Calacanis (00:47:09): it is going to be very interesting for people to go back to offices because now we have had a resolution and identity politics cancel culture. And extremism on both sides, hysterical, and trolling trolling, Republican, historical libs. This has been a loss for both of those parties. And now the pandemic is ending we're gonna be back in offices at some point. I mean, what is office culture going to be like? Are people going to go with the Brian Armstrong? let's just get worked on here. Let's not talk about politics. It's just too charged or not. It's it's gonna be a very interesting Chamath Palihapitiya (00:47:49): It's every it's every comp it's every company's right. You know, it's every company's right to care about what they wanna care about, every board, every CEO. every controlling shareholder, and then it's every employee's right to vote with their feet about whether that's okay or not. And I think that look. I I mean, the whole Brian Armstrong thing, again, just to say, one of the most pathetically poorly written, you know, pieces of English prose I've ever fucking seen David Friedberg (00:48:16): You know? Jason Calacanis (00:48:17): He's a crypto in fairness. My dog my dog's Chamath Palihapitiya (00:48:20): my dog. He's not a coder. He's a he's a CEO. My dog slamming his her paw and the keyboard would have created a better pros in that. But he was coming from a reasonable place. He had the right to say what he said. The problem is that it's so antithetical to what you're allowed to believe for example, living in San Francisco. But I think that that's gonna change because you can't ignore every other person telling you that there are meaningful economic issues that matter and that the prioritization and the policing of these, you know, sort of high value social signaling issues are no longer a priority. And I think that what's gonna happen is there will be room for a party that focuses on that. and a group of people, but they will be relegated. Just like on the other side, that will happen to the Republican version of that as well. I I just think this whole thing to this honestly for me, it would it seems like such a tight election. It is. But I really think the huge winner here is centrism. Balance Jason Calacanis (00:49:22): 100%. David Sacks (00:49:23): I I I I I agree with that. And I I would say that this election proves that Brian Armstrong was right. because the average American is tired of these highly charged political situations. And the last thing they wanna do is have these conversations at work where they can get reported to where they can offend their coworkers and get reported to HR Jason Calacanis (00:49:44): -- They can make them feel unsafe, Dave. That works. David Sacks (00:49:47): Why they they don't wanna have these conversations at work certainly. By the way, only 5% of Coinbase employees took Armstrong up on that offer to leave. So the number of people who actually want to have a politically charged workplace is very very small. They're just the noisiest. They're the squeakiest wheel. Jason Calacanis (00:50:04): I mean but that was a ridiculous deal. I mean, what did he say 6 months and we vest his hobby? David Sacks (00:50:09): He made it really attractive to leave if you didn't agree with his policy. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:50:11): Was that was that written because I couldn't figure that out David Sacks (00:50:13): that way. That was written. It it was an attractive deal to leave if you wanted to leave, and 95% chose to Yeah. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:50:19): Did I did I say it was poorly written? I didn't understand it because it was so poorly written. David Sacks (00:50:23): So anyway so Jason Calacanis (00:50:23): 90 95% David Sacks (00:50:25): stayed. So my point is just the number of people who actually like this highly polarized political chart situation in which we're all arguing with our friends over politics. And children are divorcing their parents because they're not woke enough. I mean, people don't wanna live in that kind of country anymore. And I think this is the thing that Joe Biden really got right in his campaign. I mean, this is why I mean, this is the only way that his basement strategy could actually work and result in him getting elect elected is people actually do want this return to normalcy. Jason Calacanis (00:50:57): know who the biggest losers gonna be coming out of the side bank, not when you think holistically about the ecosystem? It's gonna be the media. Because they have made an absolute fortune over the last 4 or 5 years picking aside. What is the point of watching Rachel Maddow January 20th? What is the point of tuning into Fox News or reading the historical opinion page of The New York Times, all of these places that were being propped up by either Trumpism or the anti Trumpism are now gonna find themselves where they started, which is -- Without Chamath Palihapitiya (00:51:35): a job. Jason Calacanis (00:51:36): -- without a job and We just wanted you to tell us the news and tell us the strength. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:51:41): There was a great article. Jason Calacanis (00:51:42): -- the New York Times have an opinion page. rip the opinion page out of the New York Times, rip it out of the Wall Street. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:51:50): No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. I I I no. I disagree. I think the opposite happens which is that opinion page was meant to be where people could have an opinion so that everything else was fact. And the problem is that all the other pages became opinion as well as nobody told anybody. Jason Calacanis (00:52:05): Yes. Exactly. But nobody can tell the difference. I agree. But nobody can tell the difference. David Sacks (00:52:10): That's right. They can't tell the difference. And look at that expose about how Barry Barbara Weiss was run out of the New York Times. Basically, the activists ran her out. And the the reality is activists that completely capture the New York Times and CNN and MSNBC. And there is no -- And Jason Calacanis (00:52:28): they always had Fox And the New York Post. David Sacks (00:52:30): They always had Fox, but but now we have no objective, neutral media. And so who's gonna call the election? I mean, you complain about the fact that Trump is sowing dissent. But who is the universally trusted spokesperson for neutrality the way that Walter Cronkite was when he could just declare it and that's the way it is and people believe that's the way it is. Jason Calacanis (00:52:53): Who did the best job, Friedberg? That When we were doing that, let's reflect on the livestream. I have two questions for the livestream. Number 1, who was your bestie guestie? Who did who did you think Edith the most as a guestie? and why. And then number 2, Chamath Palihapitiya (00:53:07): we're do we're doing what we're gonna do? We're we're gonna do a bull, a human valuable. Wait. Before Jason Calacanis (00:53:13): -- Speaker 5 (00:53:13): Who who good for? Jason Calacanis (00:53:15): I got I got a lot of feedback on the guesties that were girly people. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:53:18): Can I say one more thing on this topic? Brad, Before before we go there, there was a there was a really good article in The New York Times about Maggie Haberman. Right? And Maggie who's a fantastic journalist, but built an entire career. It really amplified, came to a head in Jason Calacanis (00:53:34): 2016 Chamath Palihapitiya (00:53:36): and she just scoop after scoop about Trump. But the most compelling thing about that whole article was Some are near the, you know, the third of the way from the bottom. She's like, look at the end of the day she said something like I'm dispensable and I know it. And it was the most honest thing because it's like despite her popularity and despite sort of, you know, how big of a stick she carries, the reality is Saunce Trump, there's just nothing to do. There's nothing to leak. There's there there just is not nearly as much to do. David Friedberg (00:54:10): I did just put in the the chat here, the Washington Post, Fox News, The Hill, basically, like, the full gamut of of of media opinion have highlighted that the media generally is the biggest loser of the of the 2020 election. And I think I I think they've just lost the the faith of their audience, and, you know, it's it's I mean, it's to Saks's point. I I don't know how many people were you're either looking for objective and you've lost it, or you're looking for opinionated and you feel like your, you know, your aligned opinion setting media partner has betrayed you. You know, the fact that Fox called it for for Trump, and Trump's now saying Fox is is is a liar. The fact that the New York Times doesn't feel like they're being objective anymore, and they're, you know, they're running people out of the out of the newsroom. In general, I just feel like we've been disenfranchised. And I think that's that's something that's gonna be really hard to kind of recover from and resolve. Jason Calacanis (00:55:14): And to the love of god, can somebody please get I I I don't want you to break any laws. But, however, if we could read the Slack channel of the New York Times' reporters leading up to the 100 days of this election. That would become the greatest best selling book of all time. To watch the New York Times writers bicker with each other, Saxx. I mean, we could do 10 hours on that. No problem. Let's talk about okay. Besty Gasty. Who who who guess these? What'd you think? Of our guests? David Sacks (00:55:50): I thought they were all great. I think they're all great. Are are we now becoming a media critics? We're gonna now -- Yeah. David Friedberg (00:55:56): What do we like? -- guys are on our own podcast. Why don't you go for are you Speaker 5 (00:56:00): gonna -- Yeah. David Sacks (00:56:00): Were we about Naval Gazing? Jason Calacanis (00:56:02): You go for -- You go for -- -- naval Gazing, David Sacks (00:56:04): but the first time we had Jason Calacanis (00:56:05): -- David Sacks (00:56:06): Jason Jason Jason Calacanis (00:56:07): -- Chamath Palihapitiya (00:56:07): Jason wants Jason wants to throw a mute under the bus. Go ahead, Jason. You start. Jason Calacanis (00:56:12): No. No. No. No. No. No. Oh, oh, Contreras. David Friedberg (00:56:14): Does anyone have a video they wanna care? Jason Calacanis (00:56:15): -- person on the podcast who had to quit. mute in his plays that it was not the it was not the point guard in this case. Somebody pulled a Draymond and pulled he held me at the side and said, stop. You gotta pass the ball. I do think Brad did a great job. He had some great insights. I think Bell Girly had some great insights. We I think it was just a really good job of getting some people to rotate in. I enjoyed it. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:56:42): Yeah. I thought it was really well. David Sacks (00:56:43): Everyone was great. I'll give a shout out to my best in human. He was better he was better as a political analyst and all those jokers on CNN and Fox and MSNBC. David Friedberg (00:56:54): The dude with the with the map, and he kept touching the map. And, yeah, Speaker 5 (00:56:57): that's like, David Friedberg (00:56:57): I gets paid to do that? I can't believe he gets paid to do that. Jason Calacanis (00:57:02): I'm gonna get David Friedberg (00:57:02): my I'm gonna get my daughter on CNN. She could do that. Jason Calacanis (00:57:05): When guy on CNN who does that. John King -- John Speaker 5 (00:57:08): King. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:57:08): John King. Jason Calacanis (00:57:09): God bless this guy because I don't know how much Adderall he's on. But I I turned it on at 8 AM, and he was zooming into Pennsylvania. And he's like, oh, well, of course, in 2018, this time, 2016. He's like, let's zoom out. Let's go back to Arizona. Of course, Arizona, this place, I was like, is this guy a geography teacher? I mean, he was amazing and just the dexterity. He looked like he was Tom Cruise a minority report with the finger -- Speaker 5 (00:57:34): I don't know. I don't know if David Friedberg (00:57:36): I call him Tom Cruise. Jason Calacanis (00:57:37): Alright. When -- I didn't look like Tom Cruise, but the minority report pinch and zoom in and out. It was incredible. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:57:44): When when does Trump call this thing? Jason Calacanis (00:57:46): That's a great question. Well, I David Sacks (00:57:48): think he has to run out these court challenges, which will take a few weeks. But I I predict by Thanksgiving, but it may have to go up to the Supreme Court. But he's gonna he's gonna dot the i dot dot every i and cross every t that he's got legally. But he's got like, we talked about at the very beginning, he's got a huge uphill challenge. I'd I see the court ultimately ruling against him or throwing it out. Jason Calacanis (00:58:08): What is the point, David? David Sacks (00:58:10): What is Well, because why why shouldn't Jason Calacanis (00:58:11): he exhaust every -- He's not gonna win. Speaker 5 (00:58:14): No. I don't I don't know David Sacks (00:58:15): that he he knows that. He he I think it's his right to exhaust every legal possibility. And let's remember, Al Gore didn't concede for 37 days after the election. So I third certainly think Trump is within his rights over the next few weeks to run this out. In terms of what the point is, I mean, other than the obvious attempt to challenge it legally, I do think this is partly a branding exercise by Trump. It's a marketing exercise. I don't think he's gonna come up with enough malfeasance to overturn an election. But I do think he'll probably produce a lot of smoke. And this is about protecting his brand as a as a winner. And, you know, if he kicks up enough you know, examples of voter fraud or or or what have you, he'll always be able to say, you know, years from now that this was a it was a stolen election. And when you combine the fact that COVID really did drive this this election, you could call that Chinese election interference if you want. the fact that the vaccine is now here already, you could call that, you know, some sort of election interference. He's gonna have enough arguments where if he wants to run 4 years from now, I think he probably gets to a Republican nomination again. Jason Calacanis (00:59:28): What what's the percentage chance, Chamath, that he runs again in 4 years. 0. Friedberg? Speaker 5 (00:59:36): From? David Friedberg (00:59:37): Yeah. he's gonna be making so much money. He's not gonna know what to do with him. So he's not going back to that fucking torture torture house. He didn't be thinking about the White House, like, some terrible blown house production movie set. He's like, fuck that. I'm not going back there. It was awful. Jason Calacanis (00:59:51): Where is he going? Where is he going? He's going to Shanghai. Is he going to -- Speaker 5 (00:59:55): He's gonna launch it? You can be in David Friedberg (00:59:57): New York. He's gonna buy a law firm because he's gonna need a law firm to keep everyone at bay, and he's gonna be probably printing a 100,000,000 bucks you know, put Jason Calacanis (01:00:04): it at Dubai, Saudi Arabia. I think -- Yeah. Speaker 5 (01:00:06): I think Chamath Palihapitiya (01:00:06): I think he's definitely gonna launch a media business, and he'll he'll try to become kingmaker. David Sacks (01:00:12): I think I think he will become a kingmaker Republican politics. He will launch a competitor to Fox News, but it will also be Fox News hybridized with a grassroots movement like the tea party. And every Republican will need to go get his endorsement or they will be primary by the Trump party. And I I I would not put it -- -- disagree more. Jason Calacanis (01:00:34): Could not disagree more. I think he's a disgrace. I think he will be, like, I think Chamath Palihapitiya (01:00:39): what that's not what David says. Jason Calacanis (01:00:41): -- why he's gonna come not you, David. I'm talking about Trump. I think, Dave, it's incredible. No. I think the stuff that comes out after this, the deluge, the number of SDNY suits, all the grift, and the graft, it's all coming out. Not only is he not gonna be a kingmaker, He will not be able to get the backing for this network. It'll be brightbark light, and it'll be shut down within 24 months. He'll fail so miserably that when he walks into a restaurant, it'll be like Game of Thrones. Shame. Shame. They will Chamath Palihapitiya (01:01:20): Well, I I don't I don't I don't I don't think so. I think that it's very likely that the Donald Trump that runs for president 2024 is Donald Trump Junior. Jason Calacanis (01:01:30): Oh, god. No. He's horrible. The whole Republican party has to start over. Let's end on this. Pompeo did a press conference. Is the state department currently preparing to engage with the Biden transition team? And if not, At what point does a delay hamper a smooth transition propose a risk to national security? Speaker 6 (01:01:53): There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration. Alright. We're we're ready. The the world is watching what's taking place here. We're gonna count all the votes. When the process is complete, there'll be electors selected. There's a process. The constitution lays it out pretty clearly. The world should have every confidence that the transition necessary to make sure that the state department is functional today, successful today, and successful with the president who's in office on January 20th a minute afternoon will also be successful. David Friedberg (01:02:24): Can I can I just say, I don't disagree with the position they're taking. It's not immoral. It's customary and traditional to concede your election. But, you know, December 15th is the date that congress ratifies the electoral votes to determine who the next president is gonna be. And these guys are just taking a a very kind of pragmatic legal line that is not immoral in a way. They they they believe that they have some case on on what the vote should be. The votes are all very close, yadayadayada. I'm not saying that he's gonna win by any chance, but I don't think that folks saying, like, let the votes be counted and let congress do their job of having the states tell them who their electoral votes are going to is is an inappropriate position to take. I sound like I I might sound like some conservative, you know, Trump head, but I'm not. I I think that these guys what I'm just saying is that these guys aren't that immoral in in kind of asking for that for that. You know? Chamath Palihapitiya (01:03:21): Sorry. I also think at the fringes of the Republican party, this is what you keep all these militia folks and all these other folks at Bay is just you show a really methodical, you know, stepping away from the spotlight. And I think that this is yeah. Honestly, it's this is a very deliberate, safe, calming thing to do. David Friedberg (01:03:44): There's been nothing about the Trump administration from 2016 through to this very moment that has been customary or traditional. so I don't know why we all expected him to step in and say, like, I concede, like, the way that we've been doing it Chamath Palihapitiya (01:03:55): for us. Right. It would be worse if we worse if he had conceded all of a sudden was holding a bunch of protests and rallies all over the country. That'd be nuts. David Friedberg (01:04:02): He's he's not doing anything illegal. No one has any legal requirement to concede. And You know? And I think as long as these guys on December 15th, which is the date that we should all be watching and and waiting for, as long as these guys do the appropriate thing at that point, then you know, that that that's the only point in which I would have any sort of concern or worry about what's going on with the transition in the government. But sorry. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:04:23): I think I think this is about saving face and saving brand as sexy percent. He'll he'll be out by December 15th, meaning Jason Calacanis (01:04:29): -- Speaker 5 (01:04:29): Right. Jason Calacanis (01:04:29): -- Chamath Palihapitiya (01:04:29): it'll this will all be done. David Sacks (01:04:31): Yeah. I I agree. And, look, let's remember that Gore was able to challenge the election result for 37 days without being hysterically accused of undermining democracy. So let Trump have his day in court. It'll play out over the next few weeks I expect that the obstacles he have has to overcome are are too large, and he will lose these lawsuits. It might go to the extreme court It would not be a bad thing if the Supreme Court were the ones to make this decision. They're one of the last institutions that still trusted it. Clearly, the media are not. And I think that, you know, Trump will accept the result. He may not concede, but he will accept the result when it comes from the Stream Court. Jason Calacanis (01:05:10): Is there a non zero chance that he could win on a recount? David Sacks (01:05:15): He he would have to prove systemic fraud because it's not like Florida where there's just one state and a few 100 votes, he's gotta overcome over Jason Calacanis (01:05:24): 12,000 David Sacks (01:05:25): votes in at least 3 states. So that's the issue is is it's just -- Put Jason Calacanis (01:05:30): a percent on it, Sacks. If you had to lay money on it, David Sacks (01:05:33): Oh, I mean, it's, like, sub 10% chance, I think. Jason Calacanis (01:05:36): Sub 10% chance. 1 in 10, you'd give 10 to 1 odds? David Sacks (01:05:39): No. I'm saying it's under 10%. I'm saying it's a very small chip. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:05:43): Well, here's the thing. So Bushvie Gore, the the supreme court ruled 7 to Jason Calacanis (01:05:49): 2. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:05:50): I mean, you would have thought it was 9 to Jason Calacanis (01:05:52): 0. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:05:53): So clearly, there were some sympathizers in Bushby Gore. So, hopefully, you know, it's something like 7 to 2, and, you know, we move on. David Sacks (01:06:02): I I I believe if it gets to the supreme court, it will be at least 7 to 2, if not 81 or 90. Just because I think Trump has a much harder case to prove. In Florida, the issue was simply whether the recount should be allowed to continue. James Baker went to supreme court to stop the recount that was in process because of the fear that the local corrupt election officials basically steal the and for Gore. They you know? But but but Bush was always ahead in that election. There was never a time when Bush was behind. Biden is now ahead in every swing state that matters. Trump has to now overturn that result in at least 3 of those states. I don't know how he does that. By tens of 1000 of votes. I just don't know how he does that. He has to prove some sort of systemic fraud that took place across the nation that and and and look, I think from a like a marketing or branding standpoint, you'll be able to create a lot of smoke. I think they will actually find quite a bit of misconduct because I don't think our elections are perfect. But will it rise to the standard that the Supreme Court's gonna set for overturning an election. I don't think so. I don't think so. Jason Calacanis (01:07:11): I mean, they'll probably find it on both sides. There's gotta be some crazy -- Chamath Palihapitiya (01:07:16): Well, the other Jason Calacanis (01:07:16): -- -- Trump supporter who has 10 ballots they signed, and there'll be some crazy liberal who did the same -- Chamath Palihapitiya (01:07:21): Well, the Jason Calacanis (01:07:22): nuance -- -- that out? Chamath Palihapitiya (01:07:23): The nuanced issue is whether they can do a constitutionally valid recount by you know, the time necessary as well. So the longer that this delays on, then they'll be forced to basically say no to that also because otherwise, it will be effectively throwing out an election. And so Jason Calacanis (01:07:37): -- As we wrap here, San Francisco's continuous to develop revenue down 40% in terms of taxes. Budget is double what it's been just a few years ago. Crime is going crazy. Walmart is closing their stores and leaving Walgreens. because of Walgreens. I'm sorry. Walgreens. You don't have a Walmart here. And there's 20 there's more homes on the market now than there have been. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:08:03): Too much of anything is a bad thing. If you eat too much broccoli, it's a bad thing. You know what I mean? So too much of a single party monoculture is bad. whether it's Republican or Democrat. You need a diverse centrist plurality and in the absence of that, many cities that veered in one direction or the other will decay and die. And San Francisco is going to be the tip of this beer for the left's version And there's been a bunch of cities that have already been the examples of the rights version. So you know what? Apparently the water is warm and they wanna join. Jason Calacanis (01:08:43): Anybody else? Friedberg? David Sacks (01:08:44): I can't I can't find a lot to disagree with there. I think San Francisco, we we're basically in Atlas shrugged. I mean, The, you know, half the storefronts are closed. They're boarded up. The city is completely surrendered to the criminal element. You can't your car anywhere in the city without having it getting broken into. They won't prosecute people for crimes, including increasingly violent crimes. the, you know, the the the the the the city is about to go bankrupt, and the entrepreneurs are all disappearing. they're all leaving. I mean, it's right out out. Let's shrug. David Friedberg (01:09:20): Yeah. I mean, it's it's the the action is the wrong action. Right? So San Francisco the biggest disappointment of election night for me was the new business taxes that were passed for San Francisco Businesses. And and there was also this, like for for 99.9999, 99% of people, they're gonna shrug and say I don't give a shit. But there was this new tax of 6% for homes that get sold over $10,000,000. Now if you're a successful entrepreneur and invest or a CEO of a company in San Francisco, and, you know, it's it's like a slap in the face. You add the business tax with that kind of high end property tax And it's almost like an invitation to leave the city. And some people are nodding their head. It's -- Wait. This Jason Calacanis (01:10:08): 6% is on leaving or buying? David Friedberg (01:10:11): Transaction. when you sell. So you literally, 6% off the top when you sell a home. David Sacks (01:10:16): The city basically just took 6% of my house. Yeah. The the city just took 6% of my house. David Friedberg (01:10:21): It's a David Sacks (01:10:21): state tax. They're now a part owner of my house. David Friedberg (01:10:24): Yeah. It's in a state tax. And so there there are people, like, there are people in San Francisco who we all know. Jason Calacanis (01:10:30): How much warning did you have before they took your -- None. -- bedroom? Yeah. David Friedberg (01:10:35): I mean, There's a London Bridge that puts some people in Stax's 13th bedroom on the Third Floor, and they're they're all living there right now. But, I mean, David Sacks (01:10:45): It's it's okay. I got, like, wings I don't even know about. Yeah. Totally. It's like Ritchie Ritchie's house or something. So, like, no nobody cries. Nobody cries for super rich people. And, you know Jason Calacanis (01:10:55): But it was a short David Friedberg (01:10:56): sighted is the point. Right? Jason Calacanis (01:10:57): Like -- Right. David Sacks (01:10:57): Exactly. I'm not complaining about the taxes on me, but it's gonna do tremendous damage to the city. people are not gonna wanna move here. And we yeah. David Friedberg (01:11:05): Yeah. I look. I've built businesses in San Francisco since 2006, and I will not build another business in San Francisco. And I hear the same from other entrepreneurs. If you're gonna build a business, do it in the South Bay, do it in the East Bay, do it in the North Bay, or do it in Austin, or LA, or somewhere else. but this is just not a place to build businesses. The city is basically saying we don't want you here. Now that would be fine and dandy if the city was being conservative in the way that they spend and if they were actually reducing their budget and, you know, kind of reducing the the city's activities, the problem is these these taxes diverge with the budget because the taxes are now gonna go down because businesses are leaving. People are selling their homes. They're not gonna buy expensive homes anymore. And we are seeing a budget crisis. San Francisco, I think, is looking at a 1.7 to $2,000,000,000 budget shortfall here. I mean, like, where's that money gonna come from? This is gonna be with Jason Calacanis (01:11:58): 800,000. David Sacks (01:11:59): And we have and there there was that expose in the San Francisco chronicle talking about how there's 20,000 city workers making over a $150,000 a year. 30,000. Yeah. Yeah. What what are we getting for all of that? The evidence is not apparent. And this is where okay. Look. I'd be happy to give the city 6% of my house and pay all these high taxes if we actually got something for it. but the city just keeps getting less and less livable. David Friedberg (01:12:24): Yes. City budget in 2013 will still be it. fiscal price we have David Sacks (01:12:27): a fiscal crisis, and we have a livability crisis. I think is even worse. Speaker 5 (01:12:33): And that that that's a David Sacks (01:12:34): huge problem. And let's be frank. San Francisco is always the accidental beneficiary of Silicon Valley. If you will, San Francisco was the accidental billionaire, it was Silicon Valley that created this enormous wealth and all the jobs and the the companies. It wasn't San Francisco policies or politics that created any of that. It just so happens that Silicon Valley got big enough. It started around Stanford. It got big enough. that San Francisco as the nearest metropolitan area really was a beneficiary of that. And and, you know, because they never really did anything to create the conditions for that prosperity. Frankly, they took it for granted. And now that the rug's been pulled out from under them, I don't think they're really gonna know what to do. David Friedberg (01:13:14): Local local San Francisco politicians treated Silicon Valley's success as a grab bag. And Uber set up here and Twitter and Square and Salesforce and San Francisco politicians put their hand in the honey jar and took as much as they could. And it's now backfiring because new businesses don't wanna set up here. Entrepreneurs don't wanna operate here. And as Saks is pointing out, the, you know, the the the rapid kind of inflation has caused this tremendous decline in in the quality of service. There's zero accountability, 0 checks and balances. So San Francisco is in for a really Frank, a scary reckoning, and a lot of people are really worried about it, and it's, like, a very real problem. It's not like, oh, the city's fucked, like, a $2,000,000,000 budget shortfall. You're either gonna have to cut a lot of jobs of public employees, or you're gonna have a city gonna go bankrupt and, you know, bonds are gonna get defaulted on. And at the same time, you're gonna have this mass exodus of people and businesses, and it is a it is a very kind of unwinding not right now. So it's a it's a scary moment. I don't think there's a real great answer for for what Chamath Palihapitiya (01:14:18): to do. David Friedberg (01:14:18): It's more nuanced, but Jason Calacanis (01:14:19): -- Chamath Palihapitiya (01:14:20): I think it I think it will happen. Mark my word, San Francisco will file for bankruptcy in the next 10 years. David Friedberg (01:14:26): Wow. Are we Pelosi look. You know Pelosi held out? Chamath Palihapitiya (01:14:30): A major city filing for -- Maybe 15. Maybe 15 years. But, yeah, 10, 15 years. David Friedberg (01:14:34): Remember, a big part of what Pelosi held out on the big thing she held out on in the stimulus negotiations last month was for local and state governments to get bailout support in this stimulus package. And she's acutely aware. She looks one block away from me down the road here. She's acutely aware of what's going on in San Francisco. And the solution may not be to bail out these cities and these states. if they're gonna continue to operate the way they are because it's Jason Calacanis (01:15:01): -- So State needs to break in order to rebuild. David Friedberg (01:15:05): Well, you need to cut budget. I mean, any of us running a business know, like, it you know, if you have a little revenue coming in and you're spending too much, where the fuck's the money coming from? You can't just keep going to Big Papa in DC and asking them for more Jason Calacanis (01:15:15): What about Masayoshi san? Maybe he'll what he consider coming in and -- Well, maybe Speaker 5 (01:15:20): he's back. Maybe he should do a second. David Friedberg (01:15:20): I I really Chamath Palihapitiya (01:15:23): Fine. I'm fine. I'm gonna spack San Francisco. Please back Jason Calacanis (01:15:26): -- David Friedberg (01:15:26): Right. I see. Jason Calacanis (01:15:26): I get it. Kamashi Yoshi do the secondary, and then -- Yeah. -- we spack San Francisco. David Sacks (01:15:33): Listen, I I think so so Jermuth is right about San Francisco being the proof of what happens when you have a one party system. And I I really hope that the the tech community, the tech liberals who are listening to this podcast, they're not gonna listen to me because they probably, you know, think I'm too conservative. But, you know, Tremoth is pretty liberal. And you know, he he makes the right point. And, you know, we cannot have a a one party system that remains healthy for very long. we need the pendulum to swing back towards the center. And, you know, I really hope that yeah. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts, absolutely, Chamath Palihapitiya (01:16:09): as you've as you've said many times. Yeah. David Sacks (01:16:11): Look -- And it's true. That's yeah. Lord Acton said that Jason Calacanis (01:16:16): This is literally what the Dark Knight Batman series is about. It's literally about not having a basic standard of policing and allowing criminals to run a city. We've turned into a goddamn comic book. Like, you have to arrest people who commit crimes. David Sacks (01:16:37): And and and what else -- -- if that hurts Jason Calacanis (01:16:38): your feelings. Speaker 5 (01:16:39): And one of the things that -- -- people David Friedberg (01:16:41): up Yeah. Speaker 5 (01:16:42): You're right. And and one of David Sacks (01:16:43): the things that's like the comic book is the sense of fatalism. You know? It's like everybody knows San Francisco's broken, but nobody thinks they can do anything about it. that's really the tragedy of it. Jason Calacanis (01:16:52): That is the tragedy. And you know what? If any of us I I've said it before. I'm like, I know exactly how you can stop all these car break ins. You there's a thing called the bait car. You put 10 bait cars out. You put cameras in them. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:17:04): And now that Einstein has spoken, boys, I love you. David Friedberg (01:17:07): Love you all. Love you all. I Chamath Palihapitiya (01:17:10): do see. Jason Calacanis (01:17:10): -- to see again. And for those of you who'd like to advertise on, We're gonna podcast. The advertising rate has been set at $10,000,000 a year for however many episodes we we do. I will read the ad at the end of the show if you give $10,000,000 to the charity of Chemaltz picking, which apparently is gonna be San Francisco. I think that'll ballad point 7% of the budget. Follow of Friedberg on the Twitter. Follow David Sachs. Follow it. If you like the show, tell your friends and write a review. or don't. We don't care. We just do this because we like hanging out with each other. We'll see you all. Oh, and if you wanna be a guest on the show, we don't accept any guest recommendations for the love of basking. Speaker 5 (01:17:54): I mean, I don't know Jason Calacanis (01:17:55): how many people are begging to be on the show. It's there's room enough for four people, maybe on a live show, Besty Yesies, You're not getting your CEO of your whatever company on the show, period end of story. And I cannot introduce you to Chamov to spark your company. Enough of that. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:18:13): Love you, besties.