The State of the World — with Ian Bremmer

0:00:02 Support for PropG comes from Anthropic.
0:00:05 It’s not always easy to harness the power potential of AI.
0:00:07 For all the talk about its revolutionary potential,
0:00:09 a lot of AI systems feel as if they’re designed
0:00:12 for specific tasks that are only performed by select few.
0:00:15 Well, Cloud by Anthropic is AI for everyone.
0:00:18 The latest model, Cloud 3.5 Sonnet,
0:00:21 offers groundbreaking intelligence at an everyday price.
0:00:23 Cloud Sonnet can generate code, help with writing,
0:00:26 and reason through hard problems better than any model before.
0:00:28 You can discover how Cloud can transform your business
0:00:31 at Anthropic.com/clod.
0:00:39 Thumbtack presents the ins and outs of caring for your home.
0:00:43 Out, uncertainty, self-doubt,
0:00:46 stressing about not knowing where to start.
0:00:50 In, plans and guides that make it easy
0:00:51 to get home projects done.
0:00:54 Out, word art.
0:00:56 Sorry, live laugh lovers.
0:01:01 In, knowing what to do, when to do it, and who to hire.
0:01:05 Start caring for your home with confidence.
0:01:06 Download Thumbtack today.
0:01:10 – Hey, everybody.
0:01:13 I’m Ashley C. Ford, and I’m the host of “Into the Mix,”
0:01:17 a Ben and Jerry’s podcast about joy and justice
0:01:19 produced with Vox Creative.
0:01:20 And in our new mini-series,
0:01:23 we’re talking about voter fraud.
0:01:26 For years now, former President Donald Trump
0:01:28 has made it a key talking point,
0:01:31 despite there being no evidence of widespread fraud.
0:01:34 But what impact declaims like these have
0:01:36 on ordinary voters?
0:01:38 People like Olivia Coley-Piersen,
0:01:40 a civil servant in Douglas, Georgia,
0:01:42 who was arrested for voter fraud
0:01:44 because she showed a first-time voter
0:01:46 how the voting machines worked.
0:01:49 Hear how she fought back on the latest episode
0:01:50 of “Into the Mix.”
0:01:52 Subscribe now, wherever you listen.
0:01:58 Episode 323, 323 Azirica covering Los Angeles,
0:02:00 Beverly Hills, and parts of Hollywood.
0:02:01 True story.
0:02:03 I’ve invested in a Beverly Hills Plastic Surgery Clinic
0:02:07 that specializes in low-cost breast enhancements.
0:02:09 It’s called Nordstrom’s Rack.
0:02:15 All right.
0:02:17 Go, go, go!
0:02:19 (upbeat music)
0:02:30 – Welcome to the 323rd episode of “The Prof. G. Pod.”
0:02:32 In today’s episode, we speak with Ian Bremmer,
0:02:33 the president and founder of Eurasia Group,
0:02:35 the world’s leading political risk research
0:02:37 and consulting firm.
0:02:39 We discussed with Ian major themes and forces shaping
0:02:41 the current geopolitical landscape
0:02:44 covered in his recent 2024 state of the world speech
0:02:47 in Tokyo, including the wars in the Middle East in Russia.
0:02:50 The impact of China’s managed decline
0:02:52 and the impending U.S. election.
0:02:53 I’m an enormous fan of Ian.
0:02:55 I think he’s been on, he’s our Alec Baldwin.
0:02:58 I think he’s been on six or eight.
0:03:02 Actually, no, he and Oswalt de Modren are our two go-tos
0:03:06 for all things geopolitics and the markets.
0:03:09 Anyways, the dog is in Delray Beach.
0:03:10 The dog loves the beach.
0:03:12 And we’re standing with our friends Jojo and Bobby,
0:03:15 and they’re so infinitely Canadian.
0:03:17 They’ll drive in and they’ll use the other driveway
0:03:19 ’cause they don’t wanna bother us.
0:03:22 They act as if it’s our home and they’re the guests.
0:03:25 Meanwhile, I would take my socks off, hit their kids.
0:03:27 I make myself right at home.
0:03:30 I don’t, I’m literally the,
0:03:32 I’m either the worst or the best house guest
0:03:35 ’cause as far as I’m concerned, I’m not a guest, I’m family.
0:03:37 Anyways, in Delray Beach, I love it here.
0:03:42 I went to a fundraiser for Jed where I was given an award.
0:03:44 I was given an award for the support
0:03:47 or raising awareness around mental health issues for teens.
0:03:50 The Jed Foundation raises money
0:03:55 or is a nonprofit focus on teen mental health.
0:03:58 They leverage the infrastructure of schools to try and identify
0:04:01 or distinguish between what is kind of aberrant
0:04:03 but somewhat normal team behavior in a teen
0:04:08 who might be on the precipice of an episode of self-harm.
0:04:11 When I think about the joy in my life,
0:04:15 a lot of it is a function of the things I’ve avoided
0:04:18 or that I’ve been blessed enough not to have to endure.
0:04:19 And one of the reasons I love the Jed Foundation
0:04:22 is it’s one of those charities that they can’t sale.
0:04:25 We saved 1,100 dogs with our rescue shelter
0:04:29 or we housed 4,000 people who are homeless.
0:04:31 All of those wonderful things.
0:04:35 The success of this charity will never be measured
0:04:38 because it’s about, it’s about staving off
0:04:43 or cauterizing or reducing despair
0:04:46 and depression before it happens.
0:04:50 We’ll never really know the success here.
0:04:53 They do have metrics in place around schools,
0:04:56 they have Jed programs versus schools where they don’t.
0:04:58 But one of my favorite quotes
0:05:01 is from this wonderful series that Ricky Gervais did
0:05:03 that didn’t get nearly enough attention.
0:05:05 It’s on Netflix called Afterlife.
0:05:08 And he’s been coached by a woman
0:05:10 who’s also lost her husband.
0:05:12 He loses his wife in the show.
0:05:14 And she has one of my favorite quotes.
0:05:18 She says, “The good people plant trees the shade
0:05:20 “of which they will never sit under.”
0:05:22 And I just love that, that that’s real character, right?
0:05:23 You take care of yourself.
0:05:25 You gotta fix your own oxygen mask
0:05:27 before you can help others.
0:05:29 You help your family, you take care of your family,
0:05:31 you take care of your extended family,
0:05:33 you start taking care of your community.
0:05:35 And then real ballers, real success in this world
0:05:38 is you help people that you will never meet
0:05:41 and will never have an opportunity to say thank you to you.
0:05:42 So anyways, here we are.
0:05:44 Some big news in the journalism world.
0:05:45 The Washington Post has decided
0:05:47 not to make a presidential endorsement
0:05:49 for the first time in 36 years.
0:05:53 By the way, I was worried that I was giving into the crowd.
0:05:54 I have a newsletter that goes out every Friday
0:05:57 to about half a million people called No Mercino Malice.
0:06:01 And I try to not play to the crowd.
0:06:02 I write stuff and I think,
0:06:03 okay, this is gonna piss people off.
0:06:05 I love it when people say I’m unsubscribing.
0:06:07 And it’s like, well, let me do it for you, bitch.
0:06:08 I don’t care.
0:06:10 We don’t monetize this thing.
0:06:13 Or people say, you know, complain like,
0:06:14 well, full refund coming your way.
0:06:16 I don’t mind feedback.
0:06:19 The most unsubscribes we’ve ever received.
0:06:23 So I came out and I endorsed a presidential candidate.
0:06:24 I’ll give you one guess.
0:06:25 I’ll give you one guess.
0:06:29 It’s the guy that doesn’t demonstrate fascist tendencies.
0:06:32 Anyways, that probably triggers about 47% of you.
0:06:35 So the Washington Post decided to skip an endorsement.
0:06:39 And although Will Lewis, the papers publisher and CEO says
0:06:41 he killed the endorsement, many believe the call came
0:06:44 from the post billionaire, Jeff Bezos.
0:06:46 Jeff wrote a big thing saying it was,
0:06:48 that he was not in fact influenced by the fact
0:06:51 that his company had met with a Trump official.
0:06:54 I gotta be honest, Jeff, I think you’re lying.
0:06:56 I think you’re full of shit.
0:06:57 Supposedly the Washington Post,
0:06:59 or it’s not supposed it’s been reported
0:07:02 that Washington Post had an endorsement ready to go.
0:07:04 And I go back to the notion of why an autocracy
0:07:07 is so dangerous, but so effective.
0:07:10 And that is there is very little downside
0:07:14 or less downside to shitposting Kamala Harris.
0:07:17 Because if she’s elected, she has fidelity to the constitution
0:07:21 and she’s not gonna weaponize the DOJ or the IRS
0:07:22 to go after political enemies.
0:07:25 Whereas Trump, and I love how the Republicans
0:07:28 when he says shit like I’m gonna round up people,
0:07:29 they’re all like, oh, isn’t he funny?
0:07:32 He’s just, Donald’s just being Donald
0:07:33 and they act all fucking cute.
0:07:35 They turn into Sarah Payton, like, oh,
0:07:37 that’s just him being him.
0:07:39 Well, I don’t know, he’s kind of done what he said
0:07:43 he was gonna do, specifically around bodily autonomy.
0:07:45 But when this guy shows these sort of fascist tendencies,
0:07:50 it’s a really good strategy from the sense that
0:07:52 if Donald Trump is in fact elected,
0:07:55 he might go after the people who supported Harris
0:07:56 or didn’t support him.
0:07:58 So you have what I think of as traditional leaders,
0:08:02 whether it’s Jamie Dimon or some of the other folks
0:08:04 in the valley all kissing his ass.
0:08:06 Because I think a lot of them are like,
0:08:08 they do the algebra and they think, okay,
0:08:10 if Harris wins, we can kiss and make up.
0:08:11 It’s not a big deal.
0:08:13 It’s a democracy, all is forgiven.
0:08:16 If he wins, the guy might steer contracts
0:08:17 and business away from me.
0:08:19 He might take government contracts and say,
0:08:21 fuck you, you didn’t support me.
0:08:23 I’m not giving you a government contract.
0:08:25 And this is a dangerous thing about autocracy.
0:08:27 Is that it creates a new math
0:08:32 and it absolutely discourages people to speak their mind
0:08:34 and to speak truth to power for fear
0:08:36 that it’s going to impact their livelihoods.
0:08:37 And what’s really disappointing
0:08:39 is I think this is occurring at the highest levels
0:08:41 where the fourth richest man in the world
0:08:42 is being intimidated.
0:08:43 And I want to be clear, Jeff,
0:08:46 despite the size of your very bulbous
0:08:48 and engorged biceps.
0:08:50 By the way, I do think you’re sexy.
0:08:51 I get it.
0:08:52 I get it.
0:08:53 Lawrence, I get it.
0:08:54 You’re sexy, my man.
0:08:55 You look good.
0:08:56 It’s working.
0:08:57 But here’s the thing.
0:08:58 Why the fuck do you work so hard
0:08:59 and aggregate so many resources
0:09:02 and become a billionaire in a capitalist society
0:09:05 if you’re going to be some autocrats bitch?
0:09:07 This is just incredibly disappointing.
0:09:10 And then the same thing happened at the LA Times.
0:09:12 They decided not to endorse the presidential candidate.
0:09:15 The decision made by the LA Times owner, Patrick Soong-Jeong,
0:09:17 I’m not sure where I got that right,
0:09:19 led to the resignations of the Papers Editorials Editor
0:09:21 into editorial board members.
0:09:23 You’ve also seen a bunch of defections
0:09:24 at the Washington Post.
0:09:28 In addition, supposedly 8% of its subscriber base
0:09:30 is unsubscribed.
0:09:32 Does everyone need to endorse the candidate?
0:09:32 No.
0:09:34 As a matter of fact, I believe most CEOs
0:09:36 should probably stay out of politics.
0:09:37 I think most of it is virtue signaling
0:09:41 that’s just gonna piss off half their employees on average.
0:09:44 Maybe 47%, maybe 53%, depending on where you’re working.
0:09:47 But it’s generally a good idea for CS to stay out of it.
0:09:49 But when you’re the biggest paper of the media company
0:09:51 that is traditionally endorsed a candidate
0:09:53 in what is probably the premier political brand
0:09:54 in the United States,
0:09:56 and you have a habit of always endorsing candidates,
0:09:59 and you had an endorsement ready to go,
0:10:02 and then the owner meets with the potential
0:10:04 Trump administration official and pulls the endorsement,
0:10:06 boss, that’s just not fucking cool.
0:10:10 What’s the point of being a billionaire?
0:10:12 This is what’s so dangerous about an autocracy,
0:10:17 is it creates a new math that discourages open honest dialogue.
0:10:20 The autocrat wins here, and it is not good.
0:10:22 We’ll be right back for a conversation
0:10:23 with Ian Bremmer.
0:10:29 Support for the show comes from Fundrise.
0:10:31 The Fundrise Innovation Fund
0:10:33 is trying to change the landscape for regular investors.
0:10:35 The Innovation Fund pairs a $100 million
0:10:37 plus venture portfolio of some of the biggest names in AI
0:10:39 with one of the lowest investment minimums
0:10:41 in the venture industry.
0:10:43 AI is already changing the world,
0:10:44 but this time you can get in early
0:10:46 with the Fundrise Innovation Fund.
0:10:49 You can get in early at fundrise.com/propg.
0:10:51 Carefully consider the investment material
0:10:52 for investing, including objectives,
0:10:54 risks, charges, and expenses.
0:10:56 This and other information can be found
0:10:57 in the Innovation Fund’s prospectus
0:10:59 at fundrise.com/innovation.
0:11:01 This is a paid advertisement.
0:11:10 – Hey there, I’m Ashley C. Ford,
0:11:13 and I host Into the Mix, a Ben and Jerry’s podcast
0:11:18 about joy and justice, produced with Vox Creative.
0:11:20 As former President Donald Trump continues
0:11:23 to claim, without evidence, that voter fraud
0:11:27 is a key issue in the 2024 presidential election,
0:11:31 we wanted to know, what impact can claims like this
0:11:34 have on ordinary voters?
0:11:36 Olivia Coley-Pearson, or Ms. Livy,
0:11:38 as she is known in her community,
0:11:41 comes from a family of proud voters
0:11:43 and civil rights activists.
0:11:46 So as an adult, civil service came naturally to her.
0:11:50 In 2012, while she was volunteering at the polls,
0:11:52 a first-time voter asked Ms. Livy
0:11:54 how the voting machine worked.
0:11:56 And of course, she showed them.
0:11:59 Years later, in 2016, Ms. Livy was arrested
0:12:02 for voter fraud because of it.
0:12:05 In her mind, this arrest wasn’t about voter fraud.
0:12:08 It was about intimidating black voters.
0:12:11 Listen to her story on the first episode
0:12:15 of our new three-part series on Into the Mix, Out Now.
0:12:21 Support for Prop G comes from Anthropic.
0:12:23 If you’re not using AI to help your business
0:12:26 run more efficiently, you might be falling behind still.
0:12:28 It’s a lot easier to talk about incorporating AI
0:12:31 into your workflow than it is to actually get started.
0:12:33 The landscape is cluttered and technical,
0:12:35 and a lot of us are fatigued by the options.
0:12:37 If you’re looking for a place to get started,
0:12:39 Claude from Anthropic may be the answer.
0:12:41 Claude is a next-generation AI assistant
0:12:42 built to help you work more efficiently
0:12:45 without sacrificing safety or reliability.
0:12:49 Anthropic’s latest model, Claude 3.5 Sonnet,
0:12:50 can help you organize thoughts,
0:12:53 solve tricky problems, analyze data, and more.
0:12:54 Whether you’re brainstorming alone
0:12:56 or working on a team with thousands of people,
0:12:59 all at a price that works for just about any use case.
0:13:00 If you’re trying to crack a problem
0:13:02 involving advanced reasoning,
0:13:04 need to distill the essence of complex images or graphs,
0:13:06 or generate heaps of secure code,
0:13:09 Claude is a great way to save time and money.
0:13:11 Plus, the Anthropic leadership team
0:13:13 was founded in AI research and built Claude
0:13:15 with an emphasis on safety.
0:13:18 To learn more, visit Anthropic.com/Claude.
0:13:21 That’s Anthropic.com/Claude.
0:13:32 (upbeat music)
0:13:38 – Welcome back.
0:13:40 Here’s our conversation with Ian Bremmer,
0:13:42 the president and founder of Eurasia Group,
0:13:43 the world’s leading political risk research
0:13:45 and consulting firm.
0:13:48 Ian, where does this podcast find you?
0:13:50 I am at home right now in New York.
0:13:51 I’m gonna go to my office right after this.
0:13:52 – Let’s bust right into it.
0:13:57 You recently delivered your anticipated 2024
0:13:59 State of the World speech in Tokyo,
0:14:01 where you outlined the major themes and forces
0:14:02 shaping the geopolitical landscape,
0:14:05 including the wars in the Middle East and Russia,
0:14:09 the impact of China’s managed decline, I love that term,
0:14:12 the impending US election and AI.
0:14:14 You said we should be most worried
0:14:16 about the absence of global leadership.
0:14:19 What do you think is driving this leadership vacuum
0:14:23 and who is, if anyone, poised to step in?
0:14:27 – I don’t think anyone’s poised to step in right now.
0:14:31 I mean, you know, you look at what’s happened
0:14:34 in the Middle East over the last year
0:14:36 and the United States is by far
0:14:39 the most powerful ally of Israel,
0:14:41 but has been basically hands-off
0:14:44 on the Israelis have been making the decisions
0:14:45 as they choose fit.
0:14:49 The Chinese are the most important ally
0:14:52 out there, most powerful of Russia on the global stage.
0:14:56 They’ve had no impact on what the Russians
0:14:58 have been doing in Ukraine over the course
0:14:59 of the last few years and no one else is close
0:15:04 to the Americans or secondarily the Chinese.
0:15:06 So I mean, it’s not as if, I mean,
0:15:10 there’s all sorts of leadership, but not global leadership.
0:15:12 It’s national leadership, it’s leadership at home.
0:15:14 It’s focusing more on the stuff that you have
0:15:15 going on in your own country,
0:15:18 especially when people, when most people around the world
0:15:21 are not comfortable or not happy
0:15:23 with the direction that their countries are heading.
0:15:24 And we’re seeing that play out
0:15:26 in elections all over the world.
0:15:27 – What is the downside of that?
0:15:30 Do you feel, I mean, I’ll give you an example.
0:15:33 It feels like, I can’t figure out if Israel
0:15:36 is ignoring the US or the US is actually quietly coordinating
0:15:39 and trying to pretend that they’re going
0:15:42 against their wishes you claim or you state.
0:15:47 And it feels obvious now that Russia is sort of ignoring China.
0:15:48 Is that a good thing where we have
0:15:52 a more diverse ecosystem or do we need one or two superpowers
0:15:56 kind of moving the pieces around on the chessboard?
0:15:58 – It’s a more uncertain thing.
0:16:02 I mean, certainly if you’re Russia, you like it more.
0:16:03 If you’re Israel, you like it more.
0:16:05 If you’re North Korea, you like it more.
0:16:07 If you’re Iran, you like it more.
0:16:09 I mean, generally speaking, you know,
0:16:14 countries that want to be able to act unconstrained
0:16:19 from the international norms, multilateral architecture,
0:16:21 you know, sort of collective security alliances,
0:16:23 countries that don’t like to be, you know,
0:16:27 sort of contained by that are happier
0:16:30 when you have an absence of global leadership.
0:16:33 I mean, I can tell you quite strongly, Scott,
0:16:36 that the Israelis have been ignoring
0:16:39 what the United States would prefer.
0:16:42 But the US has been unwilling to do very much
0:16:45 to try to get that outcome to be fair,
0:16:48 which is very similar to what’s been happening
0:16:51 with the Russians vis-a-vis China.
0:16:56 And I’m not trying to suggest that these wars are the same,
0:16:58 but I think it’s just interesting
0:17:00 that if you talk to the Chinese, they’ll say,
0:17:04 “Oh, but we support Ukrainian territorial integrity
0:17:05 and sovereignty.”
0:17:07 And I can say in response, “Well, sure.”
0:17:10 Well, the United States supports the two-state solution.
0:17:12 Well, we have pretty good relations with the Ukrainians.
0:17:15 Well, the Americans are doing what they can to get,
0:17:17 you know, a humanitarian aid to the Palestinians.
0:17:18 But is that actually happening?
0:17:20 And the answer is no.
0:17:25 How much effort are these countries willing to deploy?
0:17:28 How much political capital to try to ensure
0:17:30 that the outcomes they say they want,
0:17:32 they’re actually getting?
0:17:33 And the answer is very little.
0:17:35 The answer is very little.
0:17:38 And I don’t see that changing in either place anytime soon.
0:17:41 – So whenever we have you on,
0:17:42 we kind of do this around the world,
0:17:43 around Robin, so to speak.
0:17:47 So let’s start and we’ll end up with the U.S. election.
0:17:49 But first, give us your state of play
0:17:52 or your view on the state of the war
0:17:53 in the Middle East right now.
0:17:57 – So you and I are talking, Scott, on Monday.
0:17:59 I know this is coming out on Thursday.
0:18:02 Oil prices down 6% today.
0:18:04 And why would that happen?
0:18:08 Because this round of escalation is over.
0:18:12 You know, Israelis hit Iran back
0:18:14 after waiting almost a month.
0:18:15 – Sort of, right?
0:18:17 Sort of.
0:18:18 – Well, yeah, no, they hit him back.
0:18:20 They did more damage to Iran on the ground
0:18:22 than the Iranians did to Israel.
0:18:23 I mean, so you could say, I mean,
0:18:26 I don’t know if you said sort of when Iran hit Israel.
0:18:28 – I find the whole thing.
0:18:30 The word I would use, I’m curious if you agree with this,
0:18:31 the word I would use on both parties,
0:18:33 Iran and Israel is performative.
0:18:35 – Yeah, I think that’s right.
0:18:37 I think that’s absolutely right.
0:18:41 I don’t think that what set this all off,
0:18:46 which was the assassination of Hamas’s political leader
0:18:50 during the inauguration of Iran’s president in Tehran,
0:18:53 that was not performative.
0:18:55 Israeli strikes killing Hassan Nasrallah,
0:19:00 who runs Hezbollah and blowing up Hezbollah’s leadership.
0:19:02 That’s not performative.
0:19:05 But the last two rounds, absolutely performative.
0:19:10 The Iranians waited for weeks and weeks.
0:19:13 And when they finally did engage in strikes,
0:19:17 they gave the Americans a heads up in advance.
0:19:21 And that ensured that there was gonna be minimal damage
0:19:22 on the ground in Israel.
0:19:24 And the only person that was killed,
0:19:26 you may remember, was a Palestinian
0:19:29 living in the West Bank, right?
0:19:32 And the Israeli response was also restrained.
0:19:36 And here, I haven’t given the Americans much credit
0:19:39 in restraining Israel, but here,
0:19:41 I think they deserve a little
0:19:45 because the United States really wanted to ensure
0:19:48 that Israel did not hit Iranian nuclear facilities
0:19:52 or energy facilities, and they didn’t.
0:19:55 And in part, that’s because the United States
0:19:58 offered some incentives to Israel
0:19:59 over the last few weeks.
0:20:02 They fast-tracked the Thad missile defense,
0:20:04 stood it up in less than two weeks
0:20:06 on the ground in Israel, a new system
0:20:09 that they already had one from the U.S.
0:20:11 at the beginning of the war, they gave them another.
0:20:16 And then they also started sanctioning some of the ships
0:20:20 that had turned off their transponders,
0:20:24 shipping oil tankers out of Iran,
0:20:26 illegally exporting it, breaking U.S. sanctions.
0:20:28 The U.S. probably should have done that a year ago,
0:20:31 but did that to basically show the Israelis,
0:20:34 hey, we’re gonna ensure these guys have less money
0:20:38 to spend on the proxies that are attacking you.
0:20:40 And I think that both of those things,
0:20:43 plus a little diplomacy, helped restrain
0:20:48 Israel’s response more than they would have done absent that.
0:20:50 – So give me the other side of the,
0:20:51 well, I’ll put forward an argument.
0:20:52 You give me the other side of the argument
0:20:54 for de-escalation here.
0:20:57 And that is whether it’s the Houthi, Samas, or Hezbollah,
0:20:59 the credit card funding, all of this chaos and terror,
0:21:03 if you will, is oil revenues coming out of Iran.
0:21:06 Wouldn’t this sort of cut the head off
0:21:08 the snake strategy of going in and basically saying,
0:21:12 we’re gonna start shutting off this credit card
0:21:15 unless you stop funding these proxies.
0:21:16 And they did not do that.
0:21:18 Give me the political calculus
0:21:20 for why they did not do that.
0:21:23 – I think it’s a really good question, Scott.
0:21:25 I mean, they’re exporting right now
0:21:28 over a million barrels a day.
0:21:31 And the typical argument you’d give,
0:21:33 and this is the argument the Americans
0:21:37 have quietly given over the last almost three years
0:21:41 for why Russian export of oil has not been cut off, right?
0:21:43 I mean, America’s friend, the Indians
0:21:46 are buying an obscene amount of Russian oil,
0:21:49 some of which they’re refining and then sending on Europe.
0:21:51 And the reason that wasn’t cut off
0:21:53 is because the U.S. is concerned
0:21:55 that that would spike oil prices
0:21:56 and lead to a global recession.
0:22:02 That’s just not true with the million barrels
0:22:03 that the Iranians are exporting.
0:22:07 OPEC has over a million barrels right now
0:22:09 that they are holding back.
0:22:12 I mean, what’s driving prices, which are pretty low,
0:22:15 is the fact that there isn’t a lot of demand,
0:22:17 and particularly the Chinese economy
0:22:20 is performing so poorly, Chinese consumption.
0:22:22 So given all of that,
0:22:25 there’s not a really good argument
0:22:28 for why you want doing more to cut off Iran,
0:22:31 which is why I said I’m a little surprised
0:22:33 that the Biden decision to hit these ships
0:22:35 with the transponders, they didn’t do that.
0:22:37 Why didn’t they do that six months ago, nine months ago?
0:22:41 Like why are you letting the Iranians export illegally?
0:22:45 Now, some of that, getting all of that million plus
0:22:47 off the market would have also involved
0:22:51 probably sanctioning some Chinese institutions
0:22:53 that the Americans have been loathe to do
0:22:55 because China is a lot more powerful
0:22:58 and has the capacity to hit you back.
0:23:00 So I mean, there’s definitely some narrow economic self-interest
0:23:04 playing out here, but I am in the camp
0:23:08 that more can and should have been done
0:23:11 to cut off Iranian export, absolutely.
0:23:12 – Russia, Ukraine.
0:23:14 – Where we’re going, where we are?
0:23:16 – State of play, how things have changed.
0:23:19 It’s, I would argue the biggest winner
0:23:20 or one of the biggest winners
0:23:21 in the Middle East conflict has been Putin
0:23:25 because it’s taken the Western gaze off of Ukraine.
0:23:27 And where are we?
0:23:29 People haven’t been focused on it.
0:23:31 What’s the state of play on the ground?
0:23:35 What do you think 2025 holds for Russia, Ukraine?
0:23:37 – Well, Scott, by people, you mean Americans
0:23:42 because your Europeans are relentlessly focused.
0:23:45 They’re spending more overall, and they have been,
0:23:47 then the United States, something the Americans
0:23:49 probably don’t appreciate.
0:23:53 And they recognize that if Trump comes in
0:23:54 and it cuts off the Ukrainians,
0:23:57 they are going to have to do more.
0:23:59 And I think they will.
0:24:00 Is it enough for the Ukrainians?
0:24:03 That’s another question, but this is
0:24:05 and will remain a much more existential issue
0:24:10 for most of the Europeans who see not only
0:24:13 that in many cases, they’ve got a border with Ukraine
0:24:15 or a border with Russia,
0:24:18 but also they’re engaging in all sorts
0:24:21 of asymmetric fighting with Russia directly.
0:24:23 You know, I mean, if you go on Telegram,
0:24:27 I mean, the Russian GRU, I mean, their spies
0:24:32 are paying lots of money for locals, Russian speakers,
0:24:35 ethnic Russians in many countries across Eastern Europe
0:24:39 to engage in acts of espionage, vandalism,
0:24:42 arson, other criminality, you name it.
0:24:47 This is a war that is being fought on the ground in Europe.
0:24:49 It’s well beyond disinformation.
0:24:52 So they are focused like a laser
0:24:54 on what happens going forward.
0:24:56 And that conversation, the conversation across Europe
0:24:58 has not slipped to the Middle East.
0:25:00 It is focused on Russia, Ukraine.
0:25:02 We’re in the United States, Russia, Ukraine
0:25:07 is a decided number two, if even that.
0:25:09 So there’s a real gap.
0:25:11 I’ll tell you, one thing that I think the media
0:25:13 has gotten wrong recently, and because it’s
0:25:15 a track that a lot of headlines, I
0:25:18 think it’s worth you and I going into for a couple minutes,
0:25:20 is the North Korea angle.
0:25:23 People are talking about North Korea
0:25:27 and saying it shows desperation that Russia is going
0:25:29 to get 10,000 troops from North Korea,
0:25:31 and it means they really can’t fight.
0:25:33 They can’t go anywhere else.
0:25:35 They’re scraping the bottom of the barrel.
0:25:41 In the broad scheme of things, 10,000 poorly trained troops
0:25:43 from North Korea being sent as cannon fodder
0:25:47 to the front lines who don’t speak the Russian language,
0:25:49 won’t be effectively trained or integrated,
0:25:51 matters almost none to the fighting.
0:25:53 That is not what’s going on here.
0:25:56 What the North Koreans have done that really matters
0:26:00 is a solid majority of all the artillery
0:26:04 that is being used against Ukraine
0:26:06 and the ammunition being used against Ukraine.
0:26:09 That is North Korean.
0:26:10 And that means the war.
0:26:13 North Korea is absolutely the war machine
0:26:15 behind what’s happening on the front lines right now,
0:26:18 and that’s been going on for months and months now.
0:26:21 What’s interesting about the North Korean decision
0:26:27 to send troops is it really solidifies a military alliance
0:26:29 that Russia has now signed with North Korea.
0:26:33 It’s made them closer to North Korea than the Chinese are.
0:26:38 The Chinese are not aware of what the details
0:26:40 of that military agreement comprise,
0:26:43 and they’re deeply discomfited by that.
0:26:46 And historically, of course, the Chinese are the ones
0:26:49 that called the shots for Pyongyang, if anyone did.
0:26:52 So that’s what’s really different here.
0:26:57 And the fact that they are a nuclear weapons state
0:27:00 that is developing aggressively
0:27:02 much more advanced technology,
0:27:03 including nuclear submarines
0:27:05 that the Russians are clearly helping them with,
0:27:09 advanced ballistics, maybe even some space stuff,
0:27:12 that’s a serious problem.
0:27:15 And that’s something that the Russians are 100% behind.
0:27:18 – In the last few months, what has happened on the ground?
0:27:20 Have the Russians been making progress?
0:27:24 Is it a stalemate or the Ukrainian army pushing back?
0:27:26 What’s the state of play on the ground?
0:27:27 – So the big thing that happened,
0:27:30 the spectacular thing that happened a couple months ago,
0:27:34 is the Ukrainians decided to take almost 40,000
0:27:38 well-trained troops and send them into Russia,
0:27:42 the territory of Kursk, which they have taken
0:27:45 and they have held much of it.
0:27:48 They’re now losing territory to the Russians.
0:27:50 But the Russians have largely ignored that.
0:27:54 They’ve referred to it as terrorism internally,
0:27:59 and they have instead sent more troops to inside Ukraine,
0:28:02 and they are taking, which is now less well defended,
0:28:05 and they are taking more of the Donbass.
0:28:10 So I would argue, and most NATO leaders would argue,
0:28:13 that this was Zelensky,
0:28:16 both with the flair for the spectacular to show
0:28:20 that the Ukrainians can still do very unexpected things
0:28:24 and cause pain for Putin, and also getting desperate,
0:28:27 because they’re increasingly recognizing
0:28:29 that they aren’t going to have the capacity
0:28:31 to keep fighting the way they have
0:28:33 for the last two and a half years.
0:28:36 This is a dangerous move for them.
0:28:39 This makes it a lot harder for them to hold
0:28:42 their own front lines with the Russians
0:28:45 having already taken about 22% of the country
0:28:47 and threatening to take a lot more.
0:28:51 So if you ask me over the next three, six months,
0:28:54 I think that there’s a much higher likelihood
0:28:57 that the Russians take all of the Donbass,
0:29:01 and that is going to lead to more displacement,
0:29:04 and also reduce morale on the part of the Ukrainians.
0:29:07 Russia’s also, in the last couple of months,
0:29:09 done unprecedented damage
0:29:13 to Ukraine’s critical energy infrastructure
0:29:15 as winter approaches,
0:29:18 and that’s going to make it a much harder winter
0:29:19 for the average Ukrainian.
0:29:23 Only about 40 million people live in Ukraine right now.
0:29:27 There was over 50 million before the war,
0:29:29 and those numbers, I suspect,
0:29:31 are going to continue to go down
0:29:33 over the next several months.
0:29:37 – You refer China’s “managed decline.”
0:29:39 That’s your term, and I like it.
0:29:40 What do you mean by that?
0:29:45 – Well, I’m talking in part about the relationship
0:29:48 between China and the United States.
0:29:51 That, I mean, we are heading towards confrontation,
0:29:56 but both countries are trying to avoid sudden crises
0:30:00 and ensure, through a lot of high-level communication,
0:30:03 that the relationship doesn’t deteriorate
0:30:05 any faster than it needs to,
0:30:08 and any more broadly than it needs to.
0:30:10 The Americans are doing that, I think in part,
0:30:12 because we’ve got our hands full
0:30:16 with a couple of different wars and an election cycle.
0:30:19 The Chinese are doing that
0:30:22 because their economy is performing worse
0:30:25 than I’ve ever seen it, certainly since the early ’90s,
0:30:26 maybe since the ’70s.
0:30:30 I was just in Beijing a couple of weeks ago.
0:30:31 I spent the week there,
0:30:35 and every provincial government is bankrupt,
0:30:38 and real estate is in crisis.
0:30:43 That is 70% of Chinese consumer wealth
0:30:47 and about 30% of Chinese government revenue,
0:30:49 and they’re not gonna come close
0:30:52 to their 5% growth target this year.
0:30:55 This is a new Chinese economic leadership
0:30:57 put in place by Xi Jinping.
0:31:00 They are suddenly telling the president,
0:31:04 we’re not gonna be able to perform like we told you we were,
0:31:07 not a good place to be on your first year,
0:31:09 and that’s also the 75th anniversary
0:31:11 of the Chinese Communist Party.
0:31:14 So there was a lot of panic going on
0:31:18 among the top economists a couple of weeks ago in China,
0:31:20 and that’s why they’re all trying to run around
0:31:21 and say, what do we do?
0:31:23 What kind of stimulus do we put in place?
0:31:28 It’s the same kind of transition
0:31:31 that we saw when they went from zero COVID
0:31:33 to suddenly overnight.
0:31:35 We’re just gonna rip up the QR codes
0:31:37 and everyone can do what they want.
0:31:40 Remember, Scott, for a year, a solid year,
0:31:44 this was Chinese officials crowing internationally
0:31:46 about how they cared about their people,
0:31:48 and the Americans didn’t, the Europeans didn’t,
0:31:51 the Japanese didn’t, we didn’t take care of our citizens,
0:31:52 we let them get sick and die,
0:31:55 and the Chinese were the one country that really cared,
0:31:58 and they literally ripped that up overnight.
0:32:02 Overnight, it was as if they had nothing to do with zero COVID.
0:32:04 So the Chinese leadership got it wrong,
0:32:05 they didn’t get good information,
0:32:08 and now for the second time, in only a few years,
0:32:10 we’re seeing the same thing,
0:32:12 the Chinese leadership thought they had
0:32:14 like a decent control on their economy,
0:32:17 thought it was just incremental challenges
0:32:21 that they’d be able to effectively respond to this year,
0:32:23 nothing major required,
0:32:26 and then suddenly, almost overnight,
0:32:28 realizing that isn’t the case at all.
0:32:31 – It really is striking, it’s like, you know, you don’t,
0:32:34 humans are adaptable and it’s been so incremental,
0:32:36 but the changes I think about it,
0:32:40 pre-COVID, call it late teens,
0:32:43 I was in China two, three times a year doing business,
0:32:47 advising American companies on their efforts in China,
0:32:49 advising some Chinese companies
0:32:53 on their efforts in America,
0:32:55 and I have not been to China in four or five years
0:32:57 and have no plans to go back,
0:32:59 and I realize that’s pulse marketing,
0:33:03 but as I think about, I mean, the freeze is pretty deep here,
0:33:05 would you agree with that?
0:33:09 – Yes, and you see it across the corporate community.
0:33:13 Now, if you are a big Western multinational
0:33:14 with exposure in China,
0:33:17 you don’t wanna make announcements
0:33:18 that you are making layoffs,
0:33:19 you don’t wanna make announcements
0:33:21 you’re taking money out because, you know,
0:33:24 that will get you punished by the Chinese,
0:33:29 but quietly, everyone is trying to reduce exposure.
0:33:31 The only part of the Chinese economy right now
0:33:33 that is actually performing and keeping their numbers up
0:33:35 is the manufacturing sector,
0:33:40 and it’s manufacturing without consumer demand.
0:33:44 So there’s massive overproduction right now,
0:33:46 and that’s not politically sustainable
0:33:49 in other parts of the world, it’s causing backlash,
0:33:51 complaints of dumping, all of this sort of thing,
0:33:53 and it’s making the relationship
0:33:57 between China and other countries more confrontational.
0:34:00 So they’re really in a corner here,
0:34:03 they’re gonna need structural reform,
0:34:05 it’s essentially a major financial crisis,
0:34:09 and in fact, the one thing that I was quite surprised by
0:34:13 when I was in China was just how much violent crime
0:34:14 there is right now.
0:34:17 A lot of people talking about, you know,
0:34:21 stabbings and people driving their car into crowds
0:34:23 and high-profile suicides,
0:34:26 and some that got public notoriety
0:34:29 and then immediately taken down off of WeChat,
0:34:31 and some just people talking about things happening
0:34:32 in their own neighborhoods,
0:34:35 happening on their own street corners, that sort of thing.
0:34:37 Now, I mean, if this was happening
0:34:39 in any normal country around the world,
0:34:41 and by normal, I mean, a country
0:34:44 that you get reporting out of, information out of,
0:34:45 it’s all we’d be talking about.
0:34:47 But because it’s China,
0:34:51 and because very few people go to China right now,
0:34:55 I mean, there just is nowhere near the level of travel
0:34:57 that you saw pre-COVID,
0:34:59 and because the Chinese don’t actually report
0:35:03 on any of this stuff, we’re not really talking about it.
0:35:06 And that’s, I think that’s a really big deal.
0:35:12 – Support for PropG comes from Grammarly.
0:35:15 Time is valuable, but if you’re like most working professionals,
0:35:17 you might be spending nearly half your working hours
0:35:19 on emails and written communication.
0:35:21 Wouldn’t it be great to find a way to offload
0:35:22 some of those redundant tasks?
0:35:26 Well, in that case, you might want to try Grammarly.
0:35:27 Grammarly is your AI writing partner
0:35:29 that can give you real-time,
0:35:31 relevant suggestions for whatever you write.
0:35:33 With Grammarly, you can stay focused
0:35:35 and spend more time getting through your higher level
0:35:37 to-do list and less time sending the same emails
0:35:39 over and over again.
0:35:40 And it’s not just for emails.
0:35:44 Grammarly works across more than 500,000 apps and websites
0:35:46 and can help you brainstorm ideas or suggest edits
0:35:48 that’ll make you sound more confident
0:35:49 and persuasive at work.
0:35:50 We like Grammarly.
0:35:51 We use it quite frankly.
0:35:53 It just makes us sound more educated
0:35:55 and saves us time when we’re writing things.
0:35:57 For 15 years, Grammarly has helped professionals
0:35:59 do more with their writing.
0:36:00 Get more done with Grammarly.
0:36:04 Download Grammarly for free at Grammarly.com/podcast.
0:36:07 That’s Grammarly.com/podcast.
0:36:12 Support for the show comes from Quintz.
0:36:14 That summer heat is finally starting to cool off.
0:36:16 Time to pack away your flip flops and booty shorts
0:36:18 and bust out your cozy cold weather fits.
0:36:20 But if you’re dreading those clothes,
0:36:22 then maybe it’s time for a wardrobe overhaul.
0:36:25 And for that, you might want to check out Quintz.
0:36:26 Quintz offers luxury clothing essentials
0:36:29 at reasonable prices, find seasonal must-haves
0:36:32 like Mongolian cashmere sweaters from $60,
0:36:34 and comfortable pants for any occasion.
0:36:36 According to Quintz, they only work with factories
0:36:37 that use safe, ethical,
0:36:40 and responsible manufacturing processes.
0:36:42 And because Quintz partners with them directly,
0:36:44 they’re able to offer super high quality items
0:36:48 at 50 to 80% less than similar brands.
0:36:50 Our producer tried Quintz for herself
0:36:51 and she loves her Quintz sheet.
0:36:53 She says they’re super comfortable.
0:36:54 She went with a sage green
0:36:56 and was pleased with the price point.
0:36:58 In my senses, she’s sleeping way too much
0:36:59 given the script she’s given me.
0:37:03 Upgrade your wardrobe with pieces made to last with Quintz.
0:37:06 Go to quintz.com/pravchee for free shipping on your order
0:37:09 and 365 day returns.
0:37:13 That’s Q-U-I-N-C-E.com/pravchee
0:37:17 to get free shipping and 365 day returns.
0:37:19 Quintz.com/pravchee.
0:37:22 (upbeat music)
0:37:28 Autograph Collection Hotels
0:37:32 offer over 300 independent hotels around the world,
0:37:35 each exactly like nothing else.
0:37:37 Hand selected for their inherent craft,
0:37:40 each hotel tells its own unique story
0:37:42 through distinctive design and immersive experiences
0:37:46 from medieval falconry to volcanic wine tasting.
0:37:48 Autograph Collection is part of the Marriott Bonvoy
0:37:53 portfolio of over 30 hotel brands around the world.
0:37:56 Find the unforgettable at AutographCollection.com.
0:38:03 – So as a means of beginning to talk about the US election,
0:38:05 what I like to do is I like to go through all three of these,
0:38:09 the war in the Middle East, the war in Ukraine
0:38:12 and the impact of China’s managed decline.
0:38:14 And due for some scenario planning,
0:38:19 how do each of those play out differently
0:38:21 in a Harris or a Trump administration?
0:38:24 Let’s start with the war in the Middle East.
0:38:25 – Okay.
0:38:30 So Biden has been one of the most strongly pro-Israel
0:38:35 candidates we’ve ever seen, presidents.
0:38:40 And it is unclear that Harris
0:38:43 would significantly alter that.
0:38:48 She’s made repeated statements that the alliance
0:38:51 between the US and Israel is sacrosanct
0:38:53 and the US will do everything to defend Israel.
0:38:58 She clearly is much more concerned about the Palestinians,
0:39:01 about their ability to self-govern,
0:39:04 about getting them humanitarian aid.
0:39:08 I think some of that is because of the changing demographics
0:39:11 of the United States on Israel-Palestine,
0:39:15 young people in particular being much less motivated
0:39:17 by a pro-Israel policy, much more sympathetic
0:39:18 to the Palestinians.
0:39:21 And some of it is that as a lawyer,
0:39:25 she’s just generally more interested in rule of law
0:39:28 and international norms and feels like the Americans
0:39:31 are supporting a policy that undermines that
0:39:34 and that undermines US influence around the world.
0:39:39 So I do suspect that under Harris,
0:39:43 US policy on Israel-Palestine would be more aligned
0:39:47 with the Europeans than it is right now.
0:39:50 Where with Trump, I mean, actually,
0:39:55 if anything, he is a little more hawkish than even Biden.
0:39:59 He would, he certainly has, I mean, he’s indifferent
0:40:01 to what happens to the Palestinians.
0:40:05 He says he no longer supports the two-state solution,
0:40:09 though he did when he put together the Abraham Accords.
0:40:13 And he was the guy that of course recognized
0:40:16 the Golan Heights as Israeli territory.
0:40:19 He moved the embassy to Jerusalem.
0:40:22 He has no problem with further illegal settlements
0:40:25 of Israel on the ground in the West Bank.
0:40:30 I suspect that he would be fine with a more assertive
0:40:35 and expansionist Israeli military strategy in the region,
0:40:38 including against Iran’s nuclear capabilities,
0:40:41 which he might be inclined to help Israel with.
0:40:44 So there’s a little bit of a difference there,
0:40:47 but it’s not dramatic in my view.
0:40:48 – Russia-Ukraine?
0:40:50 – Russia-Ukraine is much more different.
0:40:55 Now, both Harris and Trump would want the war to end,
0:40:59 but their modalities would be very different.
0:41:01 Trump is much more of a unilateralist.
0:41:04 He’s not interested in coordinating
0:41:05 with the Europeans at all.
0:41:10 He would call Zelensky and call Putin
0:41:12 and basically say, you’re gonna end this war,
0:41:16 you’re gonna accept a ceasefire, territorial delineation,
0:41:19 where it is right now, or else, what’s the or else?
0:41:22 With the Ukrainians, or else we cut off support.
0:41:25 With the Russians, or else we sanction you a lot tougher.
0:41:29 And would he follow through on that?
0:41:32 Would the Ukrainians and the Russians listen to him?
0:41:33 Interesting question.
0:41:36 Certainly a better deal for the Russians
0:41:37 than they’re getting presently,
0:41:39 or then they’d get under Harris,
0:41:41 but that doesn’t mean that Putin would find it acceptable.
0:41:46 And there’s a big difference between Trump’s rhetoric
0:41:50 with Russia in his 2017 presidency
0:41:52 and actual policy towards Russia,
0:41:55 which was harder line the javelin anti-tank missiles
0:41:59 to Ukraine, tougher sanctions than it was under Obama.
0:42:02 So I think that there’s, what was clear
0:42:05 is if Trump became president, again,
0:42:09 the Europeans would feel very much cut loose
0:42:11 from this process.
0:42:13 And that would be, that’d be a crisis for Europe.
0:42:18 If Harris comes in, she would want to coordinate
0:42:23 a policy towards Ukraine that would lead to a ceasefire,
0:42:25 but she would coordinate that with NATO
0:42:28 and then take that joint policy with the Ukrainians
0:42:29 if she could make it happen
0:42:33 and try to get everyone to force Russia to the table.
0:42:36 Would that work or would that just be a continued drip,
0:42:39 drip, drip as the Russians continue to fight?
0:42:43 Very interesting question, hard to know.
0:42:46 But I mean, certainly Biden’s policy, Russia-Ukraine,
0:42:49 has been great in keeping the alliance together,
0:42:52 hasn’t been so great for the Ukrainians long term.
0:42:55 And then if you want to go to China,
0:42:57 Jake Sullivan, the national security advisor,
0:42:59 went to Beijing a few weeks ago,
0:43:03 spent 14 hours with Wang Yi, the foreign minister,
0:43:06 then he spent an hour and a half with Xi Jinping.
0:43:10 And the purpose of that trip was to ensure
0:43:13 a stable transition in policy
0:43:14 if Harris becomes the president.
0:43:17 I spent an hour and a half with Wang Yi.
0:43:19 When I was there a couple of weeks ago,
0:43:24 he told me he was very appreciative of the effort
0:43:25 that Jake and the Biden administration
0:43:28 have put into the relationship,
0:43:30 the time, the communications and the rest.
0:43:34 So I think that if Kamala were to become president,
0:43:36 I think that U.S.-China policy
0:43:39 would remain very consistent with where it is right now.
0:43:43 Trump, of course, sees China policy
0:43:44 and sees much foreign policy
0:43:47 through a more economic and transactional lens,
0:43:49 through the lens of tariffs.
0:43:52 He has talked about a 60% across the board tariff
0:43:55 on Chinese exports.
0:43:57 Six months ago, 12 months ago,
0:44:01 China wasn’t sure if they would prefer Harris or Trump.
0:44:04 Trump might be someone they could do a deal with.
0:44:06 Trump also will antagonize a bunch of allies,
0:44:09 creates more flexibility for the Chinese potentially.
0:44:13 This trip, everyone in China says we want Harris.
0:44:14 Why?
0:44:16 Because the state of their economy
0:44:18 means they can’t handle the uncertainty.
0:44:21 – So another thesis, I find that Americans,
0:44:23 because of our prosperity and our blessings
0:44:24 and the fact that we really haven’t been attacked,
0:44:26 I mean, you could say 9/11 was an attack,
0:44:30 but domestically, the homeland has been pretty,
0:44:32 pretty kind of attack or threat-free.
0:44:35 That as a result, we always believe
0:44:37 that all peace is a good piece.
0:44:41 And I would put forward that there is a bad piece
0:44:42 and there are good wars.
0:44:44 And what’s happening in the Middle East
0:44:47 over the mid and long-term might be seen in retrospect
0:44:49 as having been a good war,
0:44:52 where we end up with stronger alliances in the Middle East
0:44:54 and the equivalent of a much stronger iron dome.
0:44:57 And what might end up being a sustained peace?
0:44:58 Your thoughts?
0:45:01 – Well, first, more broadly, I agree with the thesis
0:45:03 that there are good wars.
0:45:04 There aren’t many of them,
0:45:05 but there certainly are.
0:45:06 World War II was a good war.
0:45:09 The Americans took way too long to enter it and to fight it.
0:45:12 And we almost lost as a consequence,
0:45:14 but it was a good war.
0:45:15 We needed to win that war.
0:45:17 We needed to enter that war.
0:45:20 The first Iraq war and defending Kuwait
0:45:22 was a good war, in my view.
0:45:24 And one that we needed to enter.
0:45:26 And I think the Ukraine war,
0:45:28 which we are partially responsible for,
0:45:30 because we told the Ukrainians
0:45:33 we were gonna bring them into NATO and then we didn’t.
0:45:37 And when the Russians invaded in 2014 a little bit,
0:45:39 we did nothing.
0:45:41 And basically a blinking yellow-white.
0:45:44 We’re finally late defending Ukraine.
0:45:46 I think that’s a good war.
0:45:51 Israel, Palestine, Lebanon is more complicated for me
0:45:54 for a couple of reasons.
0:45:58 First, the United States is losing a lot of influence
0:46:02 around the world as a consequence of supporting Israel
0:46:07 in a full-throated way and an undifferentiated way,
0:46:11 which is virtually isolated compared to other countries.
0:46:12 You see, I mean, at the Security Council,
0:46:14 the Americans making vetoes
0:46:17 that even the allies of the US won’t stand up for,
0:46:20 the French, the Brits, for example.
0:46:25 The fact that in countries across, say Southeast Asia,
0:46:28 the Americans are losing influence dramatically.
0:46:30 Indonesia is the largest Muslim population
0:46:32 in the world of any country.
0:46:35 And the Indonesians were strongly pro-US
0:46:38 and anti-China 10 years ago.
0:46:40 That has now flipped.
0:46:43 And it’s flipped almost completely because of Gaza,
0:46:45 which is considered to be a domestic issue
0:46:49 by the Indonesian population and the government.
0:46:51 Malaysia also flipped.
0:46:54 Brunei, who cares, but still, same thing.
0:46:56 Singapore a little bit.
0:46:58 So there are places that the US
0:47:00 is definitely losing influence because of that.
0:47:03 Now, having said that, Scott,
0:47:07 I agree with you that there are,
0:47:11 the Israelis and the Gulf States are aligned here
0:47:13 and they’re becoming more aligned,
0:47:16 irrespective of the Saudis saying
0:47:19 that they need a Palestinian state to do a deal,
0:47:23 to break, to get to finally open relations with Israel.
0:47:26 Generally speaking, Israel is in a strong position
0:47:27 vis-a-vis the Gulf States,
0:47:29 and also in terms of its own defense
0:47:31 and military capabilities.
0:47:34 Now, what we don’t know,
0:47:38 and even leaving aside any humanitarian concern
0:47:43 for the two plus million Palestinians living in Gaza,
0:47:47 leaving aside any humanitarian concern
0:47:50 for the over one million Lebanese
0:47:53 that have been displaced over the last month.
0:47:58 The question is, will they have any capacity
0:48:01 to take action against Israel
0:48:03 or against the US and its allies
0:48:04 in the region or more broadly?
0:48:07 Are we going to see more radicalism for a generation,
0:48:11 which the US intelligence agencies believe we will,
0:48:12 on the back of the way
0:48:16 that this war has been fought by Israel?
0:48:22 And yes, a lot of Hamas operatives and leaders have been killed,
0:48:26 Lebanese operatives and leaders have been killed,
0:48:29 but the humanitarian damage
0:48:31 that has been attendant to that
0:48:35 as a consequence of the war is utterly staggering.
0:48:39 And I assume a price will be paid for that at some point.
0:48:40 But, and that’s again,
0:48:43 that’s leaving aside just the humanitarian point,
0:48:47 which as Americans, I think we shouldn’t leave aside.
0:48:50 We certainly are, the history of our country
0:48:52 is not that we leave it aside.
0:48:53 – But implicit in that statement
0:48:57 is a very rational argument that I would reduce to,
0:48:59 you know, are you creating more terrorists
0:49:01 than you’re killing, right?
0:49:03 With this incredible humanitarian disaster,
0:49:06 I would argue on both sides,
0:49:10 but obviously in terms of civilian population,
0:49:14 the Palestinians have paid a huge price.
0:49:17 You know, I do think it’s important to note
0:49:19 that the Israelis have prosecuted this war
0:49:23 with a lower civilian to enemy combat mortality rate
0:49:25 than any war we’ve prosecuted.
0:49:29 And what I come to, or the argument I would put forth,
0:49:31 is it’s about incentives.
0:49:34 And we at the end of World War II
0:49:37 continued to bomb Hamburg and Dresden
0:49:38 despite the fact we had won the war
0:49:42 at much greater civilian to combat mortality ratios.
0:49:46 And when asked why, Eisenhower and the generals responded,
0:49:48 they need to know they lost.
0:49:52 Is there an argument that as horrific as this is,
0:49:55 this damage that you’re creating an incentive system
0:49:57 where it essentially gets people quite frankly
0:50:01 to think twice before continuing to constantly arm,
0:50:05 rearm and have a zeitgeist and an entire constitution
0:50:08 that is just basically attack Israel
0:50:13 and attempt to affect what is, I see, as a genocide.
0:50:15 I see one side, Israel is accused of genocide.
0:50:17 I think they could, they don’t.
0:50:20 I think the proxies would but can’t.
0:50:22 Is there something to the notion
0:50:25 that quite frankly counter punching much harder
0:50:29 creates a safer region with incentives
0:50:34 that finally line up and not to stop attacking Israel?
0:50:38 – It is an unanswerable question, Scott.
0:50:41 But I mean, of course, it is hard to argue
0:50:44 that the Palestinians don’t know that they’re losing.
0:50:49 They’ve been losing territory for a long time now, right?
0:50:51 I mean, again, in the West Bank
0:50:53 while the war has been prosecuted in Gaza,
0:50:56 they’re losing a lot more territory illegally
0:50:58 to the Israeli settlers with the support
0:51:00 of the Israeli government.
0:51:03 I don’t think that helps Israel’s cause personally.
0:51:07 – Oh, they’ve gone from the good guys to the bad guys.
0:51:08 In terms of global perception,
0:51:10 they’ve managed their brand terribly.
0:51:14 I would argue like when you and I were kids
0:51:15 and they were the good guys,
0:51:17 they were the David and now they’re the Goliath.
0:51:19 – Well, of course, and to be fair, some of that,
0:51:24 even if they had handled this war as well as possible,
0:51:26 which they have not, but even if they had,
0:51:29 and even if they had showed so much more restraint
0:51:32 and gone in with a multinational force
0:51:35 after October 7th, and, you know, Macron said,
0:51:36 “I’m willing to fight with you.”
0:51:38 Okay, well, let’s do this together and let’s be targeted.
0:51:39 Even if they’d done that,
0:51:41 you know how much anti-Semitism
0:51:43 there was running up to October 7th.
0:51:45 A lot of people would have said they were the bad guys
0:51:48 and would have said that because they’re more powerful,
0:51:51 because their military is more capable,
0:51:52 because they’re a lot richer,
0:51:55 because the Palestinians are living in a horrible environment
0:51:59 and the Palestinians own some of the blame for that
0:52:01 and so do the Gulf States for not doing anything about it.
0:52:03 So does the Americans, so the Israelis.
0:52:04 There’s plenty of blame,
0:52:06 but you’re not asking me who’s responsible.
0:52:09 You’re asking me, what’s the smart strategy?
0:52:13 I have a hard time believing that after the,
0:52:16 you know, the massive depredation,
0:52:19 the, you know, sort of 90% of Gaza Palestinians
0:52:23 without enough water before the October 7th,
0:52:27 50% without enough food before October 7th.
0:52:30 And then following that on with one-tenth
0:52:34 as much humanitarian support getting in for the last year,
0:52:37 I don’t think that that is going to lead
0:52:41 to better behaved, more quiescent Palestinians
0:52:43 willing to work with Israel over the long term.
0:52:44 I don’t believe that.
0:52:45 Maybe I’m wrong.
0:52:50 I mean, look, my mom was Armenian before she passed,
0:52:55 and, you know, the Armenians for generations
0:52:59 harbored irrational hatred towards Turks,
0:53:01 Turks that had done nothing to the Armenians,
0:53:02 but historically they had.
0:53:08 More recently, we’ve just seen about 120,000 Armenians
0:53:12 ethnically cleansed from mountainous Harabakh,
0:53:15 which oddly, former President Trump
0:53:16 just tweeted about a couple of days ago,
0:53:19 but otherwise nobody talks about it
0:53:22 because we’re living at a time of greater impunity
0:53:25 where if you have the military might
0:53:29 to ensure that you’re in charge, you get to win.
0:53:31 And that’s what happened.
0:53:33 The Americans complained, the French complained,
0:53:36 but Baku is about to host their COP summit
0:53:39 for global climate as a Petro State,
0:53:41 and they’re occupying that territory,
0:53:43 and the Armenians aren’t going to get it back.
0:53:45 And that’s just the way it is.
0:53:47 So I think that we’re heading towards
0:53:50 a different global order going back to the beginning,
0:53:52 one without global leadership,
0:53:54 one that feels more anarchic,
0:53:59 one where the relatively loose rules and norms
0:54:04 that we largely the Americans have created with allies
0:54:07 to try to reduce instability around the world
0:54:08 is breaking apart.
0:54:11 So that’s why I was just in Asia.
0:54:14 That’s why our allies, the South Koreans and the Japanese
0:54:16 are talking more about getting nuclear weapons.
0:54:18 I don’t think that’s a good thing.
0:54:20 Why? Because they’re concerned
0:54:22 that the Americans might not be willing to defend them
0:54:25 and countries might be willing to use nukes
0:54:27 in a more likely in this environment
0:54:30 than they would have 10 or 20 or 30 years ago
0:54:33 because those norms are eroding.
0:54:35 I think there’s lots of stuff like that happening
0:54:37 that makes our world more dangerous.
0:54:41 – Yeah, I would agree that the world’s policemen
0:54:43 did in fact have some upside.
0:54:46 So I’m curious if you, well, I’m gonna ask you,
0:54:48 I’m gonna return to the domestic,
0:54:51 to return to the homeland in our remaining minutes here.
0:54:54 Curious, A, if you have any predictions about the election
0:54:57 and also, I mean, most of the smart people I know
0:54:58 have said it’s a toss up.
0:55:00 They kind of shrugged their shoulders.
0:55:01 They might have a thesis,
0:55:02 but then they shrugged their shoulders
0:55:05 and say it’s within the margin of error.
0:55:08 – What do you think about how such contrasting candidates
0:55:10 and the fact that it’s a toss up,
0:55:12 what do you think it says about America?
0:55:15 And just curious if you have any thoughts or predictions
0:55:18 about this election and what might happen after?
0:55:20 – I think, I mean, we’re saving this for the end.
0:55:23 So it’s an abbreviated conversation.
0:55:23 It deserves more.
0:55:28 But, you know, as someone who looks at the world
0:55:31 more than I look inside the United States,
0:55:35 the common thesis this year is throw the bums out.
0:55:37 We’re not happy with where our country’s going.
0:55:38 We want somebody different.
0:55:42 We just saw that in Japan this weekend, stable Japan.
0:55:43 We’ve seen it, you know, even in India
0:55:45 where Modi is so incredibly popular,
0:55:49 it has to govern in coalition, South Africa, U.K.,
0:55:51 Austria, Germany, France.
0:55:53 I mean, you name it around the world.
0:55:55 This is what we’re seeing.
0:55:58 So this election in the United States
0:56:00 with inflation having been high
0:56:03 and now it’s coming down but the prices haven’t gone down
0:56:06 and illegal immigration having been really high
0:56:07 and now it’s coming down
0:56:10 but the illegal immigrants are all still here.
0:56:12 You know, whoever’s holding the bag
0:56:14 is probably gonna lose.
0:56:17 So, I mean, you know, ex-ante,
0:56:19 your view of this election should be,
0:56:23 it’s a change election and the Republicans should win.
0:56:26 Having said that, Trump is the least attractive,
0:56:30 least fit candidate the Republicans could possibly run.
0:56:32 I mean, any other Republican candidate
0:56:35 would win easily in my view,
0:56:38 certainly against Biden and against Kamala Harris as well
0:56:40 but Trump is not any other candidate.
0:56:43 He is a uniquely unfit candidate
0:56:45 and therefore it’s a toss-up.
0:56:50 That’s my thesis and if you asked me like, you know,
0:56:52 if I had a bet, what would I bet?
0:56:55 I guess I would bet that Trump is gonna win
0:56:57 by a really slim margin
0:57:00 because I ultimately, I think that structural,
0:57:03 you know, vote for something different really matters
0:57:06 and it seems to me that the Harris Democrats
0:57:09 are playing defense and Trump’s playing offense
0:57:13 and on balance, defense doesn’t turn out the vote
0:57:17 as effectively but those are very soft theses
0:57:21 in an environment where everything is
0:57:22 within the margin of error.
0:57:25 So, I don’t like your other friends, Scott,
0:57:29 I don’t have a strong, I don’t have a strong view.
0:57:32 I could easily be surprised on this one.
0:57:33 I think we’re all going to be.
0:57:37 I’m more worried about the disinformation environment.
0:57:40 I’m more worried about how Americans, I mean, you’re right,
0:57:42 that the two candidates are so different
0:57:44 because the people that are supporting the two candidates
0:57:46 believe completely different things
0:57:50 and it’s getting worse and worse and worse every day
0:57:52 and we see it in our mainstream media.
0:57:55 Lord knows we see it in our social media.
0:57:58 I mean, we even saw it in the response to FEMA
0:57:59 and the hurricane.
0:58:01 We saw it in response to the pandemic
0:58:02 and now it’s in our election.
0:58:05 If you’re a Dem or a Republican,
0:58:08 your views of what matters and what is true
0:58:11 has never been more different than your fellow Americans
0:58:13 since the Civil War.
0:58:15 And I think that’s what’s driving these candidates
0:58:17 being so radically different and that bodes badly
0:58:21 for what happens to the US after next Tuesday.
0:58:22 – Well, just going back to incentives
0:58:25 and this will be my last question or thesis.
0:58:27 The dangerous thing about an autocracy
0:58:30 and why it’s so effective is that I see it again.
0:58:34 Jeff Bezos, it appears was incentivized or forced,
0:58:37 supposedly a representative of one of his companies
0:58:40 was meeting with Trump and there was pressure applied
0:58:42 to someone you would think would be immune
0:58:44 from pressure in a capitalist society
0:58:47 being the third or fourth wealthiest person in the world.
0:58:49 And the story running around was that he was essentially
0:58:51 pressured into pressuring the Washington Post
0:58:53 to not issue an endorsement.
0:58:56 And this is the danger I see of an autocracy
0:59:01 that the upside of supporting this person
0:59:02 or supporting each of them, I don’t wanna say,
0:59:04 it’s bigger than autocracy
0:59:06 ’cause you get the sense he’s a bit of a kleptocrat
0:59:08 and we’ll do money good for you
0:59:12 regardless of the constitution or the DOJ to pay you back.
0:59:14 And on the flip side, go out of his way
0:59:17 to use the full power and influence of the government
0:59:20 to prosecute his political enemies.
0:59:23 Whereas if you don’t support Harris,
0:59:24 the downside I see is much less
0:59:26 because I think she has respect for the law
0:59:28 and she’s not gonna go after her political opponents.
0:59:31 They might not get appointed to be ambassador
0:59:33 but she’s not gonna weaponize the DOJ against them.
0:59:37 So all of the incentives on a risk-adjusted basis,
0:59:39 I see these heads of investment banks,
0:59:40 I know they support Harris
0:59:43 but I keep seeing them hedge their bets
0:59:45 because they’re worried that Trump would be
0:59:48 more punitive and lost than Harris.
0:59:51 – I see this as just,
0:59:54 I never recognize just how effective autocracy is,
0:59:58 the perception of a lack of concern for the law.
0:59:59 Your thoughts?
1:00:04 – Yeah, and it’s because people are insufficiently valuing
1:00:09 the importance of democratic institutions and rule of law.
1:00:11 Those are long-term things
1:00:13 that they don’t care enough about.
1:00:17 And America’s really good, capitalism is really good,
1:00:20 it’s valuing short-term things,
1:00:22 but not long-term things, not public goods,
1:00:24 not negative externalities.
1:00:27 And I mean, you remember after January 6th,
1:00:29 there were a lot of American CEOs
1:00:32 that finally said, you know what, we’ve gotta value this.
1:00:35 If you were a member of Congress
1:00:38 and you refused to certify a free and fair election,
1:00:40 those are table stakes for democracy,
1:00:41 which is not gonna,
1:00:43 our PACs aren’t gonna give you money anymore, that’s it.
1:00:45 And you and I know a lot of the CEOs
1:00:46 that made those decisions
1:00:48 and I was glad they did it.
1:00:50 That didn’t even last a year.
1:00:52 And it’s not because those members of Congress
1:00:54 apologized and changed their behavior,
1:00:57 it’s because, eh, well, you know, it’s kind of convenient,
1:00:59 we wanna like give them money again,
1:01:00 and you know, let’s get in the game.
1:01:03 And we, you know, our competitors are gonna do it.
1:01:06 And it was such we need behavior, you know?
1:01:08 It was, I mean, again, this is from someone,
1:01:10 these are from companies that didn’t need to do it.
1:01:13 Jeff Bezos doesn’t need,
1:01:18 he is wealthy enough, powerful enough, he can stand up.
1:01:22 You know, it wasn’t comfortable or convenient for me
1:01:25 to go after Elon when he did something
1:01:27 that I thought was really problematic.
1:01:30 He’s not an enemy I need, believe it.
1:01:33 But I can’t live with myself
1:01:37 if I can’t be honest about what I think
1:01:39 on the global political stage.
1:01:41 Like that’s just who I am.
1:01:42 And if I lose money for that,
1:01:43 who gives a shit?
1:01:46 It doesn’t matter, I lose a client for that, I don’t care.
1:01:50 But, you know, I do think that if you spend all of your time,
1:01:53 I mean, maybe the problem with a person like Bezos
1:01:55 is once you become that rich,
1:01:57 the only way you become that rich
1:02:00 is by that becoming the only thing you value, right?
1:02:02 It shows that money is the only thing
1:02:04 that is truly important for you.
1:02:07 That is what you orient all of your time and being towards.
1:02:09 And if that’s true, there’s not much space
1:02:12 in your value set for valuing democracy,
1:02:17 rule of law, a community, a family, any of those things.
1:02:22 And therefore, having his guys get the meeting
1:02:26 and telling the people of the Washington Post to go scratch,
1:02:31 it does reflect who he actually is as a person.
1:02:33 But we as America are incenting a lot
1:02:35 of the wrong kinds of behavior
1:02:40 by lionizing someone like that as a captain of USA,
1:02:43 ’cause they are not leading by example.
1:02:44 That’s pretty clear.
1:02:47 – Ian Bremmer is the president and founder of Eurasia Group,
1:02:49 the world’s leading political risk research
1:02:52 and consulting firm, and GZERO Media,
1:02:54 a company dedicated to providing intelligent
1:02:57 and engaging coverage of international affairs.
1:02:59 He’s also the author of 11 books,
1:03:02 including the New York Times bestsellers Us Versus Them,
1:03:05 The Failure of Globalism, and his latest,
1:03:08 The Power of Crisis, How Three Threats
1:03:10 and Our Response Will Change the World.
1:03:13 He joins us from his home in New York
1:03:15 and off to his new office that he purchased,
1:03:17 ’cause Ian is a baller.
1:03:19 Ian is literally, Ian is the guy,
1:03:23 he’s like one of my peers that has just like killed it both,
1:03:24 both in terms of influence
1:03:26 and actually knows how to build a business.
1:03:28 Ian, I always enjoy our conversations
1:03:30 and I’m glad you continue to thrive.
1:03:31 – Me too, Scott.
1:03:32 That’s great to talk to you, man.
1:03:33 Good to see you.
1:03:45 – Algebra of happiness,
1:03:48 one of the people who sent in a question said,
1:03:52 “I don’t always agree with you, but I enjoy your comments.”
1:03:56 To me, that’s arguably one of the nicer things
1:03:58 I hear from people.
1:04:01 And that is, what is your job if you’re an academic,
1:04:02 if you’re a thought leader,
1:04:06 if you’re someone engaged in discourse,
1:04:08 you want to inspire thinking.
1:04:10 And this is the fear and I fall into this a lot.
1:04:12 There is a narrative out there.
1:04:14 As soon as you get on social media,
1:04:16 it’s gonna shove you into a bubble
1:04:18 that it perceives as your narrative
1:04:19 and it’s gonna surround you with content
1:04:22 and other people who have signed up for a certain narrative.
1:04:24 And unfortunately, kind of the narratives out there,
1:04:26 the ones that people digress to are generally political.
1:04:28 I’m either a progressive or I’m a conservative.
1:04:31 It used to be religions or it used to be nationalism
1:04:34 or your country or whatever it might be,
1:04:37 but now it’s basically left or right.
1:04:39 And you’re treated like an apostate
1:04:43 if you veer from the party line.
1:04:45 And that is not how we move things forward.
1:04:48 We have to be able to think, okay, generally speaking,
1:04:49 I agree more with these people, more with these people,
1:04:51 whatever it might be.
1:04:53 But if you don’t have issues
1:04:55 where you kind of color outside the lines,
1:04:57 it probably means you’re not a critical thinker
1:05:00 ’cause nobody has no political party, no ideology,
1:05:03 no religion has a monopoly on the truth.
1:05:06 And there’s so much incentive to sign up for the narrative
1:05:08 and you get so much positive feedback.
1:05:11 If I go on, you know, meta has decided,
1:05:12 figured out I’m a progressive.
1:05:15 So all of these, I’ve been suggested
1:05:17 as a follow to a lot of progressives.
1:05:19 So when I put out a thing saying that
1:05:21 the October surprise might be this shithead comedian
1:05:22 who insulted Puerto Ricans
1:05:25 and there’s 400,000 Puerto Ricans in Pennsylvania,
1:05:28 this might be the October surprise
1:05:30 that swings Pennsylvania to Harris.
1:05:33 Five or 6,000 likes, ’cause oh my gosh,
1:05:37 my algorithmically chosen progressives love that shit.
1:05:39 But if I come out and say, you know,
1:05:42 I don’t think, I think Trump actually going on,
1:05:43 Rogan was a great idea.
1:05:46 I think the energy distinct of,
1:05:48 distinct of the ridiculous rhetoric
1:05:51 that was at that MSG meeting,
1:05:53 the energy there I think was really surprisingly strong
1:05:55 given that they came to the bluest of blue.
1:05:58 I thought it was smart for Trump to go on Rogan
1:06:01 and people treat you like you’re an apostate.
1:06:03 I knew when I put out an endorsement of Harris,
1:06:04 I was gonna lose subscribers
1:06:07 because I have a lot of people who are center right
1:06:09 and a lot of conservatives who listen to our stuff
1:06:10 and I like that.
1:06:12 And I knew when I put that out,
1:06:13 I would lose subscribers
1:06:15 and we actually lost more subscribers
1:06:18 than we ever had off a single post.
1:06:21 But here’s the thing, if you’re wealthy
1:06:23 and you have people who love you unconditionally,
1:06:25 you have an obligation to speak your mind
1:06:28 and it’s okay, it’s okay to be wrong.
1:06:30 It’s okay to disagree.
1:06:32 It’s okay to move the ball forward.
1:06:35 Progress is a function of evidence and argument.
1:06:38 And when we all bark up the same tree, we get stupid.
1:06:40 If you put out a viewpoint
1:06:41 that is not part of your policy,
1:06:45 not part of your tribe’s narrative, that’s okay.
1:06:47 If you have a civil discussion around it,
1:06:49 people will forgive you and you’re both gonna be fine.
1:06:51 Are you a critical thinker
1:06:53 or have you just signed up for a narrative?
1:06:55 Progress is a function of the former.
1:06:57 (upbeat music)
1:06:59 This episode was produced by Jennifer Sanchez
1:07:00 and Caroline Shagren.
1:07:02 And Drew Burroughs is our technical director.
1:07:04 Thank you for listening to The ProfG Pod
1:07:06 from the Vox Media Podcast Network.
1:07:08 We’ll catch you on Saturday for No Mercy, No Malice,
1:07:09 as read by George Hahn.
1:07:12 And please follow our ProfG Markets Pod
1:07:13 wherever you get your pods
1:07:15 for new episodes every Monday and Thursday.
1:07:19 (gentle music)
1:07:22 (gentle music)
1:07:26 – (speaking in foreign language)
1:07:30 – (speaking in foreign language)
1:07:33 (gentle music)
1:07:36 – I’m Ashley C. Ford and I host “Into the Mix,”
1:07:39 a Ben and Jerry’s podcast about joy and justice
1:07:41 produced with Vox Creative.
1:07:43 We’re back with new episodes,
1:07:45 taking a look at voter fraud,
1:07:48 specifically how the fear of voter fraud accusations
1:07:51 can lead to voter suppression.
1:07:54 As the 2024 election draws nearer,
1:07:57 former President Donald Trump continues to claim,
1:08:00 without evidence, that widespread voter fraud
1:08:02 lost him the election in 2020.
1:08:04 So we wanted to know,
1:08:07 how do claims like this affect ordinary voters?
1:08:09 Here are the story of a civil servant
1:08:13 who faced felony charges and years in prison
1:08:14 for helping a first-time voter
1:08:17 figure out how to use a voting machine.
1:08:20 That story and more on “Into the Mix,”
1:08:22 a Ben and Jerry’s podcast.
1:08:30 – Do you feel like your leads never lead anywhere?
1:08:32 And you’re making content that no one sees
1:08:35 and it takes forever to build a campaign?
1:08:38 – Well, that’s why we built HubSpot.
1:08:40 It’s an AI-powered customer platform
1:08:42 that builds campaigns for you,
1:08:44 tells you which leads are worth knowing,
1:08:46 and makes writing blogs, creating videos,
1:08:49 and posting on social a breeze.
1:08:52 So now, it’s easier than ever to be a marketer.
1:08:54 Get started at hubspot.com/marketers.