Election Expert Allan Lichtman Predicts Kamala Harris Will Beat Donald Trump

hello this is everybody settle down I'm Charlie Marlo that is the great Eric MERS Smith and we got some news Eric kamla Harris is going to win the election according to Allan lickman I think this is very interesting I was actually looking forward to his prediction when it came out I've been following this guy for the last several months I've known of him for years so how are you doing and let's let's get right into this this prediction from Alan lickman because I think it's going to be trending for the next couple of days here this guy basically he's either 10 out of 10 or nine out of 10 in predicting presidential winners will get to the nine out of 10 but this guy is usually right Eric yeah he has his uh 13 keys for predicting the presidency he's a political science guy and he developed it back in the'80s I think ' 84 was his first election that he predicted and basically their true false questions and if enough of them are true then the incumbent party in his prediction model wins and if a certain number are false then the Challenger wins well according to his model KLA Harris will win the presidency and they're based on things like foreign policy economics is is the incumbent party running is there a third party those kind of things things that you could plug into any election and that aren't specific to the time that you're in uh yeah it's interesting like I like the guy he's kind of quirky and funny and he clearly has thought a lot about this and i' I've looked at the keys and they do make a lot of sense in terms of giving you a general big picture of where things are and look the track record speaks for itself either nine out of 10 or 10 out of 10 depending on how you count 2,000 which was essentially a tie so if you remove that election from the sample set he's nine for nine and I think there is Merit to it and kind of taking that approach and looking back at what tends to matter to people in terms of picking a president now I will say I think it's worth noting that he didn't make an official prediction when Biden was in but when Biden was the was the candidate Biden was ahead on the keys and looked very likely that that was going to be his pick even though I think most of us thought had Biden stayed in the odds were overwhelmingly high that he would lose so I do think that is interesting I my my preferred method would be to go with polling and data over over the keys but I do think there is some value in an academic approach that is grounded in kind of these big picture concepts of what tends to matter to the electorate okay I'm glad you mentioned polling and we're going to get to the polling but because I've become an Allen lickman nerd over the last several months I watch his shows a lot on YouTube here with his son they're very funny they have a very funny Dynamic it's kind of the Boomer and the millennial they poke fun at each other so I would recommend everybody check out alen liman's channel on YouTube he's really blown up on YouTube the last several months for this election cycle you bring up polling and I've chuckled when he's said this because you and I both Eric fortunately unfortunately have a history in Sports Talk Radio and Allan lickman one of his phrases he always says is that polling doesn't matter polling is Sports Talk Radio he says polling is Sports Talk Radio for politics it gives you something to talk about every day oh look KL is up three points the next day Trump's up two and it's kind of funny and I get it what he's saying is the day-to-day polling doesn't matter as much as these big concrete you know foreign policy economy are you the incumbent are you charismatic and I'll throw it to you off that what do you think first of all about his idea that the polling doesn't really matter to him polling is Sports Talk Radio it's just a bunch of and you know hey you know Sports Talk Radio like I do it's a bunch of gas bags yeah it's a bunch of gas bags that don't really watch the games that always have hot takes and they don't really know what they're talking about and I'm including myself in that yeah it's look it's an interesting debate um I I think Nate silver who I am huge Nate silver nerd he's kind of one of the pioneers of what I would consider to be modern election modeling he did it at 538 he now has his own on the silver bulletin 538 still does their own separate from him there are other forecasts now that the economist has one the hill has one so it's become more popular and what and they're based mainly on polling um although there are other factors as well that go into their their methods and that kind of is the main he he has gone back and forth with lickman on X Nate silver has and essentially years when and when Biden was in the race and lickman was predicting it looked like he didn't make an official prediction but he was saying based on his keys Biden was in good good position in fact lickman said Biden should not drop out it would be a a a huge error for the Democrats because essentially what he said is based on my keys Biden has this one well look if you believe that I to me you lose some credibility there because then what you're saying is you are so tied to this system and this format that you are unable to see what is clearly right in front of your face which is Biden was a clearly diminished candidate who was likely I say likely to lose because you never know had Biden stayed in there were three month mons left Anything could happen right but that to me is a tell that if you're so blinded by your model you can't see the clear data right in front of you I tend you tend to lose some credibility in my mind but when they were going back in fourth when Biden was in the race Silver's model was showing Trump was a clear favorite and and so silver said hey I'll bet you I I forget the exact money he threw out it was like 700 Grand or something or 500 I'll bet you like an seen amount of money or any money you want like if you so essentially what Nate silver was saying is hey if you think your model is so good and so accurate and better than the polling based models like mine then let's put real money on the table put up money right because it's one thing to make predictions anybody can make I could sit and make any a million predictions in the world but as you know as someone who again and this is where Sports comes in betting markets and we talk about this with elections it's true with sports as well they are the great equalizer because then it's not about what do I feel what do I think it's who is putting money on the line and that was Nate Silver's point is if you think your model's so good let's bet and I actually went back and read silver had done an article years earlier when he was at 538 where he actually went back and because lickman is not the only academic Who does these the these are done through over the last 30 or 40 years by numerous academics using all kinds of different mod models and silver went back and did an a pretty extensive um look at those and what he found was they're really they didn't do a good job that they were not any more or less accurate than you would expect basically anybody to be now I will say lickman is an exception because he is incredibly accurate either nine out of 10 or 10 out of 10 depending on how you count the 2000 election so I give him more credibility because it is he he clearly when he developed this did a ton of research he's a historian and he used that to inform his model and it is held up to a pretty rigorous degree and and look 2016 he was right he picked Trump the polling showed you that Hillary was going to win now I will I think it's again this is where it gets complicated the Electoral the polling does it was for the popular vote and Hillary Clinton did in fact win the popular vote lickman predicted the winner of the Electoral College correctly which was Donald Trump so Nate Silver's model had Trump at about a 30% chance of winning in 2016 and of course he lost so if you were judging 2016 you would judge silver wrong lickman correct right which is true that is a fact but I think what Nate silver the reason I like him I think more than I than I do lickman is because silver is about probability right lickman is essentially saying well there's a 100% chance KLA Harris wins now because I predicted it my my formula shows me I I think that's crazy I think this election is much closer to 5050 I also think it's crazy that his model told him that Joe Biden was likely to win at a point where Biden had like probably a 20 or 30% chance of winning and Trump was the clear favor so I side more on the polling probability side but here's the key you have to recognize that polling and election models and betting markets are probability not certainty there is no certainty in life and there certainly is isn't certainty in politics and so when people say there's a 60% chance of something happening that means it's more likely than not but that's not a great probability and it sure as hell isn't 100% And so when you're looking at pulling an election forecast based primarily un pulling you always have to understand that in your mind uh but again I go back to what happened a couple months ago if you are so tied to a model that you think Joe Biden was going to win that election a few months ago after that debate because your model said so I think you're too tied to the model and I think you're not looking at it from a realistic standpoint but but by just here are his 13 keys and again I want to be clear I think these are pretty good if you were going to develop a model that didn't include polling which I think would be dumb but if you were going to do it this is the way you should do it here are his 13 Keys the White House Party gained seats in the House in midterm elections the incumbent president is running the White House Party avoided a primary contest a thirdparty candidate is running the short-term economy is strong the growth of the long-term economy has been as strong as last two terms the White House has enacted major national policy changes there is no social unrest there is no scandal in the White House the incumbent Party candidate has Charisma the Challenger is uncharismatic the White House had foreign policy success the White House had foreign policy failures if you were going to do like generic things that could apply to any election those are pretty good now as you probably are thinking as I'm reading them there is some degree of vagueness in assigning a true false rating to each of those keys right like there is and he to his credit again if you if you watch his videos he has very strict criteria in a lot of these for what classifies as a third party candidate what classifies as avoiding a primary contest he does have some hard numbers there which I think are good it's it's not so much about vague assertions but on some of them the Challenger is uncharismatic that's a judgment call right the incumbent party has candidate has Charisma that's a judgment call to some degree so I like what he's doing I think it's way better than other academic models I give him a lot of credence and credibility for it but but I prefer forecast based on actual pulling data which tends to be over the Long Haul pretty accurate couple things on that first of all go to the Third Party candidate you know we like to talk about RFK Jr on the show I believe and people correct me if I'm wrong I believe the third party has to get more than 5% or maybe it's 10% no it's his model it's 5% for his key to be true the Third Party candidate has to get five percent or you know it might be 10 is you sure it's five we'll look that up either way I heard him say I think I heard him say five once but I could be wrong on that couple things on his keys and and again I've I've watched and listened to him so much here that I probably know too much but like the Charisma the Charisma key in his mind Donald Trump is not one of those charismatic figures like a John F Kennedy like a Barack Obama and when you listen to him talk I I think you'll agree now I think I think Donald Trump as the leader of a movement I think he has Charisma I think his followers really love him so I understand how people would say well Donald Trump is very charismatic but you also have to look at the data and basically say for as charismatic as Donald Trump is he still has a high floor but a very low ceiling right like he's not somebody that is bringing a bunch of new people into the tent and so that's how alen lickman looks at the angle for Charisma and then the other thing with RFK Jr is it's it's kind of interesting because if the Third Party candidate were to get the big percentage right and that hurts the incumbent president but you could make the argument that in this particular election it would have hurt Donald Trump and then the fact that you have this third- Party candidate who I do think is pretty popular in RFK Jr but then he endorses Donald Trump so that's just really interesting there take that for what it's worth and then maybe we'll finish on lickman here because again I've I've watched so much of his content he says he's 10 out of 10 on the predictions because he says Al Gore actually won in 2000 and he has a lot of evidence that backs this up again you can go and watch all of this he basically says there was a hugely uh disparate number of African-American ballots that were thrown out in the State of Florida so he actually says no he was right the wrong person won the presidency in 2000 meaning Al Gore should have been the winner again that's his opinion so go don't yell at me go ahead and watch all of his all of his videos on this which he's been doing for 24 years talking about this by the way and he has a lot of data to break to uh to back it up I bring this up though because I think it's interesting look the wri and the Trump folks think every election is stolen okay and then on the left let's say let's say Donald Trump wins so Alan lickman is again wrong but let's say there's some some similar High Jinks I'll call it to 2,000 in Florida let's say that in one particular swing state let's say it's Pennsylvania for example I think we both agree that Pennsylvania will probably swing this election what if Trump wins but then we find out that for whatever reason there were folks that were no longer on the voter roles or ballots were thrown out I just when I was watching this today I I watched a video of lickman talking about 2000 and I just started to chuckle because I go what if this is the other time he's wrong yeah but it's because of some hijinks and I'm not this person that says elections are stolen and all that but the the Florida 2000 thing was really odd because it came down to one state and something like 538 votes or 537 votes in one state Al Gore won the popular vote and there was a lot of craziness with the hanging Chads and all that I only bring this up because Eric this is such a crazy year for politics I feel like with everything that's gone on with Biden dropping out with Trump and the assassination attempt with with kamla jumping in like this would be the year where again like 2000 something weird like that happens if it's gonna ever happen it's gonna be this year Eric well that's the problem with the basis of his election model is it doesn't take into account the weirdness like I said he had Biden as an incumbent staying in the race counting as a positive which normally it would probably be a positive an incumbent running for re-election not when that incumbent can't string a sentence together in a debate so his model was just wrong counting that as a positive it wasn't a positive it was a positive actually that Biden got out of the race same thing with the RFK junr thing when Biden was in the race it was true that RFK Jr was um bad for Biden right so he would have been right but when KLA Harris Scot in the race we see in the polling it was pretty clear that RFK Jr was helping Harris so again his key would have been completely wrong had RFK Jr stayed in rather than RFK Jr hurting the helping the incumbent he would have been hurting the incumbent so my point is that the that's why the model is is flawed in terms of 2000 look 2000 the right way to score that is a draw that should not count in his that should not count as he got 2000 right or wrong because it was a tie our system isn't built to measure Thai elections uh if every vote counted as it was intended Al Gore probably would have won he's probably right on that there was a butterfly ballot design in Broward County where lots of people voted for Pat Buchanan who was running as an independent way more than he got anywhere else and it was because clearly if you saw the design of the ballot people were confused because Gore and Buchanan's names were so close to each other and they voted for the wrong candidate that's what happened so I think Bush probably did win based on how the ballots were cast but I think Gore would have won based on what voters intended it was a tie now in terms of going forward you're right like Shenanigans not certifying votes disputing who's on the voter roles if it's close I think we could see 2,000 levels of lawyers looking over the shoulders of vote counters but it gets back to kind of another thing that factors into these models both liman's model and also the polling models is the difference between the Electoral College and the popular vote in most of American history that hasn't mattered usually the same candidate wins both but we've had two examples in the last what five elections the last yeah two two out of the last six elections the the party that won the popular vote didn't win the electoral vote and it's possible that happens again because I think KLA Harris is very likely to win the popular vote not certain but very likely but she is definitely not at all very likely to win the electoral college that's more like 5050 right and the reason is because Republicans have an advantage in electoral college and think about what that does I understand the people who argue for the Electoral College it is what our founding fathers settled on although they settled on lots of other things like the three- fifths compromise and Senators not being directly elected and they had to make a lot of compromises to bring all the factions together in the 1780s right if you were starting from scratch you would never design the Electoral College I mean it's it's in it's in many ways insane and it what it does not only does it distort the will of the majority in a democracy but it does it in a way and this is my biggest problem with it it does it in a way that sets us up for the kinds of things that happened in 2000 and may happen this year where you could have like it wouldn't matter that much about sh like Shenanigans by local elected officials if you had a popular vote right it would we wouldn't have to worry about fake electors because there would be no electors we wouldn't have to worry about Unfaithful electors which has happened a lot in American history hold on where where a candidate that's people that cheat on their spouses or what yes that is that is be no that are are elect those are electors who defy the will of their state so their state votes for candidate a and the electors say no I'm good I'm gonna vote for a candidate b or for another candidate altogether if you go back to 2016 there it didn't matter it didn't change the result but there were like five or six electors who voted for somebody other than Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump even though they were Bound by the results of their state to vote for either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump now some states have instituted roles to try to force electors to vote uh the way they want so it's unlikely it matters but the fact that we even that the fact that there even a possibility is insane the fact that you you wouldn't have even needed to certify the electors if you didn't have an electoral college there wouldn't have been a January 6th right it may have happened on a different day but it wouldn't have happened that day the reason it happened that day was because Congress was certifying the electors and so my point is having the Electoral College whether you believe it's the best system or not it set us up for all of these different Arcane roles that different states at different local jurisdictions have and how they count votes and makes it so that if there is a candidate or a party that wants to try to change an election result they've got a lot of different levers and mechanisms that they wouldn't have if the Electoral College didn't exist okay let's get to the Sports Talk Radio which is the polling and the betting op odds and you've seen now we've seen that for the last week to two weeks in in the betting odds there was that time where so this was right before the Democrat convention and right before the RFK um endorsement I want to say KLA Harris was up about 10 percentage points and I'm talking about percentage points in the betting odds on Donald Trump it was something like I don't know 50 5444 something like that then I think because of the the idea of RFK is going to drop out he is going to endorse Trump we started to see it kind of go towards Trump maybe there was a little bit of a bounce for kamla for the DNC but then that next day RFK makes his announcement officially and there's the speech and all that and so I'll hold it up here for everybody as of right now Donald Trump 50.1% chance of winning comma 47.7% let's just go ahead and say it's a 2.5% lead for Donald Trump but uh all of the Charisma and the bounce and the and the The Joy the joy of kamla Harris right since the announcement that has now seemed to dissipate in the betting odds and we basically have a 5050 or whatever you want to call this 5048 Trump lead right now I I actually think I would rather be Harris right now than Trump but it's really close and the reason it's close is because what I just talked about Harris is ahead by an average of two to four points nationally depending on what what polling average you look at I again I think she's very likely to win the popular vote but Trump maintains the same thing he had in 2016 and 2020 which is a fairly strong advantage in the Electoral College and that is what is driving this is the swing states are so close CNN polling of Swing States this week Trump up five in Arizona and kamla up five in Michigan Harris is ahead by six in Wisconsin pretty good but here is why Trump is still a slight favorite Harris is only up by one in Georgia she's up by one in Nevada and they're tied in Pennsylvania so let's assume that Harris wins Michigan and Wisconsin and let's assume Trump wins Arizona maybe not but I think if you were if you were to bet today you'd probably bet that way for those three states what's that leave us with Nevada Georgia North Carolina Pennsylvania here's why Trump's betting odds have improved Harris in that scenario has to win either Pennsylvania Georgia or North Carolina she's got to win one of those three has to Trump is probably slightly ahead in North Carolina and Georgia although it's very close and Pennsylvania is essentially tied and that is what a lot of this comes down to is Pennsylvania Harris's numbers in Pennsylvania were looking better a few weeks ago right now Nate silver on his polling average has Harris up by one in Pennsylvania one point that's essentially a tie and if she doesn't win Pennsylvania it's going to be so hard pre-convention Nate silver had Harris up 1.8 in Pennsylvania now he has her up one he had pre pre-convention Harris up 3.1 in Michigan now up 1.9 so again she's still up but it's so close and she didn't get it appears the DNC bounce even though I thought the convention went well you and I talked about the speech I thought it was very good there really isn't a bounce that shown up in the polling and if anything Trump has actually very slightly improved his polling position since the DNC now huge caveat here there has not been I think because Labor Day came right after the labor day long Labor Day weekend right after the debate or the convention we have not seen a ton of polling that happened all post convention I think we'll get a lot more end of this week heading into the debate coming up next week but from what we've seen Charlie there's very little if any post convention bounce and if if any it's gone a little bit in Trump's Direction but I just want to be I just want to be so clear about Pennsylvania being everything if Harris gets a poll or several polls in the next week or two that show her up two three four points in Pennsylvania the the numbers are gonna bounce up for Harris I think significantly Pennsylvania as each day goes by looks more and more like it's going to decide this thing and I just go back again to Josh Shapiro again maybe it won't matter but you had the sitting governor with a 60% approval rating and if he gives you half a point or a point in Pennsylvania I mean that literally could decide this whole thing yeah I was trying to find this graphic here that I had seen in the last couple days and and we can talk all day long about it probably coming down to Pennsylvania which it most likely will but I was reading this this kind of graphic about Trump strategy for spending in different states and even though I think it's fair to say Trump and the Republicans have an advantage in the Electoral College it also basically came down to Trump knows that he has to win Pennsylvania so much to win that they might be putting too many resources into Pennsylvania and then potentially so the strategy makes sense but it's so high risk High reward because then if you lose anything else like a Georgia like a combination and and we can do the math but like a combination of North Carolina Nevada whatever it is essentially this is a long way of saying like if if Trump doesn't win Pennsylvania he's done he's just done I think what has be look again we are we are imagining a world where obviously this election is what it appears to be now which is very close it's Poss POS one candidate or the other pulls away and this is a moot discussion right but if it stays roughly like it is now it's becoming more and more clear that Pennsylvania is everything for both candidates and the reason for that is because Georgia and North Carolina which when Biden was in the race they looked really solid for Trump and North Carolina especially that was gone that was basically off the map they have been pulled back to the point if you look at the recent polling where they are roughly the same as p pania so now you have Georgia North Carolina and Pennsylvania all kind of in the same bucket as essentially 5050 and Trump if he doesn't win Michigan and Wisconsin he has to get all three of them he has to have them all he can't lose any if he loses just one so that is why now he's he's in that kind of pickle but on the other side Harris has to win one of them Pennsylvania Georgia or North Carolina plus if it's not Pennsylvania she needs Nevada too so that's why it's so critical to her so the way that the polling has converged in these swing states with North Carolina and Georgia getting closer to 5050 and kind of in the same area of Pennsylvania have made it so that Pennsylvania now becomes even more important than it looked like it was going to be because if it's close Trump probably needs all three a clean sweep Harris needs either Pennsylvania or if she doesn't get it Georgia or North Carolina plus Nevada and that look if it's close that's what this is going to come down to are those scenarios that is where we're GNA be plus the second congressional district of Nebraska but that gets really you know that gets really hairy that looks like it's going to go Blue why do they even get that by the way it just makes no sense that they Omaha gets their own little thing it's just like hey it's been going on forever hey it's fun it's just it's dumb well again why why the answer is the Electoral College if you didn't have an electoral college this wouldn't matter but in Maine and Nebraska they're the two states that give electoral votes based on Statewide winner and congressional district and Trump is going to even though Harris is going to win Maine Trump's probably going to win one of the main congressional districts and pick up an electrical electoral vote there and Harris is going to win or I'm sorry Trump's going to win Nebraska but Parris is leading by about five six points in that Omaha District that is likely to give her that electoral vote which by the way if the scenario plays out where she holds the blue wall Pennsylvania Michigan and Wisconson but Trump wins the Sun Belt states Georgia North Carolina Arizona Nevada then Harris would win 270 to 268 because of that Omaha Nebraska congressional district in fact in Omaha they now have signed where it is just a blue dot that's the sign and obviously what it means is in a sea of red Omaha is that one blue dot that could give KLA Harris the the presidency again why because of the Electoral College baby and and that's when you explain it like that it's so hilarious and by the way I think the Electoral College is stupid I think popular vote is better I understand why right now any Republicans going to say no the Electoral College is great I get it look Democrats almost always win the popular vote Republicans have a much better chance with the Electoral College I understand it I think most people would agree it's stupid but it's even dumber when you think about that we are the greatest country in the world we are trying to elect Eric the leader of the Free World so think about if you're over there in like Australia France somewhere in Asia and you're like here is The Shining City on a Hill the United States of America is going to potentially nominate their president based on [ __ ] Omaha Nebraska right based the College World Series it's so stupid it's when you explain it it's the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my life based on a system designed in the 1780s and look I want to be I'm a huge history ner and in particular I love that time period I just not too long ago read a book about Alexander Hamilton who was the father really of the Constitution I mean he was if you were say who is the most influential person in drafting the Constitution it was Hamilton he actually wrote kind of the rough draft that they then used but Hamilton didn't get his way all the time because he wanted a more majoritarian system he was fighting for a more but the the small states and the slave holding states were like no debt no way that's why the Senate gets to that's why Wyoming has as many senators as California even though California has 40 million people and Wyoming has like 575,000 that is why we have the El the Electoral so I love the founding fathers I think their system was incredible especially given the time but it was a product of the times the compromises they had to make remember when they did this not only couldn't minorities vote not only couldn't women vote white men who didn't have property couldn't vote it was a it was a completely different world but that system that came from that world is what we used 250 years later it's really crazy and getting back to what you said about the Republicans you're right they would never go for a change now they have these all all these arguments why we should have the electoral college but just imagine for a second that in the last six elections two of them as I said earlier with a popular vote and Electoral College switch imagine if Republicans had lost both of those right so imagine in 2000 Bush wins the popular vote but Gore wins The Electoral College and in 2016 Trump wins the popular vote but Hillary is the Electoral College what arguments would Republicans be making that they'd be making the exact opposite argument they'd be saying no it's not fair the majority is spoken how can we have the so both sides would be arguing the exact opposite what they're arguing now my point is just step back from the partisan politics of who you want to win and just think about the fairness of the system where a per Joe Biden got seven million more votes than Donald Trump in 2020 had a few less than a 100,000 votes switched in three states Trump would have been the president I mean is that fair that a guy who gets 7even million votes would have lost what if he had won by 10 million or 15 million like it gets absurd third with the Electoral College if you kind of play out the examples there's no way we would design this system uh if we were starting now look my Cho my preference in an ideal world would be to have neither the Electoral College or the popular vote my preference would be rank Choice voting where you have four or five candidates and then a majority candidate would emerge with rank Choice voting because you would eliminate the person with the Le the fewest votes their second choice then would be distributed you would have a majority winner every time but people could still vote their conscience and not worry about affecting the outcome so RFK Junior under a rank Choice system could stay in the race and he could say vote for me just list Trump as your second choice and then when he was eliminated his second choice so people could still vote for the candidate they wanted without affecting the result and you would have a majority winner but that's never going to happen in the presidency I think it should I think it' be the best system I think it would incentivize moderate candidates to run I think it would be best for our democracy but it's not going to happen I recognize that so given the alternative of course it's more it's more simple and fair for the ma crazy thought right the majority to win I mean think about if you had a senate race or a house race or a Governor's race where we had a system where the candidate who got the most votes would lose I mean that would be crazy we wouldn't do that for the senate or the house or the governor but we do it for the literally the most important job in our country and in the world it's crazy and as I said earlier the biggest argument against it now isn't even necessarily that it's a the bad the worst way to pick a president it's it's that it sets up Bad actors to have so many different choke points where they can try to overturn the result it empowers local officials some of whom are let's be honest partisan hacks it gives them power in a way that they would never have if you had a popular vote like in 2020 if you had a popular vote and Joe Biden won by seven million Donald Trump and his people and Rudy Giuliani could complain all they want about you know Dominion voting changing votes or or illegals voting or whatever crazy arguments they came up with it wouldn't matter because the Gap was so wide we'd be like oh they come on it's seven million votes but because of the Electoral College it allowed for all the shenanigans we saw in 2020 you know leading up to and including a rioter storming the capital to try to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power couple things on that it's kind of like the Supreme Court with term limits I think most people would agree we we should have term limits we don't want 85y old justices dying I bet you most Republicans in theory would agree with that but they're not going to agree with it now because Trump put three about 55-year-old justices right right up there on the bench who are going to sit there for the next 25 30 years another thing because you said you're a history nerd or buff whatever word you use I also am and I I got a history degree from Bradley just because I loved studying history so much and I realized I could get a double major by just I wouldn't have to stay any longer so I love history also and if you really study American history this gets back to the Electoral College you realize that essentially almost every decision in terms of statehood from you know go back to whatever 1776 to the Constitution and and all that to the Civil War you will realize that how we determined States and allowed them into the Union Almost 100% had to do with the Free State versus slave state debate right and keeping that fair right so that you would only allow in okay a couple States here free states couple states there you got the Missouri Compromise and I bring that all up because it is hilarious when I say hilarious I mean obviously everything going back in the day was was terrible and awful with what happened in terms of slavery but we essentially still use the same system which is the Electoral College which for the most part for the first hundred or so years was solely based on the slavery argument I mean look this up folks don't just take my word for it look up how states were put into the Union from about I don't know 1800 to 1860s when we had the Civil War slavery was the number one issue for Statehood that's how we that's how we carved up this country and that's how we're determining elections in 2024 it's almost as stupid as Omaha Nebraska being able to settle the goddamn election it makes no sense it's laughable until I actually say it in my brain and then I realize how stupid it is it's it's crazy to think about but especially when you understand the history of not only slavery as you talked about but also the other big thing they had to do was they had to appease the small states and they to get them in the union the small states were like we're not going with strict proportional representation because we're smaller we want power so that's why they come up with the Senate that of course is why they came up with the Electoral College it was to balance that power just imagine you were starting from scratch now imagine like you had no history right so we there was no history of the Electoral College and we just America just formed tomorrow right and and all these people came together and they're like okay how are we going to pick the most important job the presidency for 330 million people and somebody was like well you know most votes wins right that like that's democracy and someone else was like no I have an idea have you ever heard I'm going to call it the Electoral College hear me out for a second and then you spent the next like 30 minutes explaining it again and you put that up against I don't know most votes wins which is again literally how we pick every other office in our country of any kind of importance it just is so crazy and the PE people make the arguments again it's this again it's what you talk about the Supreme Court they make the arguments based on does it help me and my party in my team right now and if the answer to that is yes then I support it and if the answer to that is no then I oppose and by the way that goes for Democrats too because like I said the if Democrats had benefited from the were benefiting from the Electoral College they would probably be making the same arguments Republicans are making now that they would just reverse if if Democrats had a six like right now there's a 63 Republican conservative majority on the Supreme Court that's locked in for a while if that were reversed and it were a 63 liberal majority you would have Democrats saying oh you can't mess with the sacred institution of the Supreme Court that are country uh figured out over so many years the delegate balance and Republicans would be the one probably calling for Supreme Court reform so both sides have their share of Hypocrites I get it I get I understand it but I'm just saying step back from a moment and just think okay remove my personal preferences from the equation and just imagine I were trying to design the fairest most Equitable system I could that would lead to the cleanest easiest transition of power what would it be and of course it would be the popular vote I mean come on okay I only bring this up because you mentioned the 35ths compromise I have chuckled at this for years because again I put myself think about just think about this Eric so this was 1787 Constitutional Convention a bunch of dudes with wooden teeth with white wigs wearing high socks and sat in a room makeup they were probably drinking whiskey out of a barrel and these men argued whether essentially a black person a slave should be worth three fifths of a human being and I bring this up this is like when I say comedy this is like the Dave Chappelle racial draft comedy think about this there is probably half the dudes in the room are like No it should be two fifths and the other half are like No it should be four fifths right like just imagine the argument like Eric I know I'm trying to be kind of funny but like that was a debate like no they're only 40% no they're 80% let's compromise on 60% that was basically an argument being had by these dudes with powdered wigs makeup and high socks wooden teeth in the late in the late 1700s and we're still basing a lot of the crap we do now on it it's insanity it is and again I have tremendous respect and admiration for most of the founding fathers particularly Hamilton and and Madison and Washington and Adams Jefferson they were men of their time right they like we all are they were products of what where they grew up what was going on around them and they were trying to do the best they could and I think given those constraints and given what we were up against to try to form this country they overcame incredible odds and what they came up with was a blueprint that I think it speaks for itself what America's become over 250 years they were they should be held up in high regard for that but to get there they had to do and make some pretty terrible compromise I mean essentially think with the southern because look the southern states were essentially arguing at the Constitutional Convention slaves aren't people their property they they don't have any rights at all none not the least of which is the right to vote they have no rights but but we want them to count because we want more represent in Congress and the northern people were like well we don't really like slavery we don't think you should own people but they certainly shouldn't be allowed to vote and they shouldn't be counted uh because that for for congressional representation because their property like these were the arguments they were having at that time and those arguments and the deals that were made some of which have have stood the test of time and I think been proven to be pretty pretty good others have not right like not direct electing Senators the Electoral College but trying to get rid of them now because of the way that it benefits or hurts one party is probably is never going to happen let's be honest it's not GNA happen Okay let's uh we'll wrap up here we got the debate I also want to talk about uh the Harris walls interview last week which was the night that we recorded last week so debate first of all I mean I can't wait for the debate I said the same thing about the Joe Biden debate never did I think it was gonna star in motion Joe Biden stepping down although I'm glad it happened but what do you think of this debate um I mean I'm I'm excited for it I don't know if we're going to get a ton of fireworks I don't know how much it matters I guess I guess it matters a lot in my opinion for KLA Harris right we've seen Trump debate Trump also does a million interviews he does a million podcasts which he should get credit for and kamla Harris should do more interviews and like I said we'll discuss her CNN interview last week but look this is the big time if if you remember KLA Harris and her debates in what 2019 20120 whenever it was I remember two moments okay one good one bad I remember the good moment where she said whatever to Joe Biden I was that little girl remember that and then also didn't she call Biden racist or something anyway whatever I remember that I remember Tulsi gabber getting after a little bit and then obviously people on the right play that clip all the time and are like tulsy gabber destroyed K Harris which it was a nice moment I didn't think it was like the greatest thing ever but whatever look this is now the big time you are running for president so even though that debate back in the day that was important like this is her first time to come out there and really show she can go toe-to-toe with Trump so to me it matters more way more for KLA Harris Trump can go up there and say whatever the hell he wants but if he gets a couple good quotes you know people are going to say he won but I think there's a lot on the line for Harris now that I think it through yeah I am not going to make a prediction because I predicted Biden would do well in the first debate I thought he could hold it together for a night he had like those 10 days of Camp daavid I thought oh he'll be fine and that will be a win right because people had such low expectations obviously I was wrong so I will not make a prediction uh what I will say is I think I initially like the idea of the muted mic because of what a [ __ ] show the 2020 debates were with the constant interruptions mainly by Trump but by Biden two to some degree but then in practice it was one of those things where once I it sounded great in theory once I saw it it led to what would have been if Biden was just okay it would have been such a boring debate there would have been almost no back and forth because you when you mute the mics you eliminate the back and forth and again I hate the constant Interruption but I also hate that just I'll answer then I'll be done then you'll answer because the debate should be back and forth those are the moments that's where you learn something so I so I love the idea of the muted mic when I heard it but then when I saw it in practice I don't like it at all I think it benefits Trump even though he didn't want it I think it really benefited him in that first debate and I think it will probably benefit him again because it it it forces him to rein in his worst impulses which are to constantly interrupt to potentially say something that is inappropriate or that he shouldn't say because he's fired up in the he of the moment now if he does that you won't hear him because it's muted when he's not when he's not giving his answer so I think it helps Trump in terms of strategy you're I think you're right we have not seen Harris she's not done a ton of interviews and she's only done the one big one and then I think a radio one she hasn't she's laid out some policy but American people are still learning about her they know who she is but they don't really know her this will be the biggest audience she's ever had bigger than you know her acceptance speech at the DNC tens of millions of people will watch it live Millions more will see the clips so this is huge for her I mean absolutely Trump we we know what he's probably going to do it's the same thing he usually does Hammer immigration inflation say a lot of things that are not true or really misleading ramble you know at times incoherently that's kind of what he is people expect that that's that's the bar for him we don't really know what the bar is for Harris it could be bad it could be really good who knows so I think Harris obviously she's got to lay out some policy I think for her side you have to correct you have to fact check Trump to some degree the the Moder you can't depend on the moderators to do it that's not really their job you can't try to go piece by piece and he he I again I hate to use the word lie because lying implies you're intentionally doing it and I don't know if Trump is or if he actually believes the things he says but he says a lot of things that are not true or or grossly misleading constantly you can't try to correct everyone in real time but here's what you can do if you follow Trump and you listen to his speeches or you watched him in the debate or you've seen the fact checks many of his misstatements are the same thing over and over again some variation of them right crime was lower when I was President not true things like that black unemployment was lower when I was President than it hinder by not true I lowered prescription drug prices forced the the negotiations not true or misleading I should say those things he says over and over again you should be ready for those if you're haris you should have short crisp beatdowns of him when he says that something like there he goes again let me tell you why that isn't true here's an or here he here he goes again lying here's here's the actual facts have it ready to to quickly correct him and then pivot to what you would do and the differences in policies that's what a skilled debater does against Trump you don't try to fact check everything he says you'd be there all night you'd have no time but but he says some of the same misstatements over and over again ready for Trump I think it's very simple act presidential don't for God's sake don't say anything about her race don't say anything about her being a woman don't make F of yes don't talk about don't don't even say the word black in any context avoid that word like the plague don't make fun of her laugh don't make it personal don't call her stupid if if he can manage to avoid personal insults if he can look presidential it would be nice if he showed some command of the issues but I that that ship has long ago sailed hit your basic points hope people don't remember what happened in 2020 with covid and just hit your basic points of preco the economy was strong we were at peace in the world let's go back to that time right don't worry don't get into the weeds or context of anything and just kind of hit those broad themes and that if Trump does that and can stay out of any kind of if he can be avoid being baited into some type of insult I think that would be a win for Trum she was always Indian then she turned black the way he says black my wife and I were laughing nonstop the other night because he's like black okay couple things I agree with you on the mic I think it's good for both here's why and then you've heard this that the whole reason kamla wants the mics open so she can do the same thing she did depend I'm speaking I'm speaking uh it's my turn to talk which isn't nice look that's a good way I think women like that because let's be real women a lot of women are uh talked over in the world they're mansplained so I do think that's a good moment when when Trump starts rambling KLA it's my turn it's my turn Donald it's my turn to speak but then on the other side see you said that it takes away Trump's uh worst impulses off the top of my head I can remember some good lines though against Hillary remember there was one where uh she said something and he perfectly interjected like yeah you'd be in prison remember it was something like that that was really good there was another one I think it was the town hall where he kept stalking her remember he's like walking behind her stalking her the whole time which was so awkward but also hilarious for entertainment and television she said something about Abraham Lincoln I believe and he's like oh oh you're Abraham Lincoln now or you're no Abraham Lincoln I can't remember the exact line folks look it up but I do think because Trump is funny like him not which is funny by the way because Trump says he's the person who's done more for black people than any president since L whether you like Trump or not he's funny he has some good lines and I think he has the ability with the mics open to jump in there and interject with some good little onliners let's end on the the interview from last week I remember after the convention you said that kamla be kamla Harris had an extra base hit and we were joking is it a double is a triple it wasn't a home run it was certainly better than a single watching that interview which wasn't very long by the way I mean if you look the content had to be less than 30 minutes I mean they made it an hour with a bunch of teases and danab Bash uh you know intro every segment but I thought it was it was either a single or like a dribbler double down the line it wasn't bad it wasn't great I think for all the buildups of hey you never do an interview I think maybe it should have been longer um again I don't know if it if it moved the needle she had to do it she has to start doing more of those so it is important but I was kind of excited to watch that and then after watching it I'm like H okay it was it was okay like I said I just I think it was net neutral like I don't think it was Advantage Harris or Trump but she had to do it and she needs to do more well I think the way the re I think it was a win for Harris and the reason was it was fine as you said it was a single it was normal it was a normal typical somewhat boring political interview and the Trump people had build it built it up to be like oh she can't even do it she'll make a giant Gaff which to be fair she had done in some interviews years ago but she didn't there was no Gaff there was some command of policy there was you know some broad talk of Flowery language that you expect from a politician and it was just kind of your normal politician interiew interview which which is why I think it's a mistake by the Harris campaign look I think Harris and her campaign overall have done well but I I have again two major qualms with them the first is not picking Shapiro which I think could be a a big mistake we'll see but the second is although I do want to give him some Grace for that because there is some reporting that I just want to say this that Shapiro maybe was demanding some things that a vice president usually doesn't get the demand so I'm not entirely sure that was a one-way Street of Harris rejecting Shapiro I think that may have been like a joint breakup you know when people say it was a mutual breakup like who broke up with who like we and usually they're lying when they say that it was usually but this may have been the true like Jo when I said it I was being serious it's not you it's me no it's not you it's us it's us it's Shapiro and Harris so that may not have been a mistake that may have been just what it was going to be but I do think the mistake they made was I don't mind they waited a while to do the interview I think that makes sense given that she was thrown in at the last minute but once you started have a bunch have like three or four over the span of a week and the reason I say that is because a you get the exposure everyone would have the first one would have been covered more I mean the Dana Bash interview that was a big story on other networks other networks were covering that like a big event you would have gotten a lot of play with a couple more big interviews following that up and also it would have given you some practice for a debate it's not the same thing as a debate obviously Trump's not there but you get some potentially tough questions like hey why did you support fracking and now you or or not support fracking and now you do why did you call for Universal healthc care is that still your possession pos position Medicare for all do you still think ice should be abolished do you still favor defunding the police you know what are your policy positions let's get into the the details that back and forth for Harris would have been good for her now look she'll do that this week she's going to Pittsburgh uh we're recording this on Thursday and she's staying in Western Pennsylvania I believe all the way through the debate to prep kind of like a bidet Camp David situation so I'm sure they'll be doing a lot of Mo I don't know hopefully it works out better I'm sure they'll be doing a ton of mock asking her all of those questions having answers ready I get that but that's all behind closed doors the lights aren't on Charlie you know this is covering uh sports for a long time playing sports there's a big difference between what you do in practice and what you do when the crowd is there and the lights are on and for a politician practice is great but that's Sim simulating okay I know that this interview is GNA be seen by people like I know the lights are on I'm miked up having that feeling and answering those questions and Harris has done a lot of that in her in her life but not recently and having that back and forth I think really could have helped her for the debate I think it would have been really good for her to have some of those reps leading into the debate and I think it's a mistake for her campaign uh for that reason it's not so much the reason of oh she has to do it I want to see her it's more of let's get her that practice heading into the debate if she doesn't have a good night and maybe she will but if she doesn't have a good night I think that could be one one of the reasons why not enough reps we're talking about practice not a game not the debate practice all right let's end on that great show sir we got to get this out as soon as possible thank you everybody for watching listening comment like subscribe uh uh rate the show on podcast and tell everybody about it put it in your group text put it on social media let's keep this thing going we've had a good week here on everybody settled down and let's keep it going all the way through this election that's Eric MERS Smith I'm Charlie Marlo thank you sir we'll see you next weekend folks we'll do one either the night of or right after the debate next week so check that out see you