Blue Wave or Blue Ripple?

Hello and welcome to the Slate Political Gap Fest.

October 8th, 2026, the Blue Wave or Blue Ripple edition.

I'm David Platz, CityCast in Washington, to see.

Low, back from beyond.

Don't know where he was.

I did see, I seemed to follow you on Instagram, John, so I saw pictures which seemed to be in Italy.

John, you seem to follow me on Instagram.

I have a hard time understanding.

I'm not, I have a hard time understanding.

You were in Italy?

I was in Tuscany, yes.

It was beautiful.

I recommended to everyone to, it was, yeah, it was really beautiful.

And from the New York Times Magazine in Yale University Law School, I do not, as far as I know,

I follow you on Instagram, Dr. Emily Vazelon.

Yeah, I have to figure out how to exist on Instagram.

It's like a thing I have to attend to.

It does feel a little late, but in some day,

but the thing is David was totally struck by the beauty and quality of the photography.

So it's an opportunity for artistic outreach.

That is literally not what I said.

Literally not what I said.

No, but I'm glad you corrected the record.

Let the case, in case a second or two passed with anybody thinking that might be the case.

Captain literal.

We just do a quick audio postcard from John's office,

because John just showed us a magnificent thing.

John, can you, can you show us that magnificent thing you were just showing us and give us a little sound, the sound there too?

Well, I said we were talking about you guys were talking about to do this and keeping them on paper.

And so I sharpened one of my pencils and this caused a huge fibrillation in the forest,

because everybody thought it was crazy.

You're going to pencil.

You want pencils?

Yes.

John has a stack of pencils, like a cord of pencils, a bushel of pencils and a thing.

All right, this week on the Gap Fest, where do the midterm stand, a month from Election Day,

could the Democrats have an epic sweep, or are they overconfident?

Then what to learn from the stir being deeply unsettling Cornell 7 rape case,

then the extremely silly, extremely Trumpian, and yet somehow really fun fight over daylight savings time.

Plus we will have cocktail chatter.

And a couple of announcements.

We have a live show coming up in Providence, Rhode Island, October 21st, Wednesday, at the Strand Ball Room, Wednesday, October 21st.

You can get tickets for that at slate.com slash Gap Fest Live.

If you're a slate plus member, you can get it discount on tickets.

There's code on the event page in your account.

We also have a limited number of VIP packages if you want to hang out with us before the show.

It's Wednesday, October 21st, in Providence, Rhode Island.

John's beloved Providence at the Strand Ball Room Wednesday, October 21st, slate.com slash Gap Fest Live.

Also, through October 16th, for one more week, you can get an amazing deal on slate plus, a special 50% off promotion.

It's exclusive at slate.com slash Gap Fest, plus a checkout, enter the promo code PG50,

to get a year of full access to all of slate content for just $59.

You get ad free across all slate podcasts, unlimited reading on slate.com site and the slate app.

Every slate game, a slate plus digest newsletter.

And most of all, you get our bonus episodes every week for free, which are some of the best and most delightful work we do, including this week.

And you'll be supporting Slates Independent Journalism.

But mostly, we have to beat the other slate podcasts.

I just learned that we're in second place.

We are not leading this.

So please, if you want us to feel good about ourselves, go to slate.com slash Gap Fest, plus, enter promo code PG50,

to get a checkout for 50% off slate plus membership for you.

A beautifully designed square space website is the difference between thinking about photography school and selling your portraits online.

It's the difference between giving away those cookies you just made for free and running your cookie empire.

A beautifully designed square space website is the difference between having a movie reviewing hobby and a movie reviewing career.

Squarespace, because no matter what you're into, a website makes it real.

Use offer code difference for 50% off select plans, terms and conditions apply.

You know that feeling. Too many updates, too many meetings, too many things falling through the cracks.

Monday.com was built for that gap.

The AI work platform designed from the ground up for people and agents to work side by side and deliver more together.

Drafting the brief, flagging risks, running a competitive scan, your agent can do it all.

And the best part, anyone can build one.

Even you, try it.

Create your first Monday agent today at Monday.com.

John, we are less than a month from election day.

Democrats are trying not to be too confident about their prospects.

The party keeps moving more seats onto their target list, which matches the predictions of independent assessors who say that more and more seats seem to be up for grabs.

They appear to be hoping to flip maybe as many as 40 seats in the house, when as many as half a dozen in the Senate and the tons of state offices to boot.

On the other hand, Democrats have been fooled by polls before, especially during 2016 and 2024.

And Republicans have a lot more cash to spend in the home stretch.

So John, start with the poll question. What are the polls show now? What reasons do we as citizens have to be confident or skeptical about what they're showing?

I think well skepticism is always warranted when it comes to polls.

Just specifically on the poll question, one of the things that makes it look like a favorable terrain for Democrats is that you don't have to rely just on the horse race polls.

And the recent horse race polls are unreliable in addition to all of the reasons everybody knows is also sometimes very hard to pull inside certain states.

You don't have reputable long-term pollsters in a lot of these states and all these races are really volatile and close in the Senate.

So it can be tricky, but what you do have is an overwhelmingly unfavorable environment for Republicans.

You have the president continues to be at historic lows in his approval. People say the issues they care the most about, they give him approval, which is to say the economy and prices.

His approval rating on those issues is even lower than his overall approval rating.

The president and his standing with important groups like Hispanics for the races in Texas and Florida are at historic lows.

I think in the Reuters poll his approval is at 26% with Hispanics. He got 45% of the Hispanic vote in the 2024 election.

The Republican Party standing with independence has cratered Democrats are doing much better with independence.

And in the generic ballot you have, depending on how you count it, like in 7, 8, 9, 10% of people who say they prefer the Democrat for the Republican, which is usually a sign that the party ahead is going to pick up seats.

So you have lots of different signals and you have things happening like the Republican Party has moved the money that we're going to spend in the North Carolina Senate race to now shore up the Kansas Senate race,

which nobody had on their vulnerable list at the start of this. North Carolina would be a Democratic pickup. Democrats need to pick up four.

And they are at the moment, sort of in this is in the Senate, kind of holding in, but it's close and Michigan and New Hampshire two places the Democrats could lose seats.

But they're doing pretty darn well in Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Maine, not well, Maine's closer Alaska. All of these are places where they would be picking up Democratic seats.

So as you said, the forecasters have increased their number of seats they say are in play. When Democrats say they are expanding their map, that's mostly a faint, I think a lot of times, right, try and spread Republicans out, get them to spend their money on everything because Republicans do have a money advantage.

I would just say this final thing in closing, which we've mentioned before, just because you have more money doesn't mean you have more impact and a lot of the outside pack money coming into these races.

The Texas race is a good example. Outside pack money buys ads at a higher rate than the individual candidates.

Talleriko, the Democrat in Texas has a bunch of money. And when he buys ads, it's at the lower candidate rate. So money advantage from outside groups doesn't actually amount to a massive advantage in terms of ratings points and eyeballs on ads.

Let alone the question of whether eyeballs on ads matter and in that race we had Ken Paxton, who Axios reported on Wednesday night was caught on a hot mic or not maybe not even a hot mic was serotoniously recorded at a fundraiser basically saying his campaign is in trouble because of the obvious things, the Iran war, which has increased prices.

And which is another example of the president taking his eye off the ball of what people care about. And when asked about the midterm Republican convention that took place in his state, he said it actually hurt him having the president and all his cabinet members there and didn't help him isn't Ken Paxton.

And an example of also poor candidate for the Republicans. I mean, one thing I've been interested in is and tell me if this is right. It seems like in some of the states you mentioned the Democrats just found a more appealing package of person.

Then some of the Republicans is that fair.

Yeah, well, I mean, not in all races, but definitely that's a that's a very good race. The North Carolina race. If president Trump, so president Trump put his finger on Ken Paxton said, you're my guy, John Corne and lost in the prime ramp. I'm not sure. Corne, Corne might have lost anyway. Yes, Paxton, bad candidate, Tallariko, you know, good candidate.

So that's the case in Texas. You could argue that North Carolina race shouldn't even be on the map because if the president hadn't threatened to primary Tom Tellus, maybe he would have stayed in the Senate.

So, you know, the president's meddling has has not been helpful. And you could also argue that's the case with the redistricting, which the president pushed Republicans found a way to build more districts that would be favorable to Republicans. But those are not uniformly paying off.

Democrats are fighting in the Texas and Florida, two states that redistricted some seats into favorable Republican terms. But the Democrats are are still fighting in those seats, which means Republicans have to spend money. And essentially in those two states, part of the success of Democratic candidates in redistricted districts is because Hispanics have completely fled from President Trump or those, I should say those Hispanics who move towards him.

Now, in fact, even have a Republican candidate for the House in Florida running an ad saying the president's gone too far on immigration. It's both a bad environment. And then in the case of Paxton, it's, you know, it's a bad candidate.

But also, Emily, I think there's a, it is true Paxton's a bad candidate. There are other bad Republican candidates. But you can also say the same about Democrats. I mean, Democrats and Michigan are running a candidate who, I think if you told them at the beginning of the year, we're going to be running up to all side.

And in the Senate race, people would have kind of been felt quite dim about it. Now he, he seems to be ahead in that race, because Michigan is a relatively democratic state, but it's not, but candid quality, candid quality matters. But it's also the environment that we're in. If this were more favor, if this were 2024, Ken Paxon would be walking away with this race.

And also, yeah, doing some things to help himself, the Michigan Senate, it kind of for the Democrats. Like hasn't he been pretty smart in this campaign and isn't, and some of the other candidates seem like they're well positioned like Josh Turk and I.O.F. for example, like anyway.

Right. I'm just saying like the environment that like because it's a year that's looking so good for Democrats, a candidate who is a relatively weak candidate on the Democratic side can still do great because there's such a favorable environment for Democrats in a way.

And on the Republican side, they needed to run candidates who are just their best possible candidates because the, the wins were so unfavorable against them. And it's just like a, I don't know. I guess I, I guess I'm, I guess I think always in all elections, you can point to Ken Paxon.

You can point to candidates who are bad candidates. Well, what's interesting this year is that it's a bad year.

Yeah, you can't afford a bad candidate in a bad year. You might be able to afford a quote unquote bad candidate in a good year for your party.

Obviously, there are going to be a lot of Democrats who would strongly revolt against the idea that else sides are bad candidate. In fact, he might be a very good candidate who's doing better than, than he should be given the all that Republicans have thrown against him.

And also, I mean, he's, he's not doing as well as the Democratic government, the editorial candidate in that state. So he has a tougher hill to climb coming from the, from the very left side of the party in a, in a, in a pretty, in a purple state.

So he might, you know, you could argue he's a, he's a good candidate from the Democratic perspective in that he's been able to survive so long. And if he wins, he's a, he's a pot.

You know, everybody will be looking to him and other races like Pennsylvania seven where you have these candidates who peeled the entire Democratic coalition.

So, you know, people might be pointing them if he wins as the, as the future.

So Emily, as you look at this, does it feel like Democrats are winning this race? Is there anything that Democrats have done to make themselves appear crisper and brighter and more shiny in the eyes of voters?

Or is it just the not Trump, not Republican aspect of it? I mean, I mean, there was a story, I think in the times today about how, and this was in Michigan, actually, how the, it appeared that Republicans were just quite demoralized and lots of people are not going to come out and vote, but not necessarily that Democrats had picked any of those folks up.

Yeah, that's interesting. I mean, I don't think the Democrats have clearly stated a few priorities of like, here's what we are going to do.

I mean, they're talking a lot about affordability and you know, they have like a decent enough track record on being able to deliver on social programs for voters.

But this question of what is the future of the party and how are they going to reconcile or fail to reconcile the progressive and more moderate wings. It remains out there.

And if they have a good election in large part because of the president's unpopularity and the fact that the Republicans are in the doldrums, et cetera, they've gone too far on immigration, all the things we were talking about.

Well, then I think like there's going to be a real post-election reckoning, right, John, because what if Abdul Al-Sahead wins in Michigan and also Josh Turk wins in Iowa, et cetera, the lesson will, like, joy will be there for all the factions.

And then they'll just keep arguing with each other will be unsettled, who is better or what you have to do to win in a tougher and right.

Right. Although you could argue that given people's priors that that debate's going to happen almost true.

Good point with evidence without evidence.

I think the progressive wing in the party is just going to give up.

They'll be like, you are right after all. And so will the centrist. Everyone will come together. It will be a moment of combi-a.

I would say a couple of things. One, there's a pull out Thursday morning from Reuters that says that 48% of Harris voters say they're very enthusiastic about voting versus 30% of Trumps.

That's, you don't want that's a bad place to be in.

As we've talked about before, the party in power has tough time turning their team out and the other team is energized.

I think when you have such an unpopular president, you know, there was a poll that came out on Thursday that said, I think it was 75% of people said

that they worried the most about affordability and 83% of them said tariffs had made them for the affordability question worse.

So you have a strong majority, very concerned about an issue the president was elected to address.

And he addressed it by doing the thing they are most worried has made that question of affordability worse.

So it's like not only is he not paying attention, but when he does pay attention, he does something that people believe makes things worse.

So you have energized Democrats unlike in 2022 when Democrats had the White House, they were in that historic position to do poorly.

But because of the, because of the Dom's decision, you had this extraordinary increase in democratic enthusiasm to go participate in the midterms, which blunted some of the normal midterm wave that comes from, you know, it just as result of the patterns of history.

Republicans don't have that at all. It's kind of the opposite. If you watch the debates that these candidates that for the House and the Senate are in, the debates take place entirely on the Democratic Party's turf.

So all the questions, because the news organizations that are running the debates want to talk about the things that their audience cares about.

So they're about energy prices and the housing prices and education prices and the war and like it's always just awful.

And so, I mean, just if you're a Republican candidate and when you hear what the Republican candidates say, they usually have to accept the premise of the question, as opposed to say Donald Trump was out there saying the economy is the best it's ever been in life.

So it, it, when you watch the debates, you see Republican candidates in a tough position.

Now, that doesn't mean, you know, everything's going to go as well as the Democrats say.

But as you write down all of the things that are contributing to the atmosphere, there's nothing in the positive column for Republicans.

And that's why you get this talk about a wave.

Final point is a wave may maybe isn't what it used to be given that so many districts have been locked up and are safer.

So a wave might be 30 seats. Whereas in the past, you would have thought, you know, wave was in like the 60 seat territory.

That's a really good point. I feel like we all have to keep that in mind, right? That I mean, is this right John? The Democrats pretty much have to run the tables in the Senate to get those four pickups and lose nothing.

And also 30 is not 60 because like the other 30 are kind of out of reach.

Yeah, on the Senate back to David's earlier question of whether this is about like Republicans in the Doldrums versus Democrats putting forward a positive message.

There is Fox poll of likely voters in four of those Senate races where Democrats are going to have to take a seat away from Republicans.

And I think in all of these states is Trump won by double digits. So these aren't just Republican states. These are quite Republican.

And you had in the polling by Fox Cooper is getting 21% of non-Maga Republicans.

Tallariko is getting 22% brown and Ohio is getting 25% and Turk and Iowa is getting 28%.

These are non-Maga Republicans. So how many of those are there? That's one question. How many of them will turn out? That's another question.

But it is what you need to have victories in red states is not just the Doldrums, but maybe to pick up some voters.

And so there's a sign at least in the Fox poll. There was also some of that evidence in recent CNN and Times polling.

So that's a sign that maybe something's happening. And then also obviously this massive move of independence over the Democrats suggests some attraction, not just purely running away from the Republicans.

I feel that there's this John Dickerson who appears during elections. You know, several years, who knows everything.

And John, I think maybe you either you were weren't on the show last week or I wasn't. You weren't on the show last week.

And so we've missed it. And you've you've stored it all up. It's all in there. And now it's just coming out. If you cut John, you would see a poll.

A poll would come out of his arm. It's like a treasure chest that opens up, I think, with all these jewels filling out or something.

This is a big fraud tab. Now that we're done with that, though, I'm done with that. I want to ask you to ask.

Wait, I have a question. I have a question. I have a question for you. No, no, I want to ask a question. Can I ask a question?

Okay.

I want to ask about culture war issues. Have the Democrats succeed in neutralizing some of them. It seems like they're doing a much better job, for example, answering questions about transports participation.

I mean, I think you're right. I kept in working on this. I kept looking for a database argument for why that dog is not barking because obviously Donald Trump is doing, you know, they've tried communism, they've tried transit tried and you you definitely hear it in some of the talking points from Republican candidates when they when they say some, oh no, I guess this was a guy from town hall, one of the pundits from town hall.

It's like, I mean, if the Democrats win, I mean, Zora Mondani, mom, Donnie's going to be calling the shots. You know, it's just like this, this kind of free associative refrigerator poetry of like socialist under the bad daughters voting, getting, you know, like just like this, these, these, this sort of slam poetry of of assault, which, which suggests, and then they're grasping.

And I think the problem, at least based on what I've seen from the debates and the ads that are running in these competitive districts is you culture war, like everybody wants to know what you're going to do about prices and like in accessibility, the American dream, end of by the way, we're at war with Iran. Why is that happening?

Like, so you have to address that and that I think is part of why the culture stuff hasn't appeared to play a role. You know, we'll see what the final outcome is. That's hard to also, it's hard to pull.

All right, last question on this, just to the process. So Emily, we've talked a lot in the summer and into the fall about the possible way Trump or Trump policies could warp the actual process of voting or the counting of votes. How are you feeling about that now? Are there any signs that this is a threat? If so, where are they or is it, does it appear relatively diminished because Republicans are so distracted by all these other more important things?

What are the issues where they're actually just losing votes? I don't think it's gone. It's sort of lurking under the surface, right? I mean, the idea of federal agents at the polls still remains like out there as a possibility, seizing machines after election, all those things. But of course, the best protection against all of this is just like a resounding victory for one side or the other.

The fewer really close races there are that matter to Donald Trump, the less chance there is of this. And the other thing is that the Supreme Court has left some real vulnerability for 2028, but less for 26. And the reason for that is the vote by mail decision did not allow the post office to put into effect these major changes for 26, but but left to open the possibility maybe that the court would go for it in 28.

I kind of think not, but it's not a totally shut door. And then there's this other order involving citizenship lists or eligible voter lists from the Department of Homeland Security. And the court said the administration could go ahead with that, but not in time for 2026.

So again, there are these kind of lingering threats to federal interference with state and local election procedures in a way that could disenfranchise people, but less in November.

Today's show is brought to you by Vanguard to all the financial advisors listening. Let's talk bonds for a minute capturing value and fixed income is not easy.

Bond markets are massive murky and let's be real lots of firms to a couple of flashy funds your way and call it a day, but not Vanguard. Vanguard bonds are institutional quality. Institutional quality is in a tagline. It's a commitment to your clients means top grade products across the board.

The lineup includes over 80 bond funds that are actively managed by 200 person global squad of sector specialists, analysts and traders. Lots of firms love to highlight their star portfolio managers like it's all about that one brilliant mind making the magic happen. Vanguard's philosophy is a little different. They believe the best active strategies shouldn't be locked away with one person.

They should be shared across the team that way every client benefits from the collective brain power, not just one individuals take. So if you're looking to give your clients consistent results year in and year out, go see the record for yourself at vanguard.com slash audio that's vanguard.com slash audio all investing a subject to risk Vanguard marketing corporation distributor.

This episode is brought to you by bomb us cozy season. It's here. Oh, it's a little crisp movie marathon nights soft soft layers. Bomb us makes your compass fall staple so you can make the most of one of the best seasons of the year.

Bomb us new suede mocka sense are perfect for fall with cushy souls, a shearing lining and water resistant suede and their slippers are everything you'd want for cozy night in made with a softest squishiest materials.

Then their bomb us compression socks a fatigue fighting pair for every moment. I am in fact wearing bomb us compression socks right now because I'm going to work out after this podcast. I love them that they feel so energizing. They're so good.

And the best part of bomb us for every item you purchase, they donate an essential clothing item to someone facing housing insecurity. One purchased equals one donated over 200 million donations and counting. So head over to bomb us dot com slash political and use code political for 20% off your first purchase.

That's B O M B A S dot com slash political code political at checkout.

This episode is sponsored by built. Look, I pay mortgage. I used to pay a lot of rent. Now I pay a lot in a mortgage. It's painful every month. It is painful. That cost really hits you.

And I've been hearing people talk about built for a while now and my first reaction was why didn't this exist sooner. Becoming a built member means earning points on every housing payment, whether it's rent or mortgage. It doesn't matter.

Your payment anyway. So you should get something back for it. And built points can be redeemed for flights, hotels, lift rides, Amazon purchases. I would use them for lift rides. I really like the idea of getting around town without having to use my car and be great to have a way of funding my transit.

And there's an unexpected benefit, which gives every built member access to its agentec neighborhood concierge in the built app. So you can ask it to pay your rent, make a dinner reservation, book a fitness class, get to all lift and more get started by first, download the build app, second link any credit or debit card to the app.

So purchases at your local spots become even more rewarding. And third, ask the neighborhood concierge in the app pretty much anything. Download the built app and join the membership for where you live at join built.com slash gavvest. That's J-O-I-N-B-I-L-T.com slash gavvest. Use our link so they know we sent you.

The Cornell 7 rape case has captured the attention of a horrified much of the nation. You've probably kept up with it, but just to briefly remind you about two years ago, an anonymous Cornell undergraduate, a woman visited a fraternity where she was applied with drugs and alcohol,

pressured into sex. And then according to her account, this accelerated increase was drugged, coerced, assaulted and raped by several men, seven of whom were kind of implicated, what's been going on. She went to the police soon after said she was raped.

The university and the police investigated a local prosecutor to climb to file charges. The university punish the seven accused students with varying degrees of severity. The student newspaper kept attention on this as paid attention to it. She has now filed a lawsuit against the students, the seven students and the university and the resulting uproar has prompted the New York governor to appoint a special prosecutor, leticia James.

In the case to determine whether to bring criminal charges and has just generally kind of shined an enormous spotlight on this case on the problems of prosecuting sexual assault, of what's going on, fraternities of so many different issues.

So Emily, that was a very brief gloss. Why, why did this case? I'm just going to throw to you to take this in an introduction. I mean, I have a lot of things I want to talk about, but I would like you, I know you're thinking you've been thinking a lot about it. So take us where you want to go.

Well, so I read the record in the case this week. And what I mean by that is all of the witness interviews and text messages and all the evidence that the Cornell police gathered and that the university had for its separate process under Title IX, which is the law that requires universities to give students a free and equal education regardless of gender.

So this is also the evidence that the district attorney, if I could have reviewed, but really barely did in deciding not to bring charges.

And the record is really dark and it's in my view and also quite complicated, like a bunch of different things involving different sets of students have been at different points on that night. And just to be clear, and I mostly want to say this because I think it's actually important to the girl, the woman, young woman in the center of this has been going by.

Jane Doe. So we're going to call her Jane Doe. And I think it's important to her, like there is no moment where there are seven men in a room all raping this young woman like that did not happen.

What happened were like different pairings of different subsets of men along the way. And all of them, I don't think she is really accusing of sexual assault or at least she didn't do that when she gave a really long interview to the Cornell police.

And I think she was going to go to the Cornell investigator on the title nine person who was there she didn't say that stuff in the beginning.

So there is rape in the story, but I don't think there's evidence that all seven of these men committed sexual assault, which is not to say like they didn't do other bad things because I think they did.

And so the actors have gotten lost to me the kind of hinge point in the story is that this young woman. So she shows up at this frat and she actually like had been drinking beforehand went over to the frat waited to get let in like all that is voluntary.

And as a boy she liked at this fraternity, his name is Matthew Engels, his name is out there. So I'm going to say it. And he asked her to have a threesome with this other guy.

He was friends with his name is Jonathan Nool. She went and did that and like that part of the story while like I thought it was a pretty gross description.

Like there's at some point I think both of those boys are doing ketamine and like one of them is vomiting. It's just gross. But it is not she does not present that as an assault that initial encounter.

However, at some point like 130 in the morning kind of maybe while that's happening or as it's ebbing, Jonathan Nool sent a Snapchat note to like 40 guys in the fraternity.

And sorry, I'm just going to have to say like a gross word I would never normally say, but you have to hear it to understand the story. And if you have children listening, like that's a mistake. Please don't do that.

He sent it. And if you're driving while you're doing this, well, you allow a little time for somebody if they're driving to turn this off while the kids are in the car.

Yes, good idea. Thank you.

Okay. So Jonathan Nool sent a note to the Snapchat that said free pussy and alumni. Alumni was the room they were in in this frat house.

And then there are other notes from other boys, including Matthew Ingalls, like inviting, encouraging the other, some of the 40 young men on the Snapchat dread to like show up and partake basically.

And that is like disgusting. And to me, totally misogynist and unforgivable. And it's the moment the whole thing becomes completely out of control of Jane does hands, right.

She had no idea in the moment that they had sent those notes. She didn't know why other boys were showing up at the door of this room.

So from that moment on, like that's the hinge point in the story to me. And I then take a very dim view of all the things that transpired after that.

Some of which seem like maybe consensual ish or at least not obviously non-consensual, but also at this point, she is also taking ketamine. And that's having, I mean, really, I am that drug seems extremely alarming.

And also, like, she is in her head, like feeling terrible. It's really clear, feeling completely used and disrespected. And I think that is indeed what was happening.

And then there's like a third part after the alumni room stuff ends where she then goes off with Matthew Ingalls and another guy.

And she characterizes that threesome as sexual assault and rape very clearly to the police. And certainly someone I think could have brought charges for that part of it.

So it's really like very upsetting. And to take a step back, I mean, I think the part of it that looms the largest to me is like, how is it okay to send that kind of a snapshot and have this culture of fraternity where no one who received it would have been concerned about what was going on in that room.

And maybe I just sound like a middle-aged mom to say that I'm sure I do, but I just like fundamentally kind of don't get that. I mean, first of all, it's immoral and gross, but also like really the 20 year olds of Cornell today don't remember all the other guys who've gotten in trouble in the last 20 years for this.

And I think the generations are so short that they have no sense of self preservation that that's like not going to work out well for them, which it did not.

And when I say it did not, we can talk about whether there could still be criminal charges. The facts are going to be difficult for that at this point.

However, what did happen was that the frat got shut down and also they expelled two of the boys, Matthew Angles and Jonathan Nuel and then suspended some of the other ones and did not find responsible in the lingo of Title 9 one or two other people.

And so I have a whole set of questions myself about whether the punishments were serious enough.

Can we do a little straightening out of what was known when and because there's obviously the handling of this is is at issue what interest me is who screwed up the you know was it the people did the original investigation with Jane do or the DA or did they both screw up because that seems to me the closest to the actual events.

And I think some of what you detailed Emily came out in the subsequent Title 9 investigation, which was not evidence at the moment not to say I mean the problem isn't it Emily in that first said analysis that the DA didn't go looking into actually what happened and that that in a story that has a lot of complexity and fuzziness that that was a screw up that is obvious and at least one that we can say is pretty clear without ambiguity.

Yeah, I do think that that's correct so the timeline of this is like this whole night is I think it's like October 19th and October 20th.

So Jane does it takes her a while to go to the Cornell police and to the school like three weeks and that is not surprising and one thing I really feel strongly about is that there's a bunch of text messages after this night and the set of events in which Jane does is like I think it's not going to be a good deal.

And so I think that's the only way to do that is to make sure that the events in which Jane does is like I think really trying to make herself feel better and honestly make the boys feel like they haven't done anything wrong.

And to me, none of that suggests this was not like a horrendous set of events that included sexual assault because I have just seen so many young women respond to sexual assault charges or like very murky upsetting situations by trying to make other people feel better afterward.

So I really like want to say that.

But it did take her a few weeks to go and do this interview and then when she did the account she gave like it's it's very frank.

It's quite hard to read has a lot of detail in it. It's upsetting.

And I think it gave the school a lot of evidence to follow up on for its title nine proceeding which in fact Cornell did I mean Cornell did 50 interviews they held 12 hearings.

Again, I think we can ask whether they punish the student the male students harshly enough that there was a lot of title nine process.

I think you're right John that from the point of view of the criminal justice system the big screw up is that so the Cornell police gave the district attorney a six page summary of Jane does long statement that doesn't do justice.

To it I mean I'm not sure you could honestly like you really need to read the whole thing.

And it does not include her saying I'm 100% sure I was raped at this one particular point which is at the last part I mentioned with these two boys in this smaller room.

And then the district attorney didn't do whether interviews didn't call her in didn't try to do anything and I think probably like either they just really didn't pay attention to it which is bad.

Or they looked at it and they said oh everyone was high on ketamine at that frat that night and like we're throwing up our hands.

And in fairness I mean it is rare for prosecutors to try to prosecute a case like this where it's hard to say who consented to what at what point.

And there are issues in the record that make it hard but he certainly could have tried.

And the other thing I'm uncertain about is like why a Cornell police officer was the one conducting the interview as opposed to like especially a trained sexual assault investigator.

I mean there was a title nine person there but still I wonder about that and if that is also why I didn't get taken seriously by the district attorney's office.

I think the legal process will play out as it can I mean there are reasons as Emily you said there are reasons to think this will be very hard for them to bring criminal charges at this point.

For me like the issues that this raised for me really I mean as somebody who has a son in college are the kind of behavioral cultural issues so just to name a few that like really trouble me.

The wicked testosterone mob energy that young men are capable of in groups especially in groups that are have this kind of cadre belonging sense like it's it's not just that only that the seven men who participated but that there are 33 other men who receive it.

Well we don't know if when they opened that message to be fair but still like that you would send it to people.

But some other some other men who receive it and nobody thinks about the they were thinking about them and their group they're not thinking about this person to whom they owe a duty of care who's a guest in their in the place they live.

That's one element the second element is this really interesting question which I get which I'm interested in your guys's thoughts on which in under New York law apparently if you are voluntarily incapacitated if you have chosen to get yourself drunk.

The consent questions around rape and sexual assault become different because you have you have made the choice to get yourself drunk and I and the question of like how at what level is incapacitation so great that you can't possibly consent and at what level is it no you can still consent and where this falls.

The Snapchat callousness of it all is crazy that part is new the idea that people would just broadcast to the world they're literally brought and Snapchat is a broadcast like that they are saying not means not literally broadcast but it is effectively broadcast it's a group message that they would think that that was appropriate.

And finally like the kind of way in which porn and the porn culture that young men especially grow up with and young women actually grow up with which is extremely violent and coercive there's a lot of porn that's extremely violent and coercive and how does that affect young men's sexual behavior.

And so all those things like appear to me to be elements of this that just are super troubling and I don't know what to do the only I can think to do is just to say to people stop fucking drinking so much do not drink as much as you're drinking stop drinking so much also can we have you don't use ketamine no special K like but if there's one thing that could change all this is like just drink half as much as you're drinking fellas.

I yeah the broadcast part of it is what's striking to me I mean having been in a fraternity and seeing a lot of super stupid behavior and and and grand misogyny I can't I still I can't imagine this happening I can imagine a single individual doing something awful for sure.

But thinking the broadcasting is not only a great idea but a like way to gain social status I mean this wasn't just I mean this was a boast this was so okay in the culture that there wasn't that I'm not sure it required a lot of alcohol.

But John I was not a fraternity and I'm and so I can't speak to this nor is I in the military nor have ever been like in an all male group but like we certainly know from other fraternities like there I don't know about sexual it is sort of group sexual assault but hazing events where there is multiple people involved an acts of deep cruelty and callusness so what part of it what part of it is the surprise to you.

Oh because I think and with this is not an excuse for hazing because it's dumb the whole thing is dumb fraternities are a mess and like basically I don't I don't see the upside because it often devolves into this one can make the case that the hazing rituals not all of which are the worst end of the spectrum so a lot of it is just dumb group in group behavior that you know it was solidifies bonds everybody in the club.

Has consented to this as part of membership in the club it's something you go through obviously it's coerced in a fashion you know if you want to be in the club and they say you have to do this you're consenting but obviously with with an element of coercion but the the eyes are much wider open here in the in the sort of things you have to go through and I'm talking about things like having to carry a lamp around to class all day long and all that and some of the other dumb things that happen with hazing that's of a totally different order that's a lot of things that I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do that.

And then a young woman who comes in as you say as a guest of this place and is subjected to what would be even by hazing standards the absolute outer edge of human depravity and group support for depraved behavior.

Yeah it was super super dehumanizing and I'm glad David use the phrase duty of care I've been thinking a lot about this that like to me what was really missing here was exactly that some sense of community of being a students together at a university who had some sense of each other's humanity and like some sense that if a girl was in a room like this even if you weren't sure she was saying no that like maybe you'd go get a friend of hers to make.

Sure that she was okay like none of that was happening there aren't other young women in this story and it is really disturbing I just yeah and really disappointing I keep hearing you know I've talked to women in college like so often.

They do not go to places alone they actually will go to play that you you have to be in a pair with another woman if you because perhaps a fear of something like this and what do you make of the fact that the last two cases like this prominent public cases like this which were the UVA rolling stone.

Fabulous rape story and the duke lacrosse rape story fell apart and made people very skeptical like why you know what what is that say to us.

So I want to be clear like this story is not going to fall apart I know not the name at all and there have been other cases that have gotten tons of attention that have not fallen apart to I think that the duke story in the UVA story partly like at the time.

It was against the grain for them to fall apart and then the right wing or like people who defend you know hyper masculine culture got really excited that they were falling apart and ran with them but also like especially the UVA story is a travesty of journalistic error and so there was like a lot to think about there and that story in particular comes in a moment of like hashtag believe women.

Which was a problem journalistically right I mean journalist job there to check and verify everything the same as prosecutors or title nine investigators and there was like a real soft underbelly there of journalism where people were publishing accounts from victims without ever trying to get in touch with the accused and hear their side of the story and some really like I think poor reporting practices gave rise to that so that one was pretty fair.

Well yeah or even find out if people were in town or in the place where they were claimed to have been I mean it wasn't even just he said she said I mean especially in the Duke case.

You know one of the people that was accused and was essentially you know was vilified in public wasn't even you know they ultimately find out is by by ATM records wasn't even wasn't even there of course the the accuser in the Duke rape case ultimately admitted that the whole thing was made up.

And then went on in later in life to I think be convicted of attempted murder and then convicted of actual murder.

Wow yeah she was actually just released in February after I think 12 years for killing her boyfriend with a knife.

So in the Duke case like there was no I mean in both of those two cases there was no evidence whatsoever at all and the the mob mentality circled around it as if there were in this case there was no evidence.

There was no evidence that there was no evidence that there was no evidence that there was no evidence that there was no evidence that there was no evidence.

So I think the rest of the judgement is bad right like that I think we could just go with that I mean last week I was not ready to talk about this case at all because I had a feeling that I just like needed to spend a lot of time thinking about it and try and understand it before I was going to be able to reach any conclusion and we just don't live I mean the things AOC said last week about this case fall.

Latisha James made a statement you know about her like tremendous sympathy to Jane do that's fine but then don't have had Kathy Huckle appoint you as the prosecutor because obviously like you've already shown your hand like you shouldn't be the one investigating this they're just and then the DA said things that were wrong like there's a lot of just like it's in Jane it's in Jane does interest that those bright lines you're talking about be capped because he doesn't make a court all that stuff gets used against her can.

There's already a motion to kick Latisha James off the case which like honestly seems like yeah they I understand why that motion was filed and I just it's really unfortunate to have the public officials in this just like add to the level of confusion about the facts and yet Emily isn't a true that or wouldn't like obviously I am the most not rushed a judgment thing but if there hadn't been the public outcry so I think I'm going to be honest with you.

I'm not crying some of these questions that I mean particularly the behavior of the DA would have gone without proper scrutiny so the public outcry is a positive impact.

I guess and that part of the student journalist attention to this has been a really helpful I think one of you has like something you feel you haven't said that you need to bring it home because it's been.

I have many more things to say but we get to stop there.

Okay.

Hi this is Mark Bittman from the podcast food with Mark Bittman I've been writing about food and restaurants for almost 50 years my whole career really and what I know is that the good restaurants all have something in common.

They're busy genuinely chaoticly busy and somehow in the last few years the best of them have begun to make it look easy and you know why because they're running on toast technology toast is built for restaurant owners who understand that toasts tools keep the line moving and keep their customers happy with fewer mistakes and hiccups in ordering and paying for owners that turns busy into business to learn more.

So let's head to toast tab dot com that's T O A S T T A B toast tab dot com toast build for busy.

Support comes from wise the smart way to manage the currencies you need around the globe fed up with losing out to hidden fees when you send money abroad with your everyday bank choose the smart way wise you can count on the exchange rate you'd usually find on Google no unwelcome surprises plus ditch that where's my money feeling.

Most transfers arrive in under 20 seconds join millions saving billions on hidden fees be smart get wise download the wise app today season sees apply.

Fighting over daylight saving time is a hearty perennial of American political life we have been struggling with it for a century we began this country with no daylight saving time just time just standard time and with standard time.

Days in the summer start incredibly early the sunrise is incredibly early we've occasionally wavered into full daylight saving time which meant.

That the sun didn't rise in the winter until noon is like eight or nine or later in a full daylight saving we all move to a last got by mistake mostly been in the the on off switch mode with which we have daylight saving time that comes in like a hammer in the fall suddenly.

In the fall each there's a awful moment when sunset suddenly shifts from like six o'clock to five and everyone feels just dismal for a couple of days except apparently my girlfriend told me she likes that day i'm and then in the spring you get this switch back to daylight saving time and the the evenings get longer and the mornings start a little bit later.

Trump has now waited this fight by going after Tom cotton publishing Tom cotton's personal number under social unbelievable because cotton is one of the senders who does not want to pass the bill that would allow states to have full daily saving time if they want so right now if you are a state you can have no daylight saving time as.

Arizona for example is no daylight saving time and you just stay on standard time all year round and you can have daylight saving time which switches in the fall and spring but you cannot have full daylight saving time we're always on daylight saving time which is something that some people want and and Trump.

Trump is and why does Trump want this Trump Trump has a more or less silly claims about it one that he he missed a meeting with an important person because no but there is a I know I know no no he's he's winding up to it i'm winding up to it is that he he he heard from that press.

He's a president of the PGA the professional golf association that it would allow or maybe the USGA the US golf association one of them that it will allow lots of people to golf more in winter because they would they could get off work and still have time to get a nine hole.

No he wants to golf himself it's a pretty confident about that I feel like he's unconstrained by.

Temporal bound he did say he did say it would 23 million more rounds of golf but it's it and like it is a pretty narrow constituent is I'm a golfer like I love golf but like golfers in the half dozen states words warm enough to golf and winter that's who you're serving man that's a pretty I think you probably got all those voters already.

Yeah so do you guys have a do you guys have a strong view on the daylight saving time are you on Trump side or not on Trump side.

I mean I would be on Trump side except now i'm embarrassed to be because I don't think it should all be about golfing plus we read an article about how can be dangerous for kids who have to get up in the dark and go to school and then I started feeling sheepish I mean.

Does anyone have a response to this is just not very personal like I hate it when it gets dark early like that's it that's how I feel about it but I don't think that should set the policy for it you could.

Maybe without spraining your ankle make a larger claim here which is about.

This is a decision which some group will always be unhappy and and yet there are reasons for the collective to make a decision and like.

I wonder how much of the debate is that we've slipped or maybe just re embraced an idea that hard choices where there are losers are a failure of government and a failure of some participant not just kind of the way it sometimes goes and it's the whole reason you have.

Governments to handle thorny questions and do what's you know best for the greatest number of people but I think there is by the way a non golf.

Sorry there is a standard time argument that could be made based on sleep basically you want to have it got get darker earlier in the springtime in summer which is saying no daylight savings time so it gets darker earlier that way you acclimate to bedtime you have more hours of darkness to acclimate bedtime.

And then in the winter you know you want the sun not to rise at 8 30 but at 7 30 earlier in the morning so you get more sunlight in your eyes and you wake up and that that seems to be the circadian river rhythms of the majority of people there are obviously outliers majority of people and that that would be the largest case to make.

Do you want permanent standard you want permanent that's an argument for permanent standard.

Yeah and there are countries that do it all the most most countries that are so equatorial companies don't do anything because they they don't.

The equator and most countries that are away from the equator have a version of daylight savings time not all of them but most Russia is all on standard time China does not do anything at all.

I mean the problem is not daylight saving time or government the problem is the tilt of the earth the promise it like when you have a.

It is tilted and you have seasons you just and the and the further away you are from the equator the more need you have to have.

Daylight saving time because the greater that shift is in the hours of daylight from season to season you know I'm quite sympathetic to this bill which passed the house.

Because the bill does not say that everyone will go to permanent daylight saving time just as a state has the right to do it and a state like Florida it kind of makes sense Florida is much further south.

The shift in daylight is much smaller the state could make up their own mind so what do we do is like oh my god it is going to be super confusing a Florida does one thing and then like.

Something to the north Georgia does something else yes that's exactly what I have well that I have an Arizona Arizona by Andy Rooney rant which is that one of the hardest things John's department I'm sorry I'm taking over really a permanent challenge for me in my life the journalist I'm very bad it's

scheduling phone calls and whatever interviews across time zone yes I like monthly sometimes weekly mess it up and so making that more complicated is personal plea that's just going to be tough on for me yes really go the wrong direction

frequently when I'm thinking about it my head yeah yeah well I like appointments oh my god yeah it is the problem of the going across state boundaries there was this period I was reading about maybe I think it was an

art it must have been an our packet when Minneapolis and St Paul were on this yeah and the cops had to watch I'm systems the cops had to watch is I don't know it is the evidence it's also an issue where the evidence is

really kind of confusion big jokes although the sleep evidence seems the cleanest yeah and is that the thing that wins like the other thing I was trying to factor in

like what about the disruption because there are accidents that could cost every year by the hour jumping and I personally again hate that and so thought to myself like oh well let's put

it some on the scale for this problem but I don't know I mean I'm not I'm I'm convinced like if I were ever going to have a kind of heart attack of despair or like take my own life would be the day it would be the day the clock goes back at like 458 like that moment

for me it's one of the most vivid moments of the year when all of a sudden you're like oh it's mid afternoon and then you're like wait it's dark it's dark what happened

totally agree also the time when you have to get up really early for something that like you thought was a reasonable plan I also hate that in the spring

I don't mind in the post basketball practice darkness oh you come out of that you come out of practice and it's like and you're night has fallen

technically well I was flirting with the idea that maybe Trump is right because fewer people have things they need to do really early in the morning like maybe we've all shifted a little bit away from a lot of really early in the morning

but then a new haven they actually moved to the start time of school earlier recently well that's crazy it's crazy but what they know about kids is that well first of all there circadian rhythms change in puberty but early early

is like starting school early as it is asked for kids it's just like totally if you design the school just the school day around what's best for the bodies of learning children to

do some to learn more you would not start the day at the crack of dawn that I mean yes can I just say so I said morning person I would just like no you cannot say it because I just want to say one thing about which is that I do as much as I hate that day of switch for

day saving in the fall I am a morning person and I I like just being up early and getting stuff done and to me like having a little bit of light at 7 30 and a winter morning seems completely reasonable and if that means that ever dark at 7 30 in the morning I know you're talking about being a morning person

about like you said 30 yeah I would have been winter I mean I'm up at 6 am okay I'm just talking about in winter and winter this done doesn't rise the sun doesn't rise till 7 30 even with a daylight saving time even on

standard time it doesn't rise till 7 let me read let me help you reframe this which is that when you get up at 5 30 or 6 the darkness is a sign of your virtue you are up so early that even the

rooster hasn't croat because you're doing great and powerful things and then when the sun ultimately does rise you think oh man I get the day started but no it's actually not that late one less you

still unless you stay on daylight savings which is the sunrise at 8 30 in your late for your 8 o'clock meeting but can I just say something about Tom cotton Tom

cotton is on face the nation after this is just another sign of what happens when you bend over backwards for Donald Trump that Donald Trump in this fight release Tom cotton cell phone

which is just like kicking a guy in the shins like a you know it's not the world's greatest but it's just like a petty elbow to the ribs and for me Tom cotton is what I am

reminded in these instances of the backpans that he did when he was on face the nation I asked him about when the president was in the Oval Office in the first term and he referred to shit hole country is basically Africa Haiti and and and cotton said oh he didn't say that and so I said well did he say anything in the neighborhood of that to disparage these whole swaths of kinds of people and he said oh absolutely not

didn't do it no and like we ran a few rounds Trump this term of course now goes on to rallies and boasts about how he referred to these countries using that explicit term so not only did he in fact express exactly the sentiment that that term suggests but he in fact did use the term so here Tom cotton is essentially he was in the room lying on the air and this is what this is what you get for it this is what you get for defending the president he releases your cell phone

also he also did Lindsey Graham cell phone like this is what he's this how he treats his friends all right let's go to cocktail chatter when you're having an evening cocktail at 457 post our retreat or fall back Emily Baselon what are you going to be chattering about I am going to be chattering about the Supreme Court I just I'm still open mouth about an essay that justice Sam Ali

to published in the Wall Street Journal I think last weekend in which he basically just like gave up the game on originalism in my view by criticizing what he called insecure originalists insecure

originalist or people are like huh I don't really like the result of the case that originalism is leading me to in other words like I have a policy preference and I don't get to reach it because the original meaning of the constitution dictates otherwise this was like the whole marketing plan for originalism right this is the idea is that it's going to bind judges to the meaning of the constitution when the framers wrote it and they weren't going to be able to substitute in their

personal preferences justice Scalia who's like the brilliant salesman of originalism originally I shouldn't have used that word when he wrote this big essay about it in 1989 he said well once in a while I'm a faint-hearted originalist because I wouldn't actually let a

flogging happen even though I think that the constitution intended to let flogging occur when it was written because cruel and unusual punishment at that point in the 1800s would have included flogging and then just

clearly I had to take that back years later because obviously it didn't make any sense like if the whole point of your theory is that judges are fixed to the public

meaning of the constitution in 1788 then you don't get to say like I only mean it some of the time and and Scalia would go around you know basically like praising

himself for having voted in favor of allowing flag burning because he thought that was what the first amendment required under

originalism and now it turns out like no those are bad insecure originalists who just need to like march forward and just get to the

ends that they want no matter what and to me it is a really good way of looking at dogs which is the 2022 opinion that justice Alito wrote in which

he overturned Roe versus Wade which to me is like a very misleading cherry picked rendition of supposedly originalist history and now like we

get it because Alito doesn't even take his own theory seriously.

Can I make a counter argument to the family not not a defensive I think it's interesting I think what it shows is the kind of degradation in the

last to and the loss of energy in this movement I think there's been 50 plus years of conservatives driving the direction of

constitutional thinking in this country and it's been the originalism has been the kind of most powerful engine in that in that move

and the fact that here we have a supreme court justice who is the kind of most conservative supreme court justices has reached this really quite pathetic intellectually dishonest conclusion suggest that as an

intellectual movement this is run its course and then now that now you know there's something else will emerge not to say necessarily like liberal that some liberals theory will emerge in its place but that this this is run its course and now there's whatever comes will come from some other

corner some other way of thinking yeah I think that's right I mean let's be real I don't think originalism ever lived up to this actual promise of fixing judges to the original meaning but I think you're right like the it's so hacky the idea that you can be justice Alito and be such a like outing yourself as a hack suggests exactly what you're talking about and there are already efforts I mean the history and tradition test they came up with in dogs and a couple other cases is super malleable and then there's this idea of like

your questions yes that's different but related and then there's this other idea percolating in conservative law professor universe of common good constitutionalism which is like you kind of substitute very old school Catholic values for what you anyway it's all like ends means maybe I should be relieved to have it all revealed and there's the rule that if if this were in Germany I would have to make your bunk

exactly John what is your chatter well I just just taking note of some of the stories that floated across my eyes in the last four days on Sunday the times reported that former DHS Secretary Christie known on her last morning as

oh my god her agency bought five airplanes from a political donors firm at a substantial markup some of these were high luxury planes which had nothing to do with the purpose of the agency for which she was the former head then on Wednesday ABC News reported that companies backed by the Trump sons have secured more than six billion dollars in active or promised government contracts since they

since the brothers invested now some of those firms sold to the panic on long before the brothers involvement but to drone makers it never want to government contract until the brothers arrive and then on Wednesday we had the extraordinary Wall Street journal story that said that days before her confirmation hearing as ambassador to Greece Kimberly Gilfoyle former girlfriend to Don Jr.

pressed a donor for a hundred thousand bucks to pay off her MX bill just why to my MX please just why are you nobody will get texted honey please with a prayer emoji and then my other favorite part of that piece is that he said he couldn't do it because of his wife found out it would end their marriage he then also turned out to be under I think it will somewhere I read Emily that he had twice been disbarred or something anyway he was seeking federal

help in some cleaning up his own personal affairs so he was not just a person with a lot of money but he had interest that she supposedly Gilfoyle could help with so anyway it's been busy for the during the swamp team in the last four last four days I'd also two quick things I recommend record lows by CJ Green a new book that's out which I read which I enjoyed and then also TJ styles two time I think winning bullets from the

surprise historian responded to my mentioning the grant documentary that I watched on the history channel I think Netflix through the history channel anyway on Blue Sky and gave some important historical context for part of it so we'll put that link in the show notes if you're a fan of grant and end up going and actually watching that documentary I will wait John what's it called or wait

part David there's like a you yeah it's called grant the date just not know about that's just it's on Netflix it's on Netflix and it's a three part and I was saying that I had never really understood what happened at Vicksburg in a way that was as well told in that documentary in particular with people like David Patreas which reminded me that you know military leaders go to school on past battles and keep very much in their present

mind for what for the fighting they have to do now which you know as we talk about history getting fuzzied up by you know various people with different interests in the military you have to like

learning the actual truth of what happened matters if you're going to be applying it to future engagements so that's that is Vicksburg the battle that's like after Gettysburg but in Tennessee and it's like the western front kind of of the civil war and the

Confederates start losing over there is that a little bit it is the same day as Gettysburg or the day before Gettysburg it's on the Mississippi but it is the Western it is the Western versus the Eastern so I forgot it was the same day

what else David should we know about it it's a not it's not Tennessee it's Mississippi right yeah it's a Mississippi okay I got one out of the four things I said

but it is the key battle on the West definitely but it's very important yes like the whole Western

Confederate I have like a shot just the fact that the the the the river and the whole river valley to the union very important moment

my chatter is much more trivial one listen to it absolutely fantastic podcast episode about cost co the acquired

podcast the podcast it's all about companies and their history and the the history of cost co how it came to be what it does

why it's special is incredible it is in throwing if you have any interest in how businesses work and if you ever shopped at cost

co it is just like among the best three hours of podcasting I've ever heard second I'm a microphone I just finished

watching the show lioness did you either be watching it's a Nicole Kidman and Zoe Saldania show which is made

by the same guy who made Yellowstone Taylor Sheridan and 1883 and it's about it's about a special

ops unit within the CIA that is carrying out various kind of extremely dangerous and brutal missions and it's

it's a really good show it's a really intense show very lively and what I really liked about it

ultimately was that it is a show that does not panned or to my political beliefs it is the rare show that I

watch which is it is it's not trumpest exactly but it's definitely anti woke it's isolationist it's

very skeptical of elites is very mannequin and its worldview and kind of brutal about like what you

have to do and I think it is quite like it's it's coherent in that way and and it's unusual to like

you know because we tend to marinate and culture that that affirms our priors and this is a show

that did not affirm my priors and yet was just very vivid and with characters who have

real depth gives you a different way of thinking about the world that it doesn't seem cartoonish and

seems worth considering so I thought that was I liked it for that reason listeners you've got

chatters please email them to us at gabfest at slate.com keep them coming something is

relating you at your cocktails and our listener chatter this week comes from Mark Phillips in Baltimore

as a follow up on the AI discussion in the September 17th political gabfest on the

Donarticle post on CNN the day after that episode the article describes an incident that occurred

months ago during the early phase of the Iran War in which a US intelligence report raised

alarms about the cargo of a Chinese ship headed for the Middle East in response the US military

launched an effort to board the ship with arms and air support while aircraft were in the air but

before the ship was attacked officials looked deeper into the report and found that an analyst

had used an AI chatbot that inaccurately identified the ship's cargo as nuclear weapons components

one of the sources for the CNN reports stated that the AI hallucination had almost started a war

between the US and China so perhaps long before a more advanced AI kills us all some

group of country will act on flawed information from AI in its current form and trigger a catastrophic

conflict has this may be the bleakest chatter in the history of the gabfest now no one can

pester Emily about her sometimes dark but always thoughtful chatters podcast slate has lots of

podcasts and you know what wouldn't you like a podcast that gave you some good advice about how

to spend your money the slate money podcast this week has Adam or Yamaha the author of the

Bloomberg money newsletter on and he brought his personal financial expertise to the show

to talk about how to think about budgeting about renting versus buying his take on financial

advisors and planners I love slate money as a podcast I love listening to Felix and Elizabeth

and Emily and check it out the personal finance sod so what they call it that's all for episode

this week we have another episode for you a bonus episode for you if you're a slate plus member

and you have to join you have to pay to become a slate plus member but that's great because right

now there's a 50% off sale 50% off sale if you go to slate.com slash gabfest plus and use code PG50

you can get a great discount so do that do that when you do that you will get to hear our episode

which I am so looking forward to talking about in one minute we're going to talk about the most

important unanswered questions in the world the New York Times did an amazing feature about unanswered

questions and science and other fields and we're going to talk about the questions that we feel

to be unanswered that are most important but again only for slate plus members go to slate.com slash

plus use code PG50 right now that's our show for today the political gaffess is pretty spiny

and a poor zookey our researchers Emily did our theme music is by David McBeegion Spendrichman

and senior director for podcast office Miele Bell EP of slate podcast Hillary Fry at different

chief of slate Emily Bezzlon and John Degersen by cohosts and I thank you for being here thank you

for listening we'll talk to you next week

I know the gym's not meant to be easy man the winter doing it in the dark is hard

doing it alone is hard doing it cold is hard doing it when you don't want to it's hard

even doing it when you do is hard doing it went too early for this is hard doing it when there's

every reason not to is hard doing it again and again and again is hard and we wouldn't want to be

doing anything else gym shark we do gym hi this is Brook to Vard from naked beauty I am always looking

for ways to elevate our daily rituals and the colder smart toilet is proof that design changes

everything it's the stunning sculptural piece that feels like quiet luxury for your bathroom

it totally transforms your daily ritual into something elevated with customizable cleansing

and touch screen controls it's functional art that makes your space feel cleaner and more intentional

a modern home deserves a modern toilet experience the difference of colors smart toilets find more

at color.com

are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are