I've taken on the corporations at the ballot box and beaten them three times. I am confident that we can push this through by hook or by crook, I really am. And I also know the old saying, when's the best data planetary 20 years ago? When's the second best data planetary [00:00:20] today? We're going to have to start work on this on day one. All right, we've got an important interview for you guys right now. Tom Steyer, one of the leading candidates in the California governor's race, joins us. Welcome, Tom. Cenk, it's nice to be with you. All right, great. So Tom, a lot of people saw you during a presidential run, but a lot of people are meeting you now [00:00:40] for the first time. So before we get into the heavy duty politics, tell us who you are. Where'd you grow up? And how did you get to this point? Well, how did you make your money, etc? Right, so I grew up back East. My mom was a teacher who taught in ah disadvantaged public [00:01:02] schools and then in prison. My dad was a lawyer. He was a Navy vet who had prosecuted the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials. My family basically was measure success in terms of much you [00:01:18] give back to your community, how much you help the state and the country you're from. I was the strange person. I came out to California with my big brother and I started a business. I started a business in one room with no windows, no partners, no employees. And the business [00:01:37] went really well. It's an investment business. I made thousands of investments. We built it from $0 to I think $38 billion when I left. It's still running very well without me. I left 14 years ago. We invested all over the world. We invested in every part of the economy. [00:01:57] um We started a lot of new ways of thinking about investing. But I wanted to do what my family had done, which is my brother Jim has been an advocate for at risk kids for his entire [00:02:13] life. I wanted to give back to the state of California. I wanted to work. working people and I wanted to work on progressive causes, opposing climate change. And I've done that for the last 14 years. And that has included- Yeah. Taking on corporate special interests [00:02:33] three times at the ballot box and beating oil companies, tobacco companies, and out of state companies who weren't paying fair taxes in California. Yeah. My wife and I, Kat Taylor, Do you me to keep going or do want me no, yeah, hold on a second. So I'm going to take one step at [00:02:50] a time. This is a fun, just goofy question that I ask almost everybody. In high school, did you play any sports or have any extracurricular activities? Three sport athlete. I played soccer, basketball, and tennis. And in college, my freshman year, played, I thought I could play all three [00:03:08] sports at D1. I did nothing but play sports. I played all of them my freshman year. the JV level and I realized they're never gonna let me start in any of these teams unless I choose a sport. So I played four years of college soccer and I was the captain of my college soccer team. That's kind of cool. Where'd you go to college? I went to Yale and I will say [00:03:30] when people ask me about college, it's kind of like I played soccer in college and I drank a lot of beer. Well, I hear you. So, okay, how'd you decide to why finance just because that's where the money was or why did you go in there? No, uh when I was coming out of college, [00:03:48] I had no idea what I was going to do. And literally, got uh a job interview and they hired me. It wasn't like I had this predisposition. I literally didn't know what I was going to do. And I got a job and I took it and then I was kind of on that path. much to the mystification [00:04:11] of my parents and my brothers and everybody in our family, that I was doing that. And then after starting my own business and running it for 27 years, had for the last quite long [00:04:27] number of years had been desperately trying to get out of it without leaving my partners, my coworkers and our investors in the lurch. And I managed to do it 14 years ago and the kind of thing I was describing to you ever since full time. So Pepe's or Sally's or Modern? [00:04:49] Pepe's. The correct answer by the way. Just so everybody knows, those are just pizza parlors in New Haven, Connecticut. And New Haven, when you think about what's good about New Haven, you kind of go to the pizza parlors. mean, just so you know, I was standing in La Jolla four [00:05:06] or five months ago with a friend of mine. gone to Yale, who's a professor. We're standing on the bluff in La Jolla at sundown and it's beautiful sunset, people surfing in front of us. And I said to him, know, this reminds me a lot of New Haven. And he goes, really? And [00:05:23] I go, absolutely not. It's totally different. On our way to Pepe's, me and my kids walked there and we saw a guy getting carted away in an ambulance we ran into. uh folks that my kids described as a gang. So but the pizza was excellent. Look, one of the biggest problems [00:05:42] with political media right now isn't just bias. It's how quickly the same story gets spun into two completely different realities depending on who's telling it. That's why I recommend ground news. It's a website and app that pulls together reporting from across the political spectrum so you can compare how the same story is being covered, who's covering it, and what [00:06:00] kind of narrative they're pushing. Take this story about Pete Hegseth refusing to rule out US troops on the ground in Iran. On ground news, you can immediately see how differently outlets frame that same development. The Daily Signal downplays the danger by stressing that [00:06:15] this isn't Iraq and that the war won't be endless. NBC meanwhile, focuses on the key fact that Hegseth would not rule out American boots on the ground in Iran. Same story, two completely different realities. And ground news makes that obvious right away. You can compare headlines [00:06:33] side by side, see the bias distribution of the coverage, check the factuality ratings of the sources, and even see who owns the outlets behind the reporting. That matters because once you understand how stories are being framed, you start to see how public consent gets manufactured. [00:06:50] Ground news also has a blind spot feed that highlights stories that one side of the political spectrum is barely covering. So you're not just trapped inside the version of the world your algorithm wants to feed you. If you're tired of being fed somebody else's narrative, I genuinely [00:07:06] recommend ground news. Go to ground.News slash TYT or scan the QR code. Using our link gets you 40 % off ground news vantage plan and you can also gift a subscription directly through ground news. Okay, back to you. ah So you're in finance, you're making a gazillion dollars. [00:07:27] So why leave? Why get into politics? What are you nuts? I want to have a meaningful life to be honest, Jen. I didn't want to die and not have lived. I didn't want the measure of my life to be my bank account. I wanted to do what my parents did, what my grandparents [00:07:46] did, which is make contributions. And I've been trying to do that. And that's still what I'm trying to do. it's a very, for me, I'm super serious about it and I've been doing it for 14 years and I was trying to do it from before. So, no, I don't ever regret that decision. [00:08:05] That was a great decision. So yeah, and you know what? Look, overall as a life decision, I totally get it because you really don't need two gazillion dollars, one gazillion will do it, right? So. My wife and I, Cat Taylor, took a pledge to give away the bulk of our [00:08:23] money while we're alive. So. I'm not going to die a billionaire or even close to it. I mean, we're in the process of spending the money to support the things we believe in. Kat has been an advocate and worked for economic, racial and environmental justice for her entire life [00:08:39] and does it full time. I don't know if you've ever met her, but she's a total powerhouse. Yeah, so okay, I totally get it. Now let's get into heavy duty politics. So you're running for governor. So the California's got a ton of stuff to fix. Tell us what you're going [00:08:56] to fix and then we'll get into how in a minute. Okay, well, the number one problem in California is Californians can't afford to live here anymore. And that starts with housing, both rental and ownership, includes healthcare for sure, includes electricity costs, includes gasoline costs. [00:09:19] And in every one of those areas, There's a corporate special interest that is making a lot of money from that and doesn't want change. And the thing you should know is, I'm the [00:09:35] person in this race, the only person in this race, who's talking about taking on the corporate special interest to drive down costs for working Californians. And so when you look at this race, I am the most progressive person on virtually every measurement. every single uh policy [00:09:56] area. I'm the person who has a plan to change things. And frankly, I am pissing the hell out of the establishment. And the big corporations and the billionaires are spending a lot of money, tens of millions of dollars to come after me. Because they're worried that I'll do exactly [00:10:11] what I'm saying, which is change California for the better for working people and they don't want that. So Tom, assume, well, I shouldn't assume I'll just ask you, do you take corporate PAC money? I want to ban corporate PAC money. In fact, I want to ban corporate PAC money. [00:10:29] I want to prevent utilities from using the money they get from their monopoly to make sure they maintain their monopoly. I want to do investigations of corporate corruption. So uh can we uh take corporate PAC money out of Democratic primaries in California? Is that [00:10:50] a thing that you could do? in leading the Democratic Party when you're governor? I mean, you'd have to pass a law. But what we're seeing is that money in politics is incredibly powerful. [00:11:06] The corporations and the billionaires are supporting everybody else who's running for governor. And some of those people, for instance, one of the other leading Democrats, Javier Becerra has had max contributions. from the oil companies. And he has gone out publicly within the last [00:11:24] week to say they're not the bad guys. We need them in effect saying, we're together on this. I will be working with the oil companies. And in my mind, that means working against the interests of every other Californian citizen. So what else can we do in California to clean [00:11:42] up the corruption? Because I hear people go into office, they say a lot of the same things you're saying. And then they go, there's nothing we can do. Democrats have a super majority in California. So what are your proposals for specific ones to get rid of corruption? [00:11:59] The ones that I described, the three things I said we were going to do are ban corporate PAC money, prevent utilities from using the money they get from their monopoly to protect their monopoly, and do more investigation and pursue more prosecutions. corruption [00:12:18] in politics. And I think that we have a system which we need to get the money out of politics. And I think Citizens United is something which has been really noxious for American politics in general and in California we're suffering from it too. So uh let's talk about the housing [00:12:38] issue. First off, California's I believe have given about $24 billion to uh help uh with the homelessness issue. And as far as we know, actually we don't know, we don't know where it went. oh So-. There's no accountability, I know that. Yeah, so and I believe homelessness [00:12:58] went up about 53 % in that same time period. look loaded in every one of these questions, Tom is, we've heard this 100 times. How do we know we can trust you? What are you going to do when you get into office to try to find the 24 billion or do something different? Well, [00:13:17] look, my feeling about homelessness comes from a very simple starting idea, which is no one gets well on the street. Being on the street, only about one in seven people who become homeless start with a serious mental health problem or some sort of substance abuse. But being on [00:13:36] the street is incredibly destructive. The system we have now gets you into permanent housing over seven years. And it costs about $750,000 to $1 million a key for permanent supportive housing. What I'm talking about is, let's keep people off the street. Let's give them rental [00:13:55] assistance to prevent them from becoming homeless. If they're on the street, let's get them off the street as fast as possible. And what does that look like? It's being done in places in California successfully. Emergency interim housing, a room that's yours with a key. You [00:14:15] can bring your animal, you don't have to be substance free. Share dining facilities, share laundry facilities, safety and support services. That is something to get people off the street into something they want to go to. People do not want to go to shelters. They can't bring [00:14:30] their animals. They're unsafe. They have no privacy. People fight that. We need to get them off the street for their sakes. This is something that the vast majority of people. the street like and want to stay in even though it's an interim solution. And it gets them [00:14:48] back in the feet with the ability to reenter society. It creates the kind of, it makes possible the kind of vibrant downtowns where people feel safe, where kids can walk. And where we, since we want to have a California that is vibrant, diverse, fun, and where we [00:15:09] build housing around public transportation. Okay, so let's break that down. Yeah, so you say let's get them off the street, but let's say that there's someone who doesn't want to get off the street. And this is a problem that happens fairly regularly, right? And they might [00:15:24] have a mental health issue, they might have an addiction issue, and they're like, no, I'm not interested in your interim housing, right? So- I understand. Yeah, so what do do in that situation? Do you believe in involuntarily committing people or just say, okay, freedom? Look, think [00:15:42] that what happens in this case realistically is about over 75 % of the people actually want to go. This is a better life for them and they don't want to leave when they get there. It's actually something where people really want it meets their needs in a serious way. I think [00:16:02] for the other 25 % over time, they need mental health care. Those are the people who have serious mental problems and substance problems. And those are people who over time we've got to get them into a facility where they're getting care. So, Tom, look, people are going [00:16:21] to say, we're going to get them into facilities, that's going to cost a good amount of money. We're going to pay their interim rent, that's going to cost a good amount of money. And then we got to get them into homes eventually and that's going to cost a good amount of money. So how do we pay for all this? Actually, this is a lot cheaper. To be honest, Cenk. I'm describing [00:16:41] is a lot cheaper than in fact getting people into interim housing is a fraction of the cost of the system we have, which is shelter. As you said, $24 billion with homelessness getting worse and no accountability to understand which parts of this system actually work. If you [00:16:58] actually do the math on this, it's much less expensive. So Tom, what's wrong with the system we're using now? I think that the system we have now, which I've been saying is, it's shelters that people desperately do not want to go to, followed by permanent housing. And for seven [00:17:17] years, you're in this limbo of being on the street, which is incredibly destructive. You're very much at risk, you can never relax, you're vulnerable, and it's dangerous. And being on the street actually creates massive mental health problems for the people who are there. [00:17:36] And so the idea that being on the street for seven years is free. It's very, very far from free for those people. And so something that gets them off the street much, much faster, I started by saying nobody gets well on the street. And so keeping people off the street [00:17:52] with rental assistance, and then getting people off the street as fast as possible for their sake is actually the thing that prevents us from getting into this cycle where there's, Real insecurity, real mental health problems, and that becomes something which is very hard [00:18:13] and difficult to solve, and that's what's expensive. Yeah, so let's move to healthcare. People have concerns pulling off single payer in a state is very difficult as opposed to doing it nationwide. So how do you address that concern? think that's true, but I also think that it's [00:18:34] imperative. And there are a bunch of things we have to do. But if you look at the numbers, you can see the healthcare is a right for Californians, and we've got to provide it. A single payer [00:18:51] system costs about half as much as what we're spending right now in this state and provides outcomes that are as good or better than the outcomes we're getting right now. And if you look at the cost of healthcare, it has been dramatically outpacing inflation for 50 years [00:19:08] and it continues to. And so it is eating up every family. mean, I'm sure you read the stories today about the millions of people who are giving up healthcare coverage so they can make rent. It is hitting every family, every business, it's incredibly expensive, and it's crushing [00:19:28] the budget of the state of California. It is eating the budget and eating up the money that would otherwise be going to education, childcare, senior care. It's really on a path of inflation [00:19:43] that seems inexorable. And I'm for single payer because that is the way we contain the cost and deliver quality healthcare as a right for every California. uh Just help me understand it. So right now we've got healthcare through this company, right? So you go to single payer [00:20:03] in California, what happens next? Well, what's going to happen is we're going to have to make sure that the companies and the people who are covered on the companies are that the money doesn't come all from the taxpayer and the companies just waltz on it. We're to have to make sure [00:20:24] that the money is safe so that the companies are paying their share for their employees. So there's enough money in the system so that we can provide it. But the companies will save a lot of money. The state will save a lot of money and the people will save a lot of money. And so this will turn out to be a system getting the details right. God is in the details. [00:20:48] We're going to have to get the details right. But the fact of the matter is, there's no choice. Honestly, Cenk, if you look at these numbers and you care about people and believe that healthcare is a right and you understand we have to deliver it for Californians. I don't [00:21:03] believe there's a second option here. And the myth that some of the people who are running for government, for governor are saying, which is, the private sector competition, they'll bend the curve. I've been hearing that for so long. Yeah, it's never been true. So that's [00:21:20] definitely not true. But let's dive into the Democratic Party. So if you go to try to pass single pair, you won't just run into resistance from the Republicans and the Republicans are not that relevant in California as things stand now. You're running the resistance from some Democrats. So how would you handle it? Look, I think a couple of things. One, we're going [00:21:40] to have to get this system right so we can show that it is absolutely better on the details that you are asking about. The other thing that's true, Cenk, is this. It really is one of those things who are going to believe me or your lion eyes. It is eating us up. When you look at [00:21:57] where we've gone, in terms of our educational outcomes as a state. It's not a flute. Everything you get when you travel around this state and understand what we're trying to accomplish in terms of delivering services for Californians and paying the people who deliver those services [00:22:15] fairly. You understand this is eating everything, honestly. Yeah, so I got you Tom, but- It's just eating it. so we're good. You say it's difficult and I agree with you. This is a complicated system and we're going to have to do a good job of getting the details, right? That's why [00:22:32] I cause and details. I'm with you, but what I'm asking is- Sorry, Tom. I understand it. Why is it going to work politically? Yeah. And my answer to you is because it's so obvious. It really is. Well, okay, yeah, but you just say it's obvious and it's obvious to me too. You don't have to sell me on it. But nevertheless in the past Democrats have voted no. So not [00:22:54] all of them but enough to block it. So What if they do it again, they vote no, then what do you do? Look, ultimately, what I've said, look, I'm an outsider, right? I've taken on the corporations at the ballot box and beaten them three times. I am confident that we can [00:23:12] push this through by hook or by crook, I really am. And I also know the old saying, when's the best data planetary? 20 years ago, when's the second best data planetary today? going to have to start work on this on day one. So there will be to get it right will be complicated. [00:23:32] And if it weren't absolutely necessary, I'd question if we had to do it, but it is absolutely necessary. And that's one of those things. If we wait three years, we've wasted three years. And that's why we'll start on day one. So I remember when Karen Bass ran for mayor the [00:23:52] first time around in LA. She said that she was going to manage the system better. uh And others said, no, we're going to change the system. So where do you stand on that? If you become governor, are you going to manage the system better or are you going to change it? I'm the change agent. I'm the only person in this race who's saying, we'll take on the electric monopoly [00:24:14] and beat them. We'll charge a windfall profits tax for the oil companies that are getting windfall profits from the war in Iran that their president started. in which they've, their cost didn't change a nickel and they're getting $70 billion at the pump. We should tax that [00:24:32] and deliver it directly to Californians. I am saying I'm the person for single payer. I am saying that we will close a corporate real estate tax loophole worth $20 billion a year that we need in the state of California. I am the change agent. I think the idea of [00:24:47] saying, you're going to do it better, the old saying, doing the same thing over and over. expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity. Yeah, we've certainly seen that from time time in California. All right, let's talk about, uh mentioned corporate PACs. Do [00:25:06] you take any foreign government lobby money? Absolutely not. Okay. One of the things I assume the question you're asking here is about a PAC. Yeah, that's part of it. I assume that's what you're asking me and let me say, I said it's a dark money organization that has no [00:25:22] position in our politics. Yeah. So if you're governor, you're not going to have to vote on Israeli funding or anything along those lines. there are some things that do come up in California. some folks pass bills saying you've got to re-educate the kids, that everything is anti-Semitic. [00:25:43] If they criticize Israel, I think it's absurd. uh There's people who put pressure on leaders of universities in California, you better not allow any pro-Palestinian protests. So where do you stand on all So I assume the first part of that question is, I think it's called [00:26:03] 715, which was passed, I think, last year. And there is an amendment to that that takes out the parts that are truly anti free speech. It's being put forward by a legislator named [00:26:19] Robert Garcia. And those amendments seem to me to be realistic and fair, and it needs to be amended. And so I would support that. And I think that the idea of cutting off free speech for protest is something, obviously people have a right to free speech and people have [00:26:39] a right to their opinions. And that's been an American tradition forever. And I want to make sure that that extends to every group, every citizen in the state of California. So a lot of states have passed laws saying that if you do or sanction of Israel that [00:26:57] you'll have your government contracts taken away from you. Are you against that or in favor of that? I think you have the right to do what you want in your life. Yeah, so Tom, I'm going to ask you a funny question here. And let me say this, Cenk, look, we're obviously seeing [00:27:15] the Netanyahu administration for years has been advancing a- that we can't accept, that we shouldn't be supporting. And the Iran war has brought that to the front. I mean, before it [00:27:32] was something we were supporting something from behind the scenes with arms sales and support. But now we're partners, we're open partners, and we can see in the Iran war. don't see how it helps America other than to try and control the oil supply of the world. It's basically [00:27:50] it's raising our prices at the pump. They've taken tens or hundreds of billions of dollars from the taxpayers, including Californians, that we should be using for schools. We should be using for healthcare and using it to blow up a country halfway around the world. And [00:28:05] they had no reason, they can't even explain why they're doing it. So we've seen that following this government has been, terrible for Californians. Yeah, they're doing it a little bit for oil, but mainly for Israel. So that leads to the core of the question, right? So everybody says, [00:28:24] no, I won't be beholden to them. And then they get into office and all of a sudden there's laws. You can't say this about Israel, you can't say that, you're going to take away your contracts, etc. And look, Tom, almost all the policies- Not everybody says change, this has changed. Not everybody says what I'm saying and then goes against it. There has been a- Maybe people [00:28:45] have done that in the past, but I think that some things really changed, honestly here. This is all exploded in Americans consciousness that what people have been saying for a long time that seemed people knew what was going on. But it wasn't in the forefront of what [00:29:02] Americans were paying attention to somewhere, but not everybody. I think now people are paying attention to it and they're basically saying, yeah, okay. So Tom, here's the essence of it, right? So people are worried that uh our politicians are at least influenced at a bare minimum [00:29:22] and maybe beholden uh to this lobby. And the lobby is super powerful nationally, it's also powerful in the states and that's why we get the laws that we were just talking about. And so you're right that in the past the politicians didn't even say that they wouldn't pass those [00:29:38] laws. In fact, they would brag about passing those laws, So, but now, Even to this day, a lot of folks running for office, including yourself, struggle with some of the words, apartheid, genocide, etc, right? So why, why do people struggle with those words? What we're [00:29:55] worried about is, what is the force that is influencing you to struggle with that issue? So behind all of this in my mind is the only solution here. people say this is such empty [00:30:10] verbiage, but it's not. I don't see how we solve this without a two state solution. I literally don't see it. I don't see how we can provide dignity and fairness and political ah self determination for the people in Israel and Palestine without having a two state solution where [00:30:30] people have the right of self determination. And- So, Tom, I'm with you and the two-state solution, I agree. And I believe you that that's what you would push for. Again, you're a governor not at international level, so to the best of your ability to influence it, right? So I do [00:30:46] believe you on that. So what I'm trying to understand is, what's holding everybody back from just using words like apartheid and genocide? And I think the reason is this. People are worried that in effect, if you cancel one side, You can never get people at the table negotiating [00:31:05] that. Now to be fair to you, the Netanyahu government has proved absolutely adamantly opposed to a two state solution. They have been working against it. They have been committing war crimes. They continue to push further to try to prevent a two state solution. But I think the reason [00:31:26] that people shy away from some of the words thinking in the long run we need to have people at the table. And that we need to have them negotiating in good faith to come up with something that's fair to both sides. That's honestly why I think people are careful about [00:31:44] those words, not because of the reason that somehow they're influenced by something. Because they want to get that outcome and they're worried by canceling somebody that you end up without the ability of ever getting to a two state solution. I mean, nobody's canceling anyone. In order [00:32:02] to get to peace, you have to have both the Israelis and the Palestinians, etc. Yeah, so that's-. And that's all-. Right, but there is influence, Tom. There's definitely influence. There's massive influence. Since you don't take the PAC money, you have some ironic credit that [00:32:19] you don't need it. So we're a little less worried about it. But we are worried because for whatever reason, when people get into office, all of sudden they turn around. So the last question really goes to that issue time in my opinion is a proxy, especially in a governor's [00:32:36] race, right? You're not going to run into it that often as governor, right? It's a proxy for what our audience is mainly asking you and all the candidates, which is, how do we know if we can trust you? because we've heard this story a million times and it never happens. [00:32:51] So how do we know you're the guy we can trust? Well, honestly, it's because I don't have any conflicts. And I walked away from the money. If I wanted money, I would stay at work. If I wanted to make a difference, I would have walked away from work and done exactly what [00:33:08] I've done for the last 14 years. if I wanted to get everything I'm doing, the fact that I'm willing to take on the corporations and they're all fighting me and spending tens of millions of dollars against me means they believe that I'm sincere. And if you look at the people [00:33:25] who are supporting me, which includes are including our revolution. It includes virtually all the environmentalists. It includes the vast bulk of organized labor. They're supporting me, [00:33:42] including the teachers and the nurses. They're supporting me because they think I'm sincere. And the truth is, if I weren't sincere, why would I be doing this? I'm doing this because I think we're in a crisis and California needs change. And I'm the person sitting here going [00:33:59] like, we're gonna make this change. We're going to stand up for working people. We're gonna be progressive in all of these different policy areas. And if that means taking on entrenched corporate interests who want their way, we're gonna do that. And so I don't understand why [00:34:19] I would be doing this if I weren't sincere in every part of that. Cuz it seems to me it would be just I don't understand what the second reason I would be doing. Well, that I do have an answer for that. mean, so Bloomberg ran and it was ego. um So that's the other problem. [00:34:35] But I get what you're saying. get what you're saying. And so tell them I'm not accusing you of that. I'm just saying you asked if there could be a second reason that is a potential second reason. uh But look, I want the audio. Can imagine a harder job than taking on all these people? Can you imagine a harder, more difficult job? I mean, I'm getting it right [00:34:55] now. I mean, they're coming after me, and trying to vilify me. If I didn't want to get the outcome, why would I be fighting my way through the swamp? Yeah, so look, I'll make this clear to the [00:35:10] audience. So my job is to interview Tom, but it's also to give you guys a sense of the race, right? And I challenge you on all those things, because I challenge everybody on all those things. But- Okay, fair questions. Right, but eh you should know somebody who threw their [00:35:27] enemies and Tom is right. The corporations are attacking him. The establishment is attacking him and ironically, that's to make the thing gives me the most trust that maybe you're the right guy because you've got the right enemies. ah So and- I also don't see your second choice, [00:35:47] Cenk. I don't see the other person who's even saying they'll do it. Yeah, no, no, I see that as well. And progressives I trust, I've started to really pile onto your campaign, including Ro Khanna, and that speaks volumes. So, uh Tom, we appreciate you coming on and [00:36:05] taking the time to do this uh and answering our questions. Hopefully we could do it again. Cenk, I really appreciate you letting me on and I appreciate the work you're doing. Thank you very much. Thank you, Every time you ring the bell below, an angel gets a swings. Totally [00:36:20] not true. But it does keep you updated on our live shows.