something generic like there's too much crime coming across the border you would say ah that's a statistic okay. But if he tells you that Venezuelan people with machine guns are taking over a building which is a real thing by the way I don't think they're machine guns I think they just have weapons but you can see that like in your mind the picture forms perfectly and it's scary because you see people with machine guns even though I don't think they had any but guns knocking on your door and saying this is our apartment now or else you're paying us rent. That is some scary scary stuff. So Trump again perfectly visual perfect description perfect summary on that topic. So good.

Did MSNBC like Kamala Harris's performance? Do I even need to tell you? Yes. Here are the things they said were just masterful. That she decided to make it about the country not herself. Did she? I don't know just sounded like her stump speech to me. Somebody named Jeremy Peters on MSNBC said she's very wisely making this about the country and bringing the country back together. Really? What was the bringing the country back together part? I don't recall that at all. Rather than saying this is about me this is who I am you already have one candidate who's doing that quite well. That's so just trying hard to write a college essay on an assigned topic. It really is trying as hard as you can to just use words. If I combine words in just the right way this is going to look like a good thing. It's crazy.

All right so anyway so somebody also on MSNBC Ellie Velez talked about her defending her switches in policy preferences. He said quote I thought she was smart to explain her policy position has not a change in values not a change in your deep inner mooring but instead something almost situational in terms of taking in more information. In other words MSNBC is adding word salad to her word salad. I feel like I'm at what's that restaurant that has infinite salad? You want salad? We'll talk about salad with some more salad. What does it mean that she's going to keep her values but instead it's something about situational in terms of taking in more information? That would be everything. Everything is situational and we're always taking more information. That really doesn't explain anything anyway but they tried.

Hard polling as you know is ridiculous at this point. But Wall Street Journal says they've got a poll that Harris is up 48 to 47 but if you throw in the third party candidates and why wouldn't you she's up two points but that's within the margin of error. Nate Silver still says Trump has a 52% chance of winning the electoral college versus Harris at 47 but that will get updated soon. So basically we don't know anything about anything. We just know it's close.

All right. Apparently CEO Mark Zuckerberg claimed somewhere this week that he didn't realize that the $400 million he spent on that whole getting out the vote thing in 2020 primarily benefited one party. So he's acting surprised that his $400 million was spent to make things more biased instead of a more fair election. $400 million he wasted because what he wanted he says is a system that was just a better system for all people. What he got was he changed the direction of the election toward Biden. Maybe he wanted that too but it wasn't planning to do it.

So here's the thing. You didn't know that the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, so that's where the 400 million was that got spent, it was led by his wife who gave most of that money to some groups that are so obviously left leaning that you should have been able to know very easily that you were going to bias the election o