eft of Bernie which is sort of a category that I'm not even sure exists. But because I brand myself as ambiguous in theory according to everything we know about science and persuasion you should give me a more clear opinion of both teams because I don't say I'm not on the team and I don't say I am on the team. I observe very few people in the United States are actually observers.

Somebody says now you're lying. I'm not sure which part you think I'm lying about but you can put it in a comment if you want. I'll be happy to comment on it. So the part that I would say for sure and those of you been watching me can confirm this, I do take opinions on both sides. So you have seen me spread my opinion across various political ideologies. So when I see President Trump say the fine people thing I'm not predisposed to think he's a monster so I can see it more clearly. When AOC or Rashida Tlaib, I wish I knew how to pronounce her name I feel bad about that, but when they say things that I may not agree with but I can at least understand what they intend to say because I'm not on a team. And I do believe it gives you some ability to see the world more clearly by not being associated with the team. It's like a superpower.

Tlaib. I see lots of different people helping me pronounce that but none of it's helping. Could you change the impact of a speech with a laugh track? Yes you could. You can change how any communication is received by changing the context and a laugh track would be part of the context. So yes you can absolutely change communication by changing the context.

These are the disingenuous arguments that cost you credibility. Do you notice there's no reason there? So if whoever just said your argument is disingenuous and it's costing you credibility that is a sign of cognitive dissonance. It means that I've said something that's triggered you and you have no, you don't know. And your response is to imagine that you can read my mind. So somebody here believes they've read my mind and that something I said is disingenuous. In other words that I'm intentionally misleading or lying. Why would I do that? It's exactly the opposite of all of my ambitions. My entire ambition is that I can disagree with you and do it honestly. Let's look this is my entire brand. My brand is not to convince you of something that isn't true or useful. I don't have, what possible incentive would I have for that? I don't get paid by anybody to do that. I have no financial interest. It doesn't help my reputation. It doesn't make me feel good. I have no interest in being disingenuous about any of these topics. I don't have a personal stake. I'm not running for office. I just don't have an interest. If I had an interest then you would be, I think you would be, it would be reasonable for you to say I think he's got a self-interest here. He might not be saying the truth because people who have self-interest do not tell the truth.

My entire ambition is for people to think that I am willing to tell the truth on both sides. That's all I want to accomplish because that's what gives me value. To have value I have to be legitimate on both sides. And if I were to say something that you could sit there and say oh that's