To Boldly Go Where No Bettor Has Gone Before

0:00 Matt: So here we are again. World at Odds. Episode fourteen.

0:06 Matt: Andrew, I have to, before we start the show, I have a personal dilemma that I want to get your take on. We mentioned last episode that we were both going to be in France. We were going to record, which we didn't do, but I saw the most perfect cottage house, an 1850s farmhouse for sale with some land and a small waterfall in the front yard and a little stream. And I think it's perfect. And I don't know if I should buy it. And I've been agonizing and losing sleep over it. And I want you to tell me what to do.

0:40 Andrew: Yeah. I mean, Matt, the only answer is to buy it. It's obviously to buy it.

0:45 Matt: I slept super well in this area, but it is pretty remote. It's like living in the boonies of Kansas, except no one speaks my language. And there's a lot more wine.

0:55 Andrew: Yeah, I think that's perfect. I don't know, I know you, you're listing negatives, which to me are positives. So I don't know how to help you with this dilemma because all I say is absolutely, get it. I promise I will come hang out with you for like a week a year minimum, and it'll be great.

1:14 Matt: All right. Well, I think that might be the tiebreaker.

1:17 Andrew: Well, it has been a while, but we committed to coming back for this episode because we are going to delve into your area of expertise today, which I'm very excited about.

1:27 Matt: Yeah. And America should be very excited about, because big things are happening this week.

1:32 Andrew: Yeah, we are on the eve of the election.

1:35 Matt: And I've been a little bit out of the loop. I had some family stuff to deal with, but we did get here thanks to your pushing. And yeah, we should talk about the election.

1:46 Andrew: There is a cultural moment that we should touch on before we get started, because a major figure in your life has moved on and I feel like it's worth a note. It's worth a note on that, before we get into the minutiae of the American political system.

2:02 Matt: Yes, it has been a rough week. So I was also in Michigan this week. I had a close family member die suddenly. I don't want to talk too much about my personal family stuff, but on an even bigger scale that other people might be more interested in: Captain Picard, Patrick Stewart, passed away. Obviously a big deal for me growing up, watching every single episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation, recording them on VHS and organizing them in a filing cabinet in my mom's living room. Were you a Star Trek nerd or were you more into Star Wars or something like that?

2:36 Andrew: I was not a Star Trek, like, I didn't watch the show religiously, but my dad and I watched all the movies. But I was not sitting on the floor of my parents' house in rural Midwest America watching every episode. But it was a thing for me. It was a thing. I mean, he is an icon.

2:55 Matt: An icon. That's right. That's the right way to say it.

2:58 Andrew: So did you raise a glass? What did you do?

3:01 Matt: Yeah, I mean, we commiserated. I have a lot of fellow nerds in my family and fellow nerds everywhere. And I feel like my Threads and Instagram are nothing but Patrick Stewart now. So that's been good. There were some really good cuts, I'll put a link on. There was a really good cut someone put together of Data asking Captain Picard about his death. And they put together this whole montage and I thought it was really good. But yeah, that was the sad stuff, but at least we're left with all the episodes we can watch. I've been watching with Diana all the way through The Next Generation. I think she almost cried when I told her. But besides that, no other commemorations.

3:42 Andrew: I think the best stuff for me has been just like, you watch a serious actor. I mean, he was a Shakespearean actor. I think he did National Theatre stuff, obviously, too. And then to watch him do that Ricky Gervais sketch where he's talking about his dream movie, where he's got the power to just take women's clothes off whenever he wants. Like Liam Neeson getting into Naked Gun and other stuff. It's always great stuff and makes them even more human, I guess, now in their death.

4:10 Matt: I agree, I agree.

4:11 Andrew: And it's time to talk about some of the biggest odds in the world, the midterm elections. And you absolutely are, you've been in the US. So give us your, I don't know, where do you want to start? Give us your take.

4:25 Matt: Well, let's start with Michigan because I was there all week. Lovely state, by the way. We got super lucky with the weather. But what I find funny, just as a preface, is you see the signs for Mike Rogers and Abdul El-Sayed everywhere, obviously. And I just find it so disheartening how everything is so dumbed down. You just see these giant billboards on the side of the road and it's just like, "El-Sayed will protect health care." And then there's obviously no details. Or it's the Rogers sign, "El-Sayed will raise prices." Something which is so dumbed down that it makes your brain hurt to think that's what people are getting bombarded with every day and have to make their decisions based on.

5:05 Andrew: Yeah, just got to try to get that last little soundbite in people's ears. But what do you think's taking, what's your zeitgeist, your take, what's going on on the ground?

5:15 Matt: Well, I was staying in a town of about five thousand people. So I guess you'd consider that rural-ish. And obviously there was quite a lot of El-Sayed out, probably more than I thought. The Republicans there were very Republican. For example, there was a fifteen-foot elephant in someone's yard with about twenty political signs. My brother and I were joking that we should just, every day, put one El-Sayed sign in there until they noticed. Unfortunately, we didn't do it. But I do think that, regardless of what signs are on the yard, I do think things are trending Democrat to the point where I am willing to call it. I think it's going to be a Democrat sweep. And in fact, I have to go back on a bet that I made where I said I thought the Republicans would win the Senate, several weeks ago. But that's my big one. The big blockbuster for the show is Democratic sweep. They're going to take the House and they're going to take the Senate. And that's going to be that.

6:14 Andrew: Wow. Okay. Does that make you happy? All right. So you think Michigan is a lock. I mean, I guess that's where you are and you think El-Sayed has it done and done.

6:24 Matt: Well, let's talk about that one. I am betting a bit on that one. And I think it's good to dig into what I'm looking for in these kinds of races. So the odds have spiked up right now. I think on Polymarket it's around eighty to eighty-two cents El-Sayed. And that's obviously up from very close to fifty-fifty a few weeks ago. So I'm looking at a couple of things. I look at all the polls myself just to parse them. I'm still a big fan of Nate Silver. He's running his Substack, natesilver.net, and he does his FLIPR forecast. So I'm checking that. And then I also like to look at the RealClearPolitics polling averages. And that is where I'm seeing something which is a fundamental, I guess, if you want to use that word, that I like to see. So if you were to open the RealClearPolling polls, Senate, Rogers versus El-Sayed, and you see the little graphs over time: back in April, Rogers was leading in aggregate, like forty-four to forty. And now El-Sayed is leading by a couple of points, say it's gone up to like forty-nine to forty-five. But at the very end of the graph, the spread starts to get bigger. And so to me that's the late break. The late break trend to me looks like it's going towards El-Sayed. And obviously there's still a day to go. But with early voting and mail voting and that kind of stuff, if you see even a little bit of a split right at the end, I feel like that's a sure sign that El-Sayed is going to go ahead and win Michigan.

7:54 Andrew: And that's the polling. You're not looking at Polymarket or Magic or whatever prices. That's the polling itself.

8:00 Matt: That's right. It's the RealClearPolitics polling average. So any one poll obviously is susceptible to error. I'm going to send this to you now so you can look at what I'm looking at.

8:10 Andrew: I can tell because I can hear you screenshotting things. Well done on the podcast there, Matt. That's good stuff.

8:17 Matt: Well, people got to know that we're working in real time for this job that pays us.

8:22 Andrew: Yeah, that pays us no money.

8:24 Matt: All right. So I've pasted that to you in our little group chat. I like to look at the aggregates because then you kind of see how things are moving, and in general the polling aggregates have a lot less error than any one single poll. But are you looking at that image now?

8:41 Andrew: Yes, yes I am.

8:43 Matt: So you just see that little blip for El-Sayed, right in the last week where he's spiked up. To me that's a sure sign that the late-breaking votes are going that way.

8:53 Andrew: Yeah. So are you like aping in full? I mean, the price is already over eighty cents, so it feels like you're betting on a clear favorite already. But you're saying it's a lock lock.

9:04 Matt: Lock lock, tough. I mean, I'd probably hedge that back a little bit. I think it's good and good value. I'm not aping in totally on that one. I am betting some, but I have only about four units on it. But for example, on Democrats to win the Senate, I have got about eighty-five units on it. So I'm betting on it. I feel like this is one of those bellwethers. If Democrats can win Michigan, they have a very likely chance to take control of the Senate.

9:33 Andrew: Yeah. No, I think the Dem seat is up. And El-Sayed is taking from a Dem incumbent, as far as I recall. But the interesting thing in this one is there's also this late-breaking feud going on, which feels like such a ridiculous Democrat own goal. And to be clear here, I want to say, as Matt is talking about how much he's putting on Dems to win the Senate, this is not necessarily his preferred political outcome. Not saying that he's all in on Republicans as a libertarian, but he's not betting with his heart here. He's betting with his mind. Is that fair to say?

10:07 Matt: Yes and no. Well, in this case, I actually am rooting for a split government, because I feel like as a libertarian, I think the libertarians have a couple of very key positions like tax is theft and don't kill people. So anti-war and anti-tax. And with the way the deficit's going, there's no way that the government's going to be able to pay for this without causing inflation on purpose or taxing people more. And obviously, Trump did the thing that he said that he wouldn't do, which is to start a war in Iran, which I'm not a fan of at all. So while I don't trust Democrats to not spend money, I do think that if they control some houses of Congress, there could be more accountability on the war spending. So really, I just want the government to do less stupid things. And I feel like if they've got to fight each other, then they'll get less done. So I'm for getting less things done.

11:01 Andrew: Great. And there you have it, folks. Anyway, moving on from Matt's saboteur politics there. There's this interesting thing in the Michigan Senate race right now where the Democrats, El-Sayed defeated this woman in the primaries, and she was sort of the pro-Israel candidate. He is sort of, I don't know, anti-Israel sounds like such a strong thing. I think he's just like, let's be rational about what's going on in Gaza, candidate, as far as I know. And now they are feuding to the point where the old-school Democrats tried to invite them to a unity thing. And then he said, no, she shouldn't come. And I just feel like it's just dumb Democrat infighting right before the election. That to me, even though he's at eighty-two cents, has me, I don't know, maybe I'm just a nervous Nancy. James Carville always said before Democrats lost every time, "oh, stop your bedwetting." Like Hillary Clinton's definitely going to win, Donald Trump couldn't possibly be president. I feel like, all right, well, I'm just going to bedwet because what the hell? This seems stupid and scary, but you seem confident.

12:02 Matt: So I think it's a nothingburger. And yeah, Haley Stevens is the candidate. And I do find the rhetoric that they've put out just ridiculous. Basically where the feud comes from, for those of you that care, is El-Sayed put out an ad, or actually I don't even think it was him, I think it was a PAC that wants him to win, basically said, hey, your rising grocery prices are because the US is shipping tons of money to Israel, which is obviously true, but probably in a very tiny way, given the amount of money the US gives to Israel versus the overall budget and what causes inflation. And then obviously people who support Israel took a huge issue with that. And that's what they're making a big deal about. But I think it's a nothingburger. I think a lot of people have already voted. And I don't think it's going to change that much. If this was a race in New York where the Jewish population was a lot bigger, I think it might have a bigger impact, but I don't think in Michigan it's going to make much of a difference.

13:05 Andrew: I hope not. I just feel like she seems like causing problems. But yeah, you're right. I think twenty-eight percent have already voted in Michigan, which is sort of shocking. I mean, I guess it's not shocking, but it's always surprising to hear early vote numbers in the US and think, oh, a good chunk of the election's already over. But can we be done with Michigan and move on to another state close to your heart?

13:30 Matt: Absolutely. I would love to. And by the way, I just want to correct myself, I was wrong. It is an incumbent Democrat. But in any case, you're right. So yeah, let's move on.

13:41 Andrew: Yeah, I like that you added "and you were right." That's an important note. All right. Let's move on to another state, near and dear to your heart, and near to a state near and dear to my heart. Let's talk about Kansas, is what I'm trying to say. I just looked just now actually. I didn't realize, I hadn't really paid attention to this race, at least in the Senate. It's like fifty-two forty-eight on Polymarket. The Dem is favored slightly. But what are you seeing? And what are you thinking about in Kansas?

14:11 Matt: First of all, Kansas is not near and dear to your heart. You are a Missouri lover, and it's near to a state that is near and dear to my heart.

14:21 Andrew: I see. That's what you said. All right. Close.

14:24 Matt: Yeah. That's fair. Well, Kansas then. It's interesting. So I was with my parents, obviously, for this family event in Michigan and Fox News was on nonstop. And Fox with Bret Baier did a really long-form interview with Hamilton, who's the Democratic candidate. I believe he is a relatively centrist Democrat, but he's also a pastor and I think a very left-leaning pastor as far as pastors go. So it's quite an interesting dynamic. He was talking about eating meat and holding the Methodist church together and some of these things. And credit to Bret Baier, he did let him talk pretty openly, and I found him pretty well spoken. And I think it just plays into the fact that you're reading these news stories of Trump going to campaign in Kansas. And if Kansas is in play, I think Republicans are completely fucked this cycle. So the seat that's up between Hamilton and Marshall, Marshall's the Republican candidate, I think Trump won it by sixteen points in the last cycle. And right now the Democrat has taken the lead in the polling aggregates. I believe it's like fifty-one forty-nine or maybe even slightly closer than that. So I do think these kinds of signals bode well for Democrats, whether or not they actually win Kansas or not.

15:34 Andrew: Okay. But wait, so in the Michigan race you said that one of the things you look for when you place these kinds of bets is this last-minute spike. Are you seeing the same thing in Kansas?

15:46 Matt: No. So the answer here is no. And the reason why is because there's not enough polls in Kansas. So generally they don't poll Kansas that much because it's not very interesting. They will poll it and you can always find a poll. But I think they run about three to five times more polls in a bellwether, in a swing state like Michigan or Pennsylvania, than they do in Kansas. So there's really not a crazy amount of polling. So actually RealClearPolitics can't even pull that same sort of graph. So I am less confident, but I'll just read you. So there's been seven polls that ended after the first of October. Marshall, the Republican, leads two of them by one point. There is a tie. And then Hamilton leads four out of the seven, with the aggregate being plus two point six. But because they're not polling very often, you can't get that same kind of spike at the end, if that makes sense.

16:39 Andrew: Right. Yeah. No, it makes sense. And also, I feel like Kansas is one of those states where with less polling like that, it's more likely to have some kind of polling error where they're not polling the right people, or turnout in a subgroup that is more red will vote more, for example.

16:57 Matt: So that's why I wouldn't bet a lot on that one. I am betting some because I do think it's interesting. And like I said, I watched the guy and I think he's well spoken and I think he has a good chance to win a state like Kansas, which I think is a lot more purple than people think. I think Kansas is way more purple than, for example, Nebraska or Oklahoma or even Missouri, probably.

17:22 Andrew: Yeah, I think you're probably right. Even Civil War history would say you're right. Hey, so, okay, let's boil this down a little bit. You're calling a Dem sweep. You're saying the Dems are going to get both the House and the Senate. You've put a bunch of units behind all that. Correct. You're saying that on individual races, when there is a decent, I don't know if you want to put a number on it, but like eighty percent favorite, seventy-five percent favorite, if you're seeing a spike near the end, that is a very good sign that the favorite is the right horse at that point. Are there any of these races that you're getting into on a very specific level? And I guess I'm looking to boil it down to the elections on Tuesday. If you were to have a thousand units and you were to sprinkle them around and you weren't allowed to do it on the aggregate, so you weren't allowed to say Dem sweep or Dem House, Dem Senate, what would you be looking for in the individual races to just dump money into, to make a short-term profit, maybe even considering the fact that some of these, even though they should technically be very quick wins, could drag on until the actual inauguration in January?

18:33 Matt: Okay. Got it. So I want to make a clarification. I am not betting on what the prediction markets or the oddsmakers say. I'm betting on the polling averages and trying to see little blips of things right at the end as they've moved. And I'm also, as I said, a big fan of Nate Silver. Part of the reason why I'm aping so big into Democratic sweep is the prediction markets have it at about eighty, eighty-one cents, but he has it at about eighty-seven or eighty-eight cents. So he thinks it's even more likely than the prediction market. So I just think there's some extra value there in addition to it being a relatively safe bet. Now, to get back to your question, if I had one thousand units and I wasn't going to bet the aggregates, what would I look for and what would I do? And my answer is probably going to frustrate you, but I don't think I would bet a thousand units. So me personally, and maybe this is a good lesson, I had some family stuff. I've been way less into this than I normally would have been before an election because I was just busy traveling, jet lagged, going to a funeral, mourning Captain Picard and that kind of stuff. So I just don't know enough. And I think that the only races I've really been following are the El-Sayed–Rogers Senate race and now a bit of the Kansas Senate race. And so when I see people speak and I think about the electorate in those places, then I sort of get these gut feelings that I try to go with. So I just haven't been following some of them enough to put more money on. And then the final point you made was, how do I take into account the fact that some of these races would drag on? And I would say I'm not using that as a data point. I don't know which states would be more or less likely to litigate, have more liberal or more conservative recount rules and stuff. I wish I was that advanced, but I'm just simply not. I wish I could claim to be, but I'm not.

20:33 Andrew: All right, fair enough. Well, should we talk about new bets, or do you want to go old bets first? Because I just put on a new bet. But I'm happy to hear old bets first.

20:45 Matt: Yeah, let's just do it. I think the election is going to be exciting. I'm planning to drink some coffee and stay up late, but we're going to keep this episode focused only on politics, and of course Captain Picard, and no sports. But we did have five bets resolved since the last time that we talked. So we had two NFL bets on week two. You took the Ravens at minus six point five. I took the Chiefs at minus six point five, way back in week two. And I believe we both lost those bets. So we both put in a loss. You lost one. I lost three point two four units. I also sold part of my "Will the US confirm that aliens exist before 2027." I sold off about twenty percent of that bet at a bit of a profit, in order to actually get funds to put on the election. I just think I can get a better ROI. So I sold some of that, although I'm holding about eighty percent of it. And what else, there was one more. Oh, okay. The big one. So I did bet on R Senate, D House at forty cents. That was way back in episode nine. And I put twenty units on it. So I dumped all the units at twenty-eight cents. So I actually lost two point four units just because I changed my convictions, basically. So I'm jumping ship. And now I have put so much on the other side that I think I will write that up. So I think I'm going to put about one hundred units, between one hundred and one hundred and fifty units, on now the Dem sweep. So those are the ones that we settled since then. Unfortunately not great news for us in our prognosticating.

22:23 Andrew: Yeah. Not great at all. Sorry about that, world. Let's talk about new bets then. Let's be optimistic about the future, sir. Let's boldly go where no bettor has gone before. What are you thinking for this week? Well, I'm doing two things. So first of all, I think I probably just put one unit on Kansas. I don't know anything about the race. So this is a horrible way to bet, but I put money on the Dem to win because that got me kind of excited. Actually, to be fair, I put a limit order in at fifty-one cents. So I'm waiting for that to fill, because I think I had fees on Polymarket, I didn't want to do that. But I also just opened up sports, because we were talking about the NFL and because we were talking about how I lost last time, and you lost as well. And the Las Vegas Raiders are underdogs against the New York Jets, which, there's no world in my mind where any team is an underdog to the New York Jets this year.

23:22 Matt: I have to read up on this game. Do you know why the Raiders would be underdogs?

23:28 Andrew: I don't have any good answer for you there. Well, it doesn't matter, I don't care. I think the Jets suck and they always suck. And so I'm putting two units on the Raiders to win this week. Just the moneyline. The moneyline is forty-seven cents. The spread is one and a half. So it's a close game, but I think the Raiders are going to win because the Jets suck and that's that.

23:52 Matt: All right. I feel like you should bet more on the Kansas race. By the way, Hamilton is the Democrat. Nate Silver has it more like a sixty percent chance that the Democrat's going to win. So you're getting even money on what the world's premier expert—

24:07 Andrew: Yeah. That just feels like a split. But in a reddish state, that just feels like one of the litigators that'll just get dragged on. But maybe you're right. Maybe I'll look at it and see if I can do it. But are you going to bet on this week?

24:23 Matt: Yeah. So I'm doing a couple of things. Let me pull up my sheet here. So I'm going to go on record and say I'm going to put up one hundred units on Dem sweep of both the House and the Senate, by proxy. I'm also betting on Dem to control the Senate, because I think the Democrats are going to win the House, it's almost a sure thing as far as the prediction markets go. So you don't get much more value by separating it out. And since I talked about it a bunch, I'm going to do the El-Sayed. So currently I have four units on it, but I'll probably try to triple that or so, probably do like twelve to fifteen units on that. So those are my two, all politics: Dem sweep and El-Sayed to win Michigan. And then I'm not sure if I'll do these officially, but I also want to talk briefly about the number of seats. Polymarket has a cool market where you can bet on the exact number of seats, for example, that Republicans will hold. And then obviously the converse is for Democrats. So I'm also betting on Republicans to hold exactly forty-eight seats and exactly fifty seats. So fifty seats obviously would mean that the Democrats didn't sweep, because the vice president would then break the tie in the Republicans' favor. So I'm buying that as a hedge. So I won't make that an official bet, it's for my own pocketbook. But for Republicans to hold exactly forty-eight seats, meaning Democrats or independents who caucus with Democrats hold fifty-two, I'm buying that at fourteen cents. And I'll probably put a couple of units on that, because that'd be a nice little way to win extra if I can get on it. So those are my three: Dem sweep, El-Sayed to win Michigan, Republicans to hold exactly forty-eight seats after the election in the Senate.

26:07 Andrew: All right. And that's that. And remind me, where are you watching the election?

26:11 Matt: So my brother and I are taking the train from Chicago. We're going old school. We rented a little room. We're going to pack a cooler full of beers, and we're going to get a little bit liquored up and make even more bets on the election. At least I am. He'll probably play Call of Duty. So we're going to ride the train to Kansas City and I'm going to go to his house. He just bought a really nice new house and it's going to be my first time seeing it. So I have my little guest bedroom and I'm going to stay there. And we're going to watch Monday Night Football on Monday. And then he's going to take off work on Tuesday and we're going to be nerds about the election together.

26:55 Andrew: Oh, that sounds great. Well, I'm jealous to be in the US watching. I will be in Asia, in the wrong time zone, which means that I wake up basically when the polls close and I don't have to stay up late watching. It'll just eat away at my day all day long. And then we'll see how long that eating away lasts. Could be months and months. Or the whole country, including the people in charge of certifying results, could just say, this is ridiculous and we're tired of it and go away, old man. And we move on. We'll see.

27:28 Matt: Actually, you know what, that brings me to two points. First of all, I also feel a little bit melancholy that we're not going to watch together. I know we had talked about it. I do wish that we could have done that. Definitely in 2028 we have to prioritize it. But what I did want to say is, how about you and I make a side bet on when we'll know who controls the House and the Senate. Let's just say both. So we'll have extreme clarity on who controls both. Maybe not the exact numbers, because if Democrats are so slow to count in California but we already know that they've picked up twenty-five seats, it doesn't matter because they already control the House. You understand what I'm saying? So I will put the over-under on November tenth. Do you think we will know before or after midnight strikes on November tenth who controls both houses of Congress?

28:19 Andrew: Well, my question is, what's the oracle? Who's the resolver here? What do we trust? What's our source?

28:25 Matt: Good question. I'm going to propose Fox News. And I'll tell you, Fox News officially says that X number of seats are in, the majority number of seats are in the hands of whatever party. And we both understand what that means. So we can be reasonable about that.

28:41 Andrew: Okay. I will take that. I will say definitely the over, or actually, you know what—

28:46 Matt: Let's do this. Okay, I've said Fox News because I know I crap a little bit on Fox News, but I think they have a really good statistician. I think their election coverage is actually really good. And I tend to watch them. I think CNN doesn't know anything about math, so I don't watch them. But what we could do is two out of three. I like the New York Times. I think they do a lot of really good election coverage. So New York Times, Fox News, and then Decision Desk HQ. I think that's a more nonpartisan one. We could do two out of three of those. How about that?

29:22 Andrew: Okay, two out of three. I still think the over. I'll take over on November tenth.

29:27 Matt: Okay. So anytime after the clock strikes midnight. What time zone are we using?

29:32 Andrew: Let's use London time. Let's be easy and use UTC plus zero.

29:36 Matt: Plus zero. November tenth. What's the bet then? I say past that—

29:40 Andrew: Yeah. And you say under. I'm going to say anytime after that day. What are we betting? What do you want to wager? Going to wager a steak, a wine, or some back scratches?

29:50 Matt: Oh yeah. That's true. It should be something fun. Well, when are you going to come out here again? When am I going to see you?

29:59 Andrew: I'm supposed to fly on November twenty-ninth. I'm supposed to be there the whole week of November thirtieth to December sixth.

30:06 Matt: Let's do it anyway. I don't think we've ever done it. Should we do a boozy brunch?

30:11 Andrew: Oh, I like that. I like that a lot. Sure. Boozy brunch. I think it'd be fun. Okay. You're on. Loser picks and loser pays.

30:19 Matt: Sounds good. Picks the place. All right. Cool. Thanks for your time. Let's keep in touch during the election. Good luck to everyone. And it's a good final, let's say I want to say a PSA about the election and voting. No matter who you support or whatever candidate you support, I want everyone to get out there and realize that voting is completely pointless and that you shouldn't vote, because it doesn't change anything and it doesn't matter.

30:44 Andrew: Yeah. And I'd like to say just really quickly, go out and vote. It's important. And it's the only way you can participate in the world as it changes around you. So, let's agree to disagree, Matt. Enjoy your travels and I will see you, probably for some drinking around noon, in a few weeks.

31:02 Matt: Absolutely. Talk to you soon. All right. Bye, everybody.