Dueling Presidential interviews, SpaceX's big catch, Robotaxis, Uber buying Expedia?, Nuclear NIMBY

**Chamath Palihapitiya** (0:00)
Friedberg is channeling Tim Walls over there.

**Jason Calacanis** (0:01)
I know.

**David Friedberg** (0:02)
Wow, he's as excited as Tim Walls.

**Chamath Palihapitiya** (0:04)
Got your flannel on. Do you know what a venture capitalist is, Friedberg?

**David Sacks** (0:07)
Oh, he's shilling SuperGut.

**David Friedberg** (0:09)
Well, as of last week, when Jay Cal decided to turn All-In into a commercial, I was actually going to do a SuperGut background. We're launching SuperGut nationwide in Target this week. Any Target in the United States, you can go into and pick up SuperGut. You can buy the GLP-1 booster. You can buy the prebiotic shake.

**Jason Calacanis** (0:29)
I have that, actually. Is that the chocolate? Or do you have the mocha? This one's chocolate. Mocha is good too.

**David Friedberg** (0:35)
All right. Let's get started. Thanks for the support, Jay Cal.

**Jason Calacanis** (0:37)
I appreciate it. Of course. Of course.

**David Sacks** (0:39)
We're cutting all this out.

**David Friedberg** (0:41)
No way. This is why I do this.

**David Sacks** (0:43)
Next time, plug a company. I have a stake in.

**Jason Calacanis** (1:03)
Also, All-In Election Night live stream is coming November 5th. You can watch live. Sacks will be hosting.

**David Sacks** (1:09)
Oh, we're doing that?

**Jason Calacanis** (1:10)
We're doing it. You're hosting it. Your team said you're doing it. And so, you'll either get to see Sacks.

**David Friedberg** (1:15)
Are you not going to Mar-a-Lago, Sacks?

**David Sacks** (1:17)
Well, if things continue to look good for Trump, I might go to Mar-a-Lago.

**Jason Calacanis** (1:22)
Oh, I see.

**David Friedberg** (1:24)
Yeah.

**Jason Calacanis** (1:24)
Okay, so you're maybe.

**David Friedberg** (1:25)
Let's not commit Sacks. You're maybe. If you go to Mar-a-Lago, you're excused.

**David Sacks** (1:28)
I could live stream for Mar-a-Lago.

**David Friedberg** (1:30)
Oh, that would be amazing. That would be amazing.

**Jason Calacanis** (1:32)
I'll go to Mar-a-Lago. That would be fun. Yeah, if it looks good, I'll go. So maybe that's... I'll just go.

**David Friedberg** (1:37)
Jason's like, I'll just go. Of course I'm invited.

**Jason Calacanis** (1:39)
I talked to Jared.

**David Sacks** (1:40)
I mean, if things look as good as they do right now, then I think I'm going to have to go to Mar-a-Lago.

**Chamath Palihapitiya** (1:44)
I think we should all be in Mar-a-Lago.

**David Sacks** (1:45)
It's going to be a unique experience.

**Jason Calacanis** (1:47)
Oh my God. Can you imagine being in Mar-a-Lago and he loses? Oh my God.

**David Sacks** (1:52)
That would be dark. Unless this thing is in the back. It's got to be too big to rig. If it's too big to rig, I'm going to Mar-a-Lago.

**Jason Calacanis** (1:58)
Too big to rig.

**David Friedberg** (2:01)
Do you guys think Polymarket is like... Why do you think it's different from the polls? Are we talking about this today? Polymarket's showing like 60-40 or 65-35 now, right?

**David Sacks** (2:12)
Yeah, because we're measuring different things. I've explained this before. Polymarket is people betting on the outcome, so 58% think Trump's going to win, whereas the polls in a particular state show the percentage of how each person's going to vote. If for sure you knew the election was 51-49, the betting markets would swing to 100-0.

**David Friedberg** (2:32)
But let me ask you this. Nate Silver's model, which takes the poll from each state and builds a Monte Carlo of super poll, like a supermodel for the whole country. Why is his estimate 50-50 right now while the polly market is betting at 60-40?

**David Sacks** (2:50)
It's possible he's laggy in his estimates. In the betting markets. The betting markets seem to go based on momentum. So it indicates the swing in momentum.

**David Friedberg** (3:03)
How do you think things are going to change after the interviews the last couple of days? Trump on Bloomberg and Kamala on Fox. Do you think those are going to change anything?

**Jason Calacanis** (3:11)
I don't think so. I think it's all baked in now.

**David Sacks** (3:15)
Well Trump over the past few weeks seems to have had a surge owing to the fact that Kamala's interviews generally don't go well. So I think she started off a little behind, started doing interviews to catch up and now she's a lot behind. I don't think the Bear interview is going to help her.

**David Friedberg** (3:30)
Well let me ask you this. So my observation as, I don't know, I'm not like a super political person or whatever, or a party-oriented person. I looked at a lot of the media on both sides, and it seems like everyone on the left says, Kamala did an amazing job on Fox. She defended herself, she showed her skills and her competency. Then everyone on the right is like, she embarrassed herself, she fell apart. Then the same thing happened with the Trump interview on Bloomberg. People are like, on the left, they say, look at how he couldn't handle the interviewer, and he fell apart and all his lies were exposed. Everyone on the right is like, look at him, he got a standing ovation. It's almost like everyone's just kind of like self-asserting their beliefs that they already hold when they judge these people on these interview shows at this point. Is it already baked at this point? Is anyone actually going to change their view based on these interviews happening?