t winning the general you know the general vote. They just have to win in the key states. So that would suggest that Trump probably has like an overwhelming advantage in winning the election because if he's at two points ahead in the general that would be better than basically any Republican has done since Reagan.

Give me a history fact check. When was the last time if ever a Republican won the election and also won the popular vote? When's the last time? Oh was it Bush? No George Bush. Did George Bush Jr. win the popular vote? Bush in 04. All right well it does happen but so far it has accurately predicted you know anywhere that a Republican won the popular vote they also won the election right? Is that right? Let's check that. Every time the Republican won the popular vote they also won the election. True. And won it handily. If they won the popular vote they didn't just win the election they won it like really. They won it by a lot right? I think that's true.

So we have a situation that guarantees civil war because either Trump wins and the bad guys create a civil war to stop it or Trump loses and his supporters start a civil war because it looks rigged. It's hard to avoid the civil war this time isn't it? Now I'm using hyperbole. I don't think there'll be a civil war. I don't think there's a civil war either way. I think we just complain a lot and do what we can in courts like always.

So you know that weight loss drug that's a big deal. You get the injections. I think Ozempic is one but there are others in the same category. And apparently they really really work and people lose weight. But believe it or not this is the conversation that's happening. Whether or not these shots should be considered a lifetime treatment because apparently as soon as people stop taking the shots two-thirds of them gain back all the weight in the year. Two-thirds. So the medical community is debating whether it should be treated like diabetes which is once you have it you have it so it's lifetime you know like high blood pressure. Once you have it you have it so you just always take the blood pressure pills.

Now is everybody okay with that? Isn't there something wrong with this reasoning by analogy? All right so it's permanent for diabetes and hypertension. Now obviously if you're if you somehow showed as non-diabetic or you somehow showed as no longer having hypertension they'd stop. But generally speaking the assumption is you're just doing it forever. Isn't that different than eating? Because I'm most positive people can eat less. Like by you know if they could eat less. If you lost a bunch of weight with Ozempic and then you got off it so your hunger came back it's not impossible for you to find another way to stop eating is it? Like a diet you know the way everybody else does it.

Now I don't do fat shaming because I don't believe in free will but since it's a real thing that people can keep weight off without drugs shouldn't you always take them off it after a year? Am I wrong about that? I would think that 100% of the time you'd say I'm going to do this for let's say two years. I'm going to do this for two years and then we'r