something that's real. So it could be that Boeing is just saying whether DEI was good or bad we can't handle the heat because as long as we're making mistakes and we're focusing on DEI those two things can't happen at the same time. So we're going to have to do something different. The fastest thing you can do different is get rid of your DEI because it takes much longer to fix all your problems. So if you at least get rid of DEI then everybody watching can say, hey what about all those problems? And then you can say, look what I've done. You were right about that DEI. That could have been a distraction.

Now again I term it as a distraction. It's not about anybody's genes or it's not about that. It's just a distraction to a company. They should be looking for skill first and nothing else. So this is really big. So kudos to Robbie Starbuck for his direct activism to cause that to happen and Christopher Rufo. Both of them working independently but you know of course in some ways coordinated I suppose. They're independent. They made that happen I think. And I think they should be taking a big victory lap on this because when somebody like Boeing can do something like this the big news is that they made it safe. Because if tomorrow Boeing is still in business and if a year from now things are going better, other companies are going to say we're getting a lot of complaints so maybe we can make a big change.

So congratulations to Boeing for showing consciousness. They predicted what would happen with DEI. They predicted wrong. They saw that it didn't work out and they corrected it. This is consciousness. This is awake. Remember when everybody was saying woke woke woke? Woke was really asleep. This is awake. Literally conscious that they're making a prediction and they're adjusting based on the prediction. Consciousness coming from a company.

All right. Apparently according to The Daily Wire the Biden-Harris administration has pushed 500 separate DEI actions into the government, trying to insert DEI into every fabric of the government. That is going to give the new Trump administration a lot of work to get rid of every single one of them, which I believe happens on day one. So if you would like every single one of the 500 DEI actions that no doubt would ruin the country if we left them there, no doubt it'd be just like Boeing again. It'd be a distraction. Has nothing to do with anybody's genes or anything like that. So that's a big target but it's one that I think Trump could hit with one executive order. One executive order: you will not treat people differently based on their race or you will be fired immediately. That's all it takes and all 500 actions should disappear at the same time.

I just saw this story so I don't know the details but apparently, I saw this on the Amuse account on X, the post office typically always did electronic images of the mail. You know they're taking a picture of it at the same time they're processing it. And apparently they've decided just this year, this is new, that they will not image the mail-in ballots. The exception to the imaging, I don't know, there might be other exceptions, but they made an exception this year that they're not going to image the ballots. Do you know what capability that takes away? That takes away the ability to know if the number of ballots that were received by whoever receives the ballots is the same number that were sent. It eliminates the audit trail. I don't think they could send a signal any stronger than that, that they don't plan to have a real election. They're getting rid of the audit trail a week before the actual vote.

Now maybe, like I said, I just saw the headline so maybe there's some detail that makes sense. So there might be more context to it. So I don't want to get too far ahead of myself on this. There might be fog of war. You know there's actually some reason to do it that's just not obvious on the surface. But really, a week before the election, that's when you decided to do this? How could it possibly be legitimate? It just looks like laughingly ridiculously corrupt. But who knows.

According to Scientific American we have a good idea of why our polling for politics is weird and wrong. Did you ever wonder why it seems weird and wrong? Well here's some good reasons. Number one, the people who are willing to answer polls are more and more different from normal people than at any time in history. So the more normal you are the less likely you're going to talk to a pollster. So if you're in the polling business you went from your business would be randomly calling people and you get a bunch of normal people and they answer. But the people who are willing to answer or even willing to pick up a landline and then also willing to answer honestly keeps shrinking.

So do you know what the pollsters do to compensate for the fact that the people they're talking to are not a representative sample? Guess what? Do you think they do? If they know that the representative sample is no longer representative what do they do? Do they go out of business? They stop creating p