u wake up in a ditch, well then you've got a drinking problem. If you had two drinks on the weekend with your friends and then took an Uber home, we would mostly say you're just somebody who has a hobby and you don't have a problem. But don't you think TDS is exactly like that? If somebody simply prefers a Democrat over Trump, I would say, "Oh, well, that's just a political preference." But if somebody is crying and shaking and they feel like he's going to become a king and he's going to lock people up in prison camps, isn't that interfering with your actual life and happiness? And wouldn't that be super easy to diagnose if you were a therapist?

So in my opinion, we have everything we need, which is it's easy to diagnose. You know, do you have a worry that Trump is president and that he'll do terrible things? Do you believe things that are real or do you believe things that are imaginary? And you don't even need that part. You could just say, does it affect your life? You know, do you wake up in the morning shaking and crying? If the answer is yes, then you've got a mental health disorder, I would think. So I feel like that really needs to be a legitimate mental health disorder. It would help.

Speaking of the Trump coalition, Trump also has trouble with the immigration issue because Trump had started out being as hardline as you could possibly be on immigration and that was keeping his coalition together because they were hardline on immigration too. But then when Trump said, "Well, maybe not the farm workers and the hotel hospitality people because they would be hard to replace." Then he lost a bunch of his followers who said, "What do you mean? There's no exceptions. If they're here illegally, they got to go." So apparently Trump has veered back to yes there will be raids on farms and hospitality places including I suppose Trump hotels I don't know but you remember the food company was it Valley Foods or somebody where the immigration people basically arrested half of the workforce or some big percentage and apparently they immediately got lots of job applicants from American-born people.

So if you were worried that there were no Americans who would apply for jobs if the foreign-born people who are not citizens get shipped or deported, we have one data point that says that it might not be a problem. I would argue that probably will depend a lot on where you are. So if you're living out, what state was that? Was it Iowa or something? I can't remember what state it was. But it could be that if you're in a rural situation, it's easier to fill those jobs. Maybe. I don't know. So we'll see about that. But Trump has a big problem. So he's either going to put farming and the hotel business out of business or maybe not out of business, but deeply inconvenienced. But as long as there are people who are American citizens who want to apply for those jobs immediately upon the openings, that might be in pretty good shape. So whether you're in favor of it or not in favor of it, it might be practical. So take that for what it's worth.

According to the Post Millennial, there's a poll that says a majority of Hispanic voters support Trump's deportation policies, which we've heard before, but it's good that it's consistent. This is the survey by the League of American Workers and Technometrica Institute of Policy and Politics. 53% of Hispanic voters say they somewhat or strongly support increasing deportations, especially ones with criminal records, but that part's easy. So overall six in 10 registered voters back the Trump deportation plans. So he's still in good shape there.

According to Blaze Media, and I guess this comes from the Trump administration, there are 1 million illegal aliens who have reportedly self-deported. Now, my question would be this. Is there anything about the group that is self-deporting that would be some kind of a common theme? So my question is would the worst, let's say the people who have done more crimes than just coming into the country illegally, do you think they would be the ones who would be self-deporting because they wouldn't want to go to jail or would it be the ones who want to have the highest odds of coming in legally because apparently if you self-deport you maintain your ability to come back through a legal process. So do you think the million people who allegedly self-deported are the worst people, you know, the criminal types who are trying to avoid getting arrested? Or are they the most law-abiding types who are using a process that keeps all their options open? I don't know, but I'm sure most of you don't care. It would be great if it was mostly the criminals who left, but that would be a lot to ask.

In other news, FBI Director Kash Patel is reporting that the FBI has located documents that detail allegations that China tried to print a bunch of fake mail-in ballots for our 2020 US election. Now, Just the News has this story if you want to read up on it. John Solomon. But they say that newly declassified intelligence reports partially corroborate but it was recalled before it was fully investigated. So we don't have confirmation, but there's a strong suggestion that China might have been involved in trying to rig our elections and that China allegedly had mass-produced fake US drivers licenses as part of their scheme to get the fake mail-in ballots and then vote for Joe Biden.

Now, do you think China would have cared enough about who was president that they would think about rigging our election? I don't know. It feels like something like this would be too big a risk because imagine if we caught them. That would be a pretty big problem for China. So I'm going to say that the odds of this being confirmed at some point are less than 50%. So maybe it's true, you know, and we kind of want to believe it's true, but I'm going to say that probably the reason it was only partially corroborated and it was dropped is that maybe there wasn't enough. It just wasn't credible enough. But we'll see. We'll see. I could be wrong. But it doesn't feel like the type of thing that China would do because it would be too easy to detect their presence like that. The risk of getting caught would be beyond whatever the benefit would be. So I don't know. I'm not buying this one entirely.

Well, as you know, the Fed has been holding tight on interest rates when a lot of people want them to be cut. The Wall Street Journal says that the reason that the Fed is not cutting rates is that they're still waiting on a combination of inflation numbers and job numbers and they want to see how the tariffs play out in terms of the public's expectation that the tariffs will increase prices. That would be part of inflation. So according to the Wall Street Journal, the only thing keeping the Fed from lowering interest rates is the uncertainty around jobs and inflation and tariffs. Maybe that could be the entire answer.

But if you like the All-In pod and you follow Chamath who I believe should be known only by his first name, you know, like Madonna or Cher. But Chamath said he thinks that the only reason is political and he could be right about that too because there's always a reason. You know, you could always say, well, you know, that inflation number, well, those tariffs, oh, well, we don't know about the jobs number. So you could always make up a reason for why you're either moving the rates or not moving them, but it does feel political, doesn't it? It does feel like Powell is not the biggest fan of Trump. And there's a lot at risk as Chamath points out. Just the savings in interest that we pay on our debt could be like $300 billion a year with just an interest rate change. So it's really big. It could be the difference between the United States stays a viable country and it doesn't. So we'll see.

Apparently OpenAI just got a big old contract with the government, a $200 million US defense contract. Now, Mike Benz points out in a post on X that he goes, "And now you know why OpenAI recruited the head of the NSA to its board last year. The biggest money in private business is always in looting the Pentagon's infinite taxpayer money glitch." So the implication is that OpenAI is cooperating with the government and the government is cooperating back.

Now, remember how we heard that the CIA had said that they were only going to allow a few big AI companies to succeed and that would be easier to control and manage and obviously OpenAI would be at the top of the list of ones that our government wants to succeed. So do you think it's a total accident that they get a gigantic government contract? Well, they might be the most capable of fulfilling the contract because it is OpenAI after all. So they're sort of a leader in the field. But this is one of those things where you kind of scratch your head and you say, "Huh, is this all connected or is it just that OpenAI has the best AI?" And the government looked at all of them and said, "Oh, this is the best one." We will never know. We'll never know.

In other news, Randi Weingarten, who is the head of the biggest teachers union, announced that she's quitting the DNC, the Democratic National Committee. Now, as Corey DeAngelis asks on X post, why didn't the media ever mention that Randi Weingarten had a position at the Democratic National Committee? And more to the point, if Corey DeAngelis didn't know that Randi Weingarten was on the Democratic National Committee, who would? I mean he's about as plugged into the whole school choice teachers union situation as anybody could be. He didn't know. So it makes me wonder was Randi Weingarten mostly a Democrat who was also the head of the teachers union or was she on the teachers union and also a Democrat? It does seem to me that the head of the teachers union should probably not be on the Democratic National Committee, but I guess she had a reason to leave, so it doesn't matter now. It's kind of a bother that we didn't know it though. Doesn't it bother you that we didn't know that? That was pretty important to know and we didn't.

According to the Post Millennial, the O'Keefe Media Group has determined that some of the protesters for the No Kings protest were being paid by some communist group. They were being paid to protest, but they were paid 20 bucks. $20. So here's the problem with a communist plot. The communists don't have enough money to buy anything good. They're like, "Hey, how would you like to spend the entire day out in the sun protesting something that doesn't even exist, kings? A totally imaginary problem, and we'll give you $20." How many of you would protest all day in the sun for $20? I feel like the communists have a little bit of a model problem there. I don't know what it would take, but I'm thinking $200 might get somebody to walk around in the sun for an afternoon, but $20. What would you do for $20? Not much. Anyway, communists do not pay competitive fees.

Well, the publication Nature, that's a science publication, is going to now require that the peer-reviewed papers show not just that they're peer-reviewed, but that they show the communication back and forth between the peer reviewer and the submitter. So that feels like a good upgrade. So you could see just how close they were, what changes they had to make to get published. I don't know if that's the answer, but at the moment something like 50% of all peer-reviewed papers turn out to be not reproducible, as in not really science. So if they can improve on the coin flip nature of it, which is what it is now, then it's worth a try. So I don't know if this will work, but definitely worth a shot.

All right, in other news, Texas is apparent