A (3:20)

Right. Did you have to convince CNN to give you this beat or were they like, we need someone to do this and then they found you?

B (3:28)

No, I definitely pitched it. And I luckily had those clips from summer internships and also from freelancing during college where I was able to point to this and say, there actually are a lot of stories to tell when it comes to young people and their politics. So I came up with the idea. I had written my senior thesis in college on the role of social media and youth led social movements. And it was not academic at all and it was purely journalistic. And so that was also something I had in sort of my bucket of clips and leaned into it and they saw the value in it and I was really grateful for that and still am.

A (4:04)

So you have this sort of breakthrough with kind of the two Gen Z's theory. Is it one of those things where you had been thinking about it for a long time and then you rolled it out? Or were you just one day standing somewhere like, oh, this is what it is.

B (4:17)

So I had been hearing in listening sessions since 2022. I would say that's really when I started doing these listening sessions and I was going to campuses and I remember one, one trip in particular, I was in Colorado and I was in a pretty conservative part of Colorado and I went to a high school and then a college and I saw a difference in how that it was within hours, the way that the high school students were talking about their experience during COVID and the fact that they had literally just come back to school and there was all this division within their class over things like mask mandates, and there was a gender gap that was forming and there was a different relationship to religion. And then I went to the college and the way that students were talking about it just felt very different. And so that was in 2022 then.

A (5:01)

And what was that? So, like, initial observation, okay, so the high school students were acting in one way, the college students in another. And you're like, oh, here's how they each see things kind of.

B (5:10)

I mean, those. That was just like the earliest manifestation of these slight differences in behavior that I felt were related to age and how old they were during the pandemic, and also their relationship to social media platforms like TikTok and Instagram. And then. But that was only in 2022. And I posted that viral post on X in 2025. So it took time. Then, I would say, during the lead up to the 2024 election, I went to a ton of campuses and I was talking with all different types of students, but also non students, and continued to see these different manifestations of both the issues that students would talk about, but also just kind of the tone and tenor of how they felt about politics and this more sort of anti establishment ethos that I felt younger gen zers were honing in particular. And then I had a. So I had written about.

A (6:05)

And that's just to understand, that's because the older gen zers had more life experience before COVID So they had a perspective that was a little more. A little more faith and a little more institutional because they hadn't had this massive disruption at sort of the most inopportune time. Like my daughter was in eighth grade when Covid hit and it was disaster. It just couldn't have been the worst possible time for that all to happen. And so I imagine her perspective is very different than someone who had already kind of lived a little more of life at that point.

B (6:37)

Yeah. And I think also it is that, you know, if you're in eighth grade, that's like peak adolescent puberty time. And so looking at the way that not being in school for months on end might impact someone who's in, let's say between sixth and eighth grade or ninth grade or even even up into high school versus a college student, that's a very different experience. Because if you're in college, you've already experienced living outside the home a little bit. You've had a taste of independence and maybe you went back to home and you were living with your parents, but the, the fact that for so many middle schoolers and high schoolers who had never had that taste of independence before were then strictly, you know, locked in their, in their rooms, essentially just scrolling all day long and having that lack of social isolation, I think that played a big difference.

A (7:27)

But did that harden? So like someone who say 18, 19, 20 now and was kind of in that peak age group that you described, obviously Covid's been over for a couple of years. Did they revert to the mean or did the kind of the way that they were the form, was it so formative that it kind of just locked in?

B (7:45)

I think that when it comes to the psychological anti establishment posture, I think that that's going obviously we don't know yet. I mean, it's been, it's too recent of history that we don't know the arc of what having that sort of those years of school ripped away from you will do or years of socialization ripped away from you will do in the long term. But I think when it comes to the political landscape we're seeing, you know, there was a movement amongst young people to the right in 2024 in support for Trump. We are seeing that they are very quickly moving away from Trump. That doesn't mean they're moving towards Democrats, however.

A (8:21)

Right. Does it not? And I, this is in my sort of political experience, broader than just this generation or the size of this generation, which is in order to run for office, you have to say, everything is bad and I will fix it. Right? That is literally how every campaign in the history of time has pretty much gotten right. And then you take office and the combination of just all the structural impediments to actually fixing anything. The reality is that even if you had a totally well intentioned ethical everything, president, governor, mayor, things just can't change in, you know, this usually the cycle of one term and then obviously you put in the chaos of now and then layer in the culture of extremism, finger pointing and screaming and nothing getting done. And we're just gonna be in this for a while, at least. On the executive branch, endless pendulum shifts where someone gets into office, they invariably don't provide the change they said they would. Everyone says you lied and they throw them out. Like I would bet right now on Calshi or one of those preaching markets on the generic Democrat for 28, almost regardless of who it is, other than maybe AOC because I just think they will be the change candidate by not being the incumbent and therefore people. And then by the way, I'd probably already lay a bet on the 2032 Republican.

B (9:41)

Yeah.

A (9:41)

Candidate. What do you think of that?

B (9:43)

I've been thinking a lot about this because not only are all of those factors that you just mentioned true, but on top of that, when, when you're thinking about young voters in particular, we're a generation that's been raised on instant gratification. We can have anything delivered within, especially if you live in a city within, you know, 20 minutes, unless it's a snowstorm you can have, you're in constant contact with anyone, you can call someone and get information that you want or use ChatGPT and figure it out in seconds. And so we're very used to things happening very quickly and that's not how politics works. And so I've been thinking a lot about is it going to be a constant ping pong back and forth where one cycle young voters are leaning more to the left, the next cycle they're leaning more to the right simply off of this idea that you mentioned of they saw a problem, it wasn't fixed up, it's up to the next guy to fix it.

A (10:30)

So tell me if my, I have kind of a, you know, you heard me talk about mobile voting when we did the event together here the other night, kind of a second order thesis that didn't get into the event. But tell me if you think it's right because it really is aimed at your specific area of work and study, which is so right now, and I think this has basically been the case since the Vietnam War. Trust in institutions of every kind, yes government, but media, higher ed, Wall street, the church, all of that has obviously plummeted. There's nothing new in that statement. And because of all the factors that you just laid out, it is incredibly hard to get out of that downward spiral. And so it just kind of gets worse and worse. But part of that is because at least on the governmental side, if you accept that politicians are always going to look out for their next election out of everything else in 30 odd years in politics at every level is maybe be pretty convinced that's the case, you're not going to change their human nature then in a world where they are effectively forced to represent, you know, the 10% who vote on the primary on either side, who tend to be the extremes and whatever special interests can intimidate, who can intimidate them or buy them off, it's Basically impossible to get anything done because if they dare to work together, like when I worked in the Senate for schumer, it was 2000, 2002, it was pre social media. And even back then it wasn't great. But he could go meet with Lindsey Graham or whoever without it being like publicly known within seconds of him walking in that door. And without the fucking base on both sides going crazy like, how dare you meet with a Republican or to Lindsey Graham, how dare you meet with a Democrat. And as a result there was at least some potential to try to work together.

B (12:04)

Yeah.

A (12:05)

And that is kind of gone right now because they're held hostage by these extremes. So my theory may be wrong, is if we can go to where the people are and let them vote from the thing that they're already spending all day working on and that gets primaries, Toronto from 10 to 30, 35, whatever it is, by definition it gives politicians a little more room to work together because now they're representing a bigger percentage of the electorate than just the extremes. And then, and this is sort of the second order piece, let's say that one of two things or two things happen. One, they can get a little more done because it's not as verboten to try to calm compromise. But two, maybe just as important, state and local government don't feel so extreme, right, Whether that's the city of Portland on the left or the state of Texas on the right. It, you know, when something is totally one sided, it feels off to everybody. So if those become a little more moderate and a little more can get done, the question is, does that start to change perceptions by say Gen Z, Gen Alpha even of like, okay, maybe things can get a little better. I will continue to vote. I might try to work in government, I'll run for office, I'll volunteer, I'll go to church, Whatever it is I'm trying to think about, how do you sort of reverse engineer this thing? Is it possible?

B (13:25)

Yeah. So just to zoom out for a second, I think that in these listening sessions I have with Gen Zers, we actually hear a massive appetite for conversations across party line. They want politicians to work with others on the opposite side of the aisle. There's a real hunger for this because they have only grown up in Trump's America, which has been hyper polarized and they want something different. And we did these 20, 26 prediction listening sessions and the number one thing that respondents on both sides of the political spectrum and those who consider themselves to be independent, which is actually the majority of Gen Z they said, what we're looking for in 2026 is any message that goes beyond Trump on both the left and like, stop talking about this guy. Stop talking about how divided everything is. Let's talk about solutions. So I think there's a real appetite for, for something other than the hyperpolarized norm. That is all they know. Beyond that, like I said, the majority of young people are independents and don't want anything to do with either political party because they hate both of them. They think both are crumbling. Are, are, are just not working for the everyday American person. Are neither of them are in our American's best interest. Then I think on top of that, I would actually argue that young people have higher trust in local government and in what's happening in their cities or their specific communities than the national level. And I think that they are.

A (14:54)

Yeah, what you want to.

B (14:55)

No, I think that they are engaged in politics more so despite being disillusioned, despite being frustrated, like I said at the top of our episode here, young people are voting at relatively high rates compared to generations of young people before them. And even compared to just a few years ago, even in what's typically considered, quote, unquote, off year elections, for example, there was higher youth voter turnout in, in New York City, in New Jersey and in Virginia in the 2025 elections than there was in 2021. So these numbers are continuing to rise, which is shocking considering how distrusting young people are of, of the system of politics in general. I think that the more that there is a focus on consensus on a local level and on issues that are being solved at a local level, the more young people see their act, their, their, their actions turning into policy.

A (15:47)

So I could sort of see this go cut in one of two ways, which is things can get done much more local level. It's less ideological, it's less partisan. You know, there's that famous saying, there's no Republican or Democratic way to pick up the trash. Right. But at the same time, I could see kind of one of two reasons why what you're saying is right. One would be things like the EMBI movement would imply that young people see, hey, at the local level you can actually get some stuff done. So if I engage here, it can be productive and a good use of my time. It's also, by the way, fun to work with other like minded people who care about something and change. Like that's what kind of makes life. That's the good stuff, right?

B (16:30)

Yeah.

A (16:30)

The other side would be we live in a world where because everyone you're talking about is digitally native and media is so stratified, they're used to only hearing what they want to hear. And therefore when local government is hyper ideological like it is in a lot of cities on the mayoral side on the left, or like it is in a lot of states on the right, they're happy because they're hearing what they want to hear, regardless of whether or not that actually results in better city operations and governance.

B (17:00)

Yeah, I mean, I think that the echo chambers are also something that's massively frustrating. I think reality is that the voices that we oftentimes see on social media and that get amplified or the ones that go on tv, et cetera, are most often people from these political extremes. But that's not actually where the vast majority of people are. I know this is part of your theory of mobile voting too, is that it would allow for government to be more representative where the actual population is, rather than just primary voters. And I hear, hear that, but I think that, I think, you know, to go along with that, I guess, is what we hear is that there is actually, you know, young people are not as polarized as TikTok makes them seem to be and they wish that their politics was more reflective of that. So, yeah, I mean, I think if more like I agree with the premise that more people should vote in primaries, 100%, you know, that's we need as representative of democracy. That's the only way democracy works. At the same time, back when I was at CNN and I would go to deep Republican districts ahead of a primary and I would hear so much concern with the way that our elections are run. And I just. When it comes to the idea of mobile voting, I guess my question is how to instill trust.

A (18:16)

So that's. Yeah, it's a great question. That's why we're only starting it at a hyper local level. Right. So I don't. If someone said to me, oh, you can have this on the 20th for presidential, I'd say, no, I'm not interested. If it's school board, city council, great. That's when we're starting with, starting with Anchorage in April. Let's see how that stuff goes. Let's learn from it. You know, and by the way, it's not going to like the one country in the world that has this is Estonia. And in year one, 1.4% of people who could vote is Internet, not, not mobile, but did. So today it's the majority of people. Right. So it's going to take Time both in terms of participation and then kind of, you know, learning from it and then kind of moving it up the scale and we mean actually the presidential gets okay turnout. That might be the one you never needed for, right? Yeah, I'm really kind of worried about everything else. Look at a perfect world, you wouldn't have gerrymandering, general elections would be competitive and then parties really wouldn't matter at all. Supreme Court's made it pretty clear that's not going away. So then to me, the other option you have is a combination of open primaries. So because I'm an independent too, right? Like, and I'm disenfranchised in New York, I can't vote in the primaries. I just refuse to affiliate with a political party or if you can't do open primaries, if you start to at least incentivize politicians to better represent the whole and not think that the best thing they can do is only fight and get nothing done, then people might not be as opposed to registering for a party to begin with because they might not seem so abhorrent, right? So from an economic standpoint, if you were someone like me, you look at Gen Z and say, man, it must be fucking scary, right? You're afraid AI is going to take your jobs. The value of a four year higher ed degree is questionable. You're going to get loaded up with tons of student debt. The fundamental kind of tenets of the US economy are all being undermined right now. Whether it's, you know, an independent Fed and data or investment in R and D or free trade or anything else. So the things that have made the American economy traditionally strong are really being systematically undermined and weakened data centers are driving up your energy bills. So it seems really depressing from my perspective. Is that accurate though? Is that how people feel or is that just sort of like how you would look at it from the outside?

B (20:37)

Yes and no. There's definitely all of that anxiety. Economic anxiety is very, very, very present and almost more so than any other issue. I think a lot of the anxiety that young people feel is driven by economic pressure and insecurity at the same time. I still hear a lot of hope from young people and maybe that's because, you know, that's just how young people are wired and you need to have hope otherwise like you're not gonna be able to live. But you know, I think Gen Z gets characterized all the time as being doom and gloom and pessimistic and it not really what I hear. Yes, there is distrust, yes there is Frustration, yes, there is fear and uncertainty. And when we ask in our listening sessions, one of the most common questions we ask is when you think about the future, what does success look like to you? And they define success as just being economically stable or having quote, unquote financial freedom. I think there's a lot of focus on just making sure you can get by. And this is a quote I've been using for a long time. But Gen Z is not trying to thrive, they're just trying to survive.

A (21:37)

So that American dream of buying a house and all, that's not even.

B (21:40)

No, it looks really different. I mean, I think it depends on kind of where you land on the political spectrum too, how you feel about the idea of homeownership and the possibility of homeownership. And also it depends on socioeconomic situation and what is possible and what might be seen as something that is eventually possible. But I think regardless of whether or not someone hopes to buy or rent a home, everyone wants to be able to live in a home. And so that's definitely still part of the American dream. It just might mean renting rather than buying.

A (22:10)

Do you think some of the popularity of things like crypto, sports betting, derivatives, gambling, prediction markets, all that is because people think I don't need to try to save money by home because it's never going to happen. So I might as well either enjoy my disposable income now or just put it all on for a big score that could maybe change my life. Is that what's fueling that? Or do you think it's not driven by apathy, it's just sort of a popular thing to do?

B (22:37)

It is definitely a popular thing to do and I think there's a social pressure to it for sure. I mean, no one would be doing this if their friends weren't doing it. But at the same time, I think last year there was this a lot of talk and I wrote about the idea of sort of sweet treat culture, which is using disposable income on things that are good in the moment but don't have long term value. And I think sports betting could be seen as something similar or betting on a prediction market could be. It's something that, yes, it could pay off and it could have massive, it could change your life. But more often than not, it's just something you do in the moment and you end up losing the money. Similar. You know, you could say going and buying a $10 matcha like tastes good for a second, then it's gone. There's actually in our research, we've seen a shift away from that, where maybe it's the talk of economic uncertainty and the fact that all of these pressures that you just laid out are more present and relevant now than they were a year ago. But I've seen a shift into this sort of investment era where young people are looking to make bigger purchases on things that will last longer, whether that be a piece of technology from young women. I'm hearing a lot about jewelry, things that are longer term. And we're hearing also a big driver of expenses is either vacations and trips with friends or concert tickets.

A (24:00)

Experiences.

B (24:01)

Right, exactly. Things you can do with people, that the memory of it will last even if the night ends.

A (24:08)

Out of curiosity, what do you hear about crypto? Right. Because I was kind of wondering about this, where it is a phenomenon, but it's a currency not backed by economic fundamentals. Is it the kind of thing where people are still really into it and it kind of goes forever, or is it the kind of thing where you could see a world where gen Z in five years, 10 years? Yeah, I don't really care about that anymore.

B (24:31)

I think that, first of all, I would say that it's been mostly popular amongst young men. So there's a gender divide here.

A (24:38)

Sure.

B (24:38)

And I think that similar to what I mentioned about, you know, there's a social pressure, if all your friends are doing it, you're going to do it, too. I think that's definitely been a part of the crypto, the rising in crypto's popularity with young people, because it's something to talk about. And everyone, you know, even things like the meme coins, it's kind of a trendy thing to do. I think that initially, part of the reason why it resonated so much with young people is that it wasn't attached to the traditional institutions that we know. Young people have come to resentment. So that boosted its popularity. But I think that especially as the Trump administration has leaned so much into it and as it has become kind of coded as maga, I think that a lot of young people who are now skeptical of MAGA and who are skeptical of Trump have kind of associated the two. And I've done some asking about this in our research, and we've heard from some of those young men who might have been more bullish on it a few years ago that it just feels like another rug pull underneath them. So I think it depends kind of who is the champion of it and who is the one leading the charge with it. But I think that the fact that it's been so tied within this, Tied to this administration in the eyes of so many who aren't hyper educated in what it actually is and aren't fully versed in the industry, I think that some of those people have become more skeptical of it.

A (26:00)

And do you think that that is different than say, attitudes towards participating prediction market sports betting, meme stocks, derivatives, that kind of stuff, or do you think it's all kind of the same thing?

B (26:10)

No, I think they're different. I think that. I don't think prediction markets are seen as tied to one political party. I think that crypto is. I think Democrats really missed the ball on that. Yeah, but. And it's part of this bigger cultural shift that Democrats missed the ball on for the past many years.

A (26:27)

Why do you think they did?

B (26:29)

Too scared to experiment.

A (26:31)

And when you say too scared, what were they scared of?

B (26:34)

Of losing their. Their base, losing their power, which they did as well. So it didn't work in their favor.

A (26:45)

Yeah, I agree. They got stuck in a bubble and an ecosystem and they reinforced each other to the point where they were the only ones left and everyone else was somewhere else.

B (26:54)

Yeah. And I think when it comes to sort of establishment versus anti establishment, I think that they were so resistant to experimenting to. And yet at the same time also afraid of pissing off the more fringe of the party. And so by choosing kind of neither of the two paths, they ended up kind of not appealing to anyone at all. And I think this also is related to the fact that I think Democrats have been so scared to actually say what they mean. And this is still true. We're seeing this play out in primaries like the Texas Senate primary, where this policing of language or of things that can and cannot be said, it just ends up being. It ends up hurting themselves.

A (27:40)

Yeah. Do you see? I mean, we have a theory in this podcast where the. In the modern era, the presidency is won by the rock star, not the most qualified candidate. Right. So if you go through since 1980, Reagan, rock star. H.W. highly qualified, one term. Bill Clinton rock star. W. At least compared to Gore, kind of more rock star. Y. Right. Obama, rock star Trump, for all of his mishigash and craziness. Rock star. Right. Biden, highly. Putting aside the dementia, like highly qualified one term. And then back to Trump, rock star. And yet the Democrats live in a world of. Of academic pedigree and think tanks and all white papers. And whether it's ROM or aoc, although I worry about her in a general or Newsom I don't know what the personality type is, but if it's not a personality type that cuts through and it's just a resume and people who say all of the right words and worry about offending their staffs, they don't go on Joe Rogan, that's just another losing candidate. Do you agree with that?

B (28:48)

Definitely. And I think that you need to be able to ruffle some feathers in order to win an election in this modern day and age. And I think that Democrats have kind of plagued themselves by not being willing to do that, whereas Republicans are ruffling everyone's feathers every day.

A (29:01)

So is there of the 25, 30 people whose names get tossed around, if you were advising the. If Clinton and Obama and all the luminaries of the party came to you and said, all right, Rachel, who should we pick? Just, we just want to win. We don't care about anything else, what would your answer be?

B (29:20)

I hate this question.

A (29:21)

All right. Are there a couple of people that you stand out as, at least from a Gen Z perspective, Different?

B (29:30)

I can tell you the names that I've been hearing. I don't think. I think it's way too early to try to pick someone, because I think, honestly, I think it's gonna have to be someone who comes out of the woodwork a little bit, someone who doesn't have, you know, so much of a. Of a record to point to.

A (29:48)

Right.

B (29:48)

But the names that we have been hearing, I mean, AOC's name does get thrown around from young people, and so does Gavin Newsom. So does Kamala Harris still. I think, because they just see her as the leader of the party, not because they actually. Not that she's the leader of the party, but she was the last standard. She was the last. Yeah, she was the last person that they could choose. And so she's still. She's still up there. Bernie Sanders name is still. I mean, you know, he's. It's not gonna be him. But I think. I think the. The reality is, is that they're actually, like, looking for someone new. They don't know who the person is yet.

A (30:25)

Right.

B (30:26)

And the same thing goes on the right, by the way, I think that, you know, young people do not like J.D. vance. And so I think that certainly some do.

A (30:35)

But not more names to hear.

B (30:38)

I've heard recently. I think this is in part just because he's been so visible is Marco Rubio. I think they're similarly looking for new people on the right. I can't. I can't definitively say any names on either side.

A (30:54)

So I worry, though, that if you both take the institutional power of both parties, right, and then your old colleagues and say cnn, where it's like, this is how we do it and we're gonna write all our articles and who's winning or losing the horse race based on what SEIU did and who's filing with the most money and all this shit that voters don't care about at all, that it just, like there's the reality of at least that voters want someone, I think, who resonates with them in an intrinsic way beyond just talking points and resumes and whatever else. But journalists and kind of party insiders in D.C. want to keep doing it the way they do it because it's what they're comfortable with. And like you said, it's what gives them the most power. And so I kind of worry that Democrats, especially, they're more susceptible of the two, where they'll just sort of fall for again what they think that, you know, they're supposed to do. And then they'll, you know, even though I do think just because of the pendulum shift, they'll be. All right. Let me flip over, though, because we can stand this all day. Yeah, AI. So it could be political, but it could also just be broadly speaking. What do you hear and what are people excited about and what are people nervous about?

B (32:04)

I just yesterday wrote a piece called Good Luck Banning AI because there has been some new data showing that young people are going to use it whether they're told not, they're told they shouldn't or not. And there was. There's Gallup and Walton Family foundation polling that Angela Duckworth did a big study with that was in the Harvard Business Review that I wrote about yesterday that shows that 3/4 of Gen Z adults used AI in the month that they. In the prior month to the survey, everyone's using it. What we're hearing is that despite the fact that they're using it, they're not necessarily comfortable using it and they don't necessarily want to be using it. But there's a lot of pressure to use it because they're being told every

A (32:46)

single day, when you say use it, you just really mean using the basic platforms. Do you mean chatbots for specific services or platforms in replacement of that?

B (32:56)

Well, it's both. That data was regarding chatbots, and when I say chatbots, I mean it could be used. And they. They actually broke it down in terms of what they're using it for. Some are using it for. For Google, like In. In replacement for search for Google. Others are using it for help with writing. Others are using it for help in daily work tasks. Some people, although this, I think, has this data leaned into the fact that it's less than has previously been, sort of have expected using it for like, advice or relationships. I had written this fall about ChatGPT as a dating guru, and we had a lot of young people tell us that they were showing it their texts with their crushes.

A (33:36)

Does it give good advice?

B (33:38)

Personally, I haven't used it, but. But from there, for what they. Yeah, I mean, well, I think it's just in the absence of any advice, it's going to give advice. And so this is the whole conversation too about using chatbots as mental health support.

A (33:52)

Yeah, so I was gonna get to that. So, like, yeah, what do you do in that? So you have a bunch of states to. Ohio this morning are kind of banning it. And yes, there were some tragic things that. And I don't have any investments in the space, so I'm not. I don't care financially either way. But it seems to me that in a world where we have learned that everybody is better off having someone else who's knowledgeable and objective to talk to about their problems than not. Right. And yet the supply of qualified therapists is relatively low. It seems crazy to me to not take advantage when they could help a lot of people. How do you see it and how do they see it?

B (34:24)

So just one thing. It's not objective because it will reinforce what you tell it. And so it will, you know, if you say, you know, it hypes people up. And that's why it, I think, has led to, you know, some really tragic awfulnesses.

A (34:39)

But that's coding that could be changed through regulations.

B (34:41)

So what I was gonna say is that I think that, well, we can talk about regulation in a second, which our community of gen zers seems to be very hungry for. But on the. On the part of you, could it be used for mental health support? Yes, it definitely could. I think that it should be. I think that, that these, these companies should be consulting mental health experts and, and therapists and doctors to help them think through what the best use cases are and program it so that it can be the most helpful. Because, yes, there is a crisis, there is a loneliness epidemic. There's not enough therapists or counselors and people can't afford the care that they need. And so this could be help make it way more accessible.

A (35:18)

Right.

B (35:19)

Going back to.

A (35:20)

Isn't that where regulation sort of Comes in.

B (35:22)

Yeah. So, I mean, I think even just yesterday, and talk about 2028 contenders. Josh Shapiro had released some his plan around AI, and I know that there was a protection angle to it in terms of protection for young people. And here in New York, Governor Hochul has done that as well, I believe, or at least talked about it in her sort of plan for what she wants the regulation to look like. So, you know, there are some. Some politicians and some elected officials who are talking about what they want to do when it comes to regulation. What we hear in our Gen Z research is that young people don't want a repeat of social media all over again. They're really eager for regulations around the way that these tools are used and are programmed. And I think that any candidate who wants a leg up in 2028 should totally be leaning into AI. It's a sleeper issue, and I don't know why more people are not talking about it.

A (36:15)

Let me give you a third shot. So, right. As someone who has kind of both spent a career in politics and government and a career in tech, this notion that regulation is inherently good or bad to me, is crazy, right? Which is, first of all, it's as good or bad as it's written and applied to any specific situation. But second, there are two pieces to any puzzle. So technologists will come up with, like, okay, we have figured out this chatbot that can do these things. Great. And that's kind of their purview, Right? Good for them. And then society has to then say, in the form of regulation, okay, here's where these chatbots can be harmfully helpful. Let's shape the rules to try to not take advantage. You can't ever put the genie back in the bottle, but to maximize its value to society. And it's funny, the people who have never worked in the private sector and just think that somehow all business and tech is evil to me clearly don't get it. The fact that Mandani's, you know, approach to economic development is to hold companies feet to the fire, like, if there's no jobs here, there's no tax revenue to spend, and all the stuff he wants to spend it on, and at the same time, a Marc Andreessen or someone that somehow just seems to think that, like, the market will just magically do everything by itself is also wildly wrong. And, you know, if you've never spent a day in government or politics, maybe you don't understand that. So do you think that when you kind of get past the two sides sort of screaming Their sort of talking points. Do you think Gen Z kind of gets that?

B (37:39)

Oh, 100%. They're not saying they know, first of all, they're using it every month, if not every day. They're using these chatbots. They. And I want to, I want to talk about that in a second, but I think that they realize that this is something that's here to stay. This is a new technology that is shaping their lives and their futures. And that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be regulated. That's like saying, you know, we're gonna, we're gonna take the subway, but we're not gonna have any regulations or brakes. Right. Like, it's, it's. And so. Yeah, and so I think they're just expecting that from leaders and we'll be really disappointed if it is shambled.

A (38:13)

So do you think here. I think I could be totally wrong. But let's assume the Democrats take the House. Let's assume they fall short in the Senate, or they could go this one on the layout could work either way because they all see what you're seeing, which is 2020, if 2026 is sort of the affordability election in terms of the buzzword and kind of short form video is sort of the tactic that everyone thinks they have to do, although most will look fairly silly doing it. 2028, I think, to your point, is the AI election in terms of impact of AI, negative in economy, positive in the economy, you know, catastrophic risk that you're trying to prohibit, all the other stuff, ways you can use AI to make government work better. I think there's a world where actually Trump and the Democrats say, you know what, let's get out ahead of this thing and let's pass a bipartisan comprehensive AI bill. Whether or not the bill ends up being the right. It's hard to regulate things when they're so early. But for example, it seems to me that they'll just say, here's $50 billion for job training for people displaced by AI or young people. I don't even know what they're going to train them in, to be honest. But nonetheless, they'll say no permit is more of a state issue. But like no permitting for data centers that are going to have huge energy costs imposed on everyone else just to make the data center go, things like that. Because. Because at the end of the day, they always want to protect themselves. Right. That's a smart politic. So I actually could see a world where they. Doesn't mean it won't still be the domination of the 2028 election. But if there's going to be one area of potential bipartisan legislation, I actually think this could be the one that's interesting.

B (39:49)

I mean, you know, I'm all for that, I think, and I haven't thought about that in that way. I think, however, though, like you said, you know, it's so nascent, and also it's changing every day. And so this is gonna be, I think, the defining issue for a long time. And the other piece of it is that AI is pervasive. It touches everything. So we talk about how. We're just talking about how it affects mental health and how it could be a tool or a problem in that sector. We talk about thinking about medicine and healthcare. It's going to touch that. It's going to touch education, already is touching education. It's touching jobs. It touches everything. And so, yeah, like an omnibus package that somehow talks about AI across the board. I think it will have to be updated, although the baseline definitely being there would be a good thing for all of us, I believe. The other piece when we first started talking about AI that I wanted to come back to, that has surfaced in our recent research, is that there is so much pressure on young people to use AI and they. They feel that, and that is part of why they are using it so much.

A (40:57)

And pressure. Their boss is like, you're young. You'll be able to figure out how to use this thing to do a better job.

B (41:01)

No, they're being told, either learn how to use this tool or you'll be left behind. Learn how to use this tool or your job's gonna be taken. Learn how to use this tool or your education is useless. And so it's the economic pressure.

A (41:12)

But is that AI or is that just like you had to learn how to use the typewriter when that was invented, and you had to learn how to use the personal computer and your phone. Like. Like maybe generative AI, True, generative AI will be a different story. But if you put that to the side, because we're still not really quite there yet. Like, it seems to me that we're talking productivity tools. Like, it's not different than Microsoft Word from 30 years ago. It's just an evolution of technology. And that's what automation is.

B (41:35)

Yeah. And I hear, you know, it gets compared to a calculator all the time. But I think the difference is that at those other points where those new technologies were coming into the market, there wasn't so much of a conversation, pervasive conversation. 247 on every single social media platform about it at all points in time. Whereas young people are literally watching reels or TikToks every single day being like, here's how I use AI to get ahead and here's what you need to do and here's why you're if you don't use it, your degree is useless.

A (42:03)

You don't think Gutenberg was making videos about the printing press in 1366 or whatever? Not on TikTok, but all right, how do people follow your work?

B (42:11)

Oh, you can subscribe to my newsletter, the up and up on Substack. You just go to theupandup us Us. And I'm Rachel Jan Faza on all social media platforms.

A (42:19)

There we go. Rachel, thanks for joining us.

B (42:20)

Thank you so much for having me. Bradley Cool

A (42:26)

Firewall is recorded at my bookstore, PNT Netware, located at 180 Orchard street on the lower east side of Manhattan. We'd love to hear from you with questions, feedbacks or idea for a guest. Just email me at Bradley Firewall Media or find me on LinkedIn. And to keep up with what's on my mind in my latest writing, please follow my new substack@bradleytus.substack.com thanks again for listening.