We Fact-Checked Stephen A.'s LeBron and Kobe Story — and Polled 1,000+ Voters on His Presidential Campaign

Summary

Pablo Torre Finds Out

Episode: We Fact-Checked Stephen A.'s LeBron and Kobe Story — and Polled 1,000+ Voters on His Presidential Campaign
Date: April 4, 2025
Host: Pablo Torre
Guests: Tim Miller, Wyatt Cenac

Overview

This episode features Pablo Torre, Tim Miller, and Wyatt Cenac as they dive deep into two interconnected spectacles in sports and politics. First, they perform a thorough fact check on Stephen A. Smith’s viral claim about LeBron James’s attendance at Kobe Bryant’s memorial. Second, they analyze the plausibility of Stephen A. Smith’s oft-teased presidential campaign with the results of an original, exclusive national poll — and wrestle with what it reveals about the state of American politics. The episode is a signature Pablo Torre “talkumentary”: energetic, investigative, funny yet incisive, with guest dialogue that is both playful and revealing.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Fact-Checking the LeBron/Kobe Memorial Story

Background:

• Stephen A. Smith recently claimed (on-air) that LeBron James did not attend Kobe Bryant’s public memorial service, a claim quickly challenged by community notes and major outlets.
• The question: Was LeBron actually at the Kobe memorial? If not, does it matter, and why?

Key Segments:

• Stephen A. Smith’s escalation: Smith referenced LeBron’s supposed absence at the memorial to “suggest he should be happy with things I haven’t brought up.” ([02:20])
• The actual facts:
  • Multiple major outlets listed LeBron among attendees, but he was not filmed.
  • Pablo speaks with eight sources directly familiar with the event, VIPs, Lakers executives, and production team members.
  • Quote from Lakers exec source: “LeBron’s attendance…a topic people…have been grousing about for years” regarding undercurrents within the organization. ([04:13])
• Memorial event details:
  • Produced by Lakers, Vanessa Bryant, Grammy team; highly orchestrated, highly exclusive.
  • Not seen in any official broadcast angles, multiple sources (including the event’s lead producer and Jeanie Buss) did not see LeBron in the building.
  • Quote from event VIP: “There’s no way he was there. If he was there, he was Casper the Ghost.” ([10:00])
  • LeBron was not on the speaking list, nor (according to an early planning email chain) even considered.
• LeBron’s non-answer:
  • When asked by media if he attended:

    “It was just...a very emotional day, very tough day for myself and my family, for everyone involved… I appreciate it.” – LeBron James ([11:03])

  • Panel reads this as a non-answer; general consensus, he was not there.
• Motives and interpretation:
  • Pablo is careful to note: "I don't care how anyone chooses to grieve." ([10:51])
  • Vanessa Bryant would be the “key source” for a definitive answer; her position and emotions central to event guest curation.
  • The real question is why this matters or is weaponized in public narrative: Is it “state funeral” political drama, or a genuine controversy?

Memorable Exchange:

• Wyatt Cenac: “If he didn’t go, what’s the big deal? Why does he have to attend every basketball funeral?” ([03:25])
• Tim Miller: “It’s genuine Kremlinology… What are people not saying, but clearly feeling? What are the power dynamics?” ([13:48 – 13:51])

---

2. The Stephen A. Smith Presidential Speculation — and Reality Check Poll

Set-Up:

• Stephen A. Smith has been publicly claiming he could “win the Democratic nomination for president, if I tried.”
• Pablo’s team commissions a legitimate poll (Rasmussen), asking 1,021 likely voters about a host of 2028 matchups involving Stephen A.
• The panel forms a mock “exploratory committee” to analyze the results.

Key Segments:

The General Absurdity (and Tempting Allure) of a Stephen A. Presidential Bid

• Wyatt: “All he’s doing is just talking. He is the most unserious human being who just likes the attention.” ([15:52])
• Pablo: “I find it hard to disagree with wise fundamental points, but I also deeply value him as an important part of the exploratory committee.” ([16:59])

Poll Construction and Skepticism

• The panel notes the classic polling chicken-or-egg problem: Are results meaningful, or created by the inclusion of a name like Stephen A. Smith in the poll?

  “If that name had been Pikachu, do you think it would have also gotten 2%?” – Wyatt ([18:58])

• Rasmussen poll features: 1,021 voters, mixed contact modes, balanced party IDs.

Poll Results Breakdown

• Hillary Clinton (2016) vs. Stephen A. Smith (2028):
  • Clinton 36%, Stephen A. 34%, Not Sure 30% ([20:15])
• Joe Biden (2024) vs. Stephen A. Smith:
  • Biden 27%, Stephen A. 36% ([21:19])
  • Tim: "I'm kind of surprised that Joe Biden got 27% there. That's maybe not a great sign for Stephen A...only coming in at nine points ahead of the guy who went to the pool before the debate." ([22:24])
• Kamala Harris vs. Stephen A. (Democratic primary voters):
  • Harris 45%, Stephen A. 24%, Big “other/not sure” block ([22:18])
  • Wyatt: “Other could be anybody. It could be Pikachu.” ([23:00])
• AOC vs. Stephen A.:
  • AOC 32%, Stephen A. 28%, Not sure/other 33% ([23:55])
• Gavin Newsom vs. Stephen A.:
  • Newsom 31%, Stephen A. 28% ([25:40])
  • Tim: “This is bad news for Gavin Newsom. He and Stephen are competitors across multiple vectors now. You would think Gavin would have a little bit more space between him and Stephen A... Governor of California, has some experience... So I don't know if that's good for Stephen A. or bad for Gavin.” ([25:40])
• J.D. Vance (GOP) vs. Stephen A. (head-to-head):
  • Vance 38%, Stephen A. 34% ([26:20])
  • Tim: “...about a third of the country would literally respond in favor of anybody over J.D. Vance.” ([26:57])
  • Wyatt: “People aren't that excited by a potato face with a beard. Like, if you just put a beard on a potato, that's J.D. Vance.” ([27:49])
• Three-way: J.D. Vance, Kamala Harris, Stephen A. (Stephen A. running as independent):
  • Vance 40%, Harris 37%, Stephen A. 11% ([35:19])
  • Pollster conclusion: “He’s not a spoiler.”

Broader Reflections: What Do These Results Say About Politics?

• Pablo: “...it is insane how plausible all of this conversation is. It is very disturbing to me...” ([34:15])

• Tim contends that “talking is a pretty key part of the [presidential] job” — charisma and debate performance may be the crucial skills to win a modern campaign. ([33:11])

• The panel considers the actual ideological emptiness of such hypothetical “celebrity” campaigns:

  “He’s not actually a Democrat in really any discernible political way.” – Pablo ([38:49])

  • Discussion of whether people want genuine change, or the illusion/presentation of change via a fresh, charismatic face.

• Panel sums up Democratic Party’s problem as “vibes.”

  • Tim: “What people don’t like about the Democratic Party right now is it feels leaderless and listless and it doesn’t feel like there’s a fight.” ([37:12])

• Jay Caspian Kang’s New Yorker thesis is paraphrased:

  “Democrats need a hostile takeover and new candidates who stand far outside the establishment's tepid choices... The policy positions...do not matter as long as they're within reason... what [voters] want is someone that can actually compete against them [Trump et al] and out meme them and own them.” ([42:44])

America’s Next Top Spokesmodel?

• Wyatt: “As president, you are America’s spokesmodel. You are Vanna White, just turning the letters on democracy.” ([33:25])
• Discussion if performativity and debate skill are truly what we want — or simply what we’re left with.

Alternate Solutions: The Celebrity VP Slate

• Pablo polled respondents for “Democratic Vice President” picks:
  • Mark Cuban (14%), Stephen A. Smith (12%), Dwayne Johnson (12%), Matthew McConaughey (10%), Jon Stewart (9%), Oprah (7%), Pablo Torre (1%), Not Sure (35%) ([47:00])
  • Mark Cuban’s dry response: “I need to reconsider my life if I only beat Stephen A. by 2%.” ([47:32])

---

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• “If LeBron was there [at the memorial], he was Casper the Ghost.” – VIP attendee ([10:00])
• “He is the most unserious human being who just likes the attention...He might as well say...if I put six months in, I could totally fight Mike Tyson.” – Wyatt, on Stephen A. Smith’s presidential delusions ([15:52])
• “This is bad news for Gavin Newsom. You would think Gavin would have a little bit more space between him and Stephen A.” – Tim ([25:40])
• “People aren’t that excited by a potato face with a beard...that’s J.D. Vance.” – Wyatt ([27:49])
• “Is it our two different questions or what we need and do a hero. We Commissioner Gordon might need...” – Pablo, on the political hunger for a “champion” ([31:16])
• “Maybe we just need to accept that talking is a pretty key part of the job and that the Democrats should probably orient themselves to finding somebody who’s really, really good at talking. And then all the other skills are kind of secondary.” – Tim ([33:11])
• “As president, you are America’s spokesmodel...you are Vanna White, just turning the letters on democracy.” – Wyatt ([33:21])
• “It’s genuine Kremlinology…What are people not saying, but clearly feeling? What are the power dynamics?” – Tim ([13:51])
• “I will end this segment by pointing out that according to the pollster...he looked at the top line numbers and said, ‘Based on what I see in these numbers, he should run.’” – Pablo ([41:40])
• “Thank you both for doing this. Pablo Torre Finds Out is produced by…” – End of content section ([49:21])

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• LeBron memorial claims — Set-up: [02:20]
• LeBron’s public actions post-Kobe’s death: [05:02]
• No on-camera LeBron, fact-finding from sources: [07:19] – [10:00]
• LeBron’s dodgy answer to media: [11:03]
• Panel summary of LeBron vs. Stephen A. feud: [12:47]
• Stephen A. presidential campaign mockery: [15:52]
• First polling result breakdown: [20:15]
• Charisma and talking as presidential skills: [33:11]
• Jay Caspian Kang’s hot take on Democratic horse race: [42:44]
• Celebrity VP slate polling: [47:00]
• Panel “what did we learn?” recap: [48:18]

---

Conclusion – Episode Takeaways

• LeBron and the Kobe Memorial: Through exhaustive and careful reporting, Pablo finds nearly all credible evidence suggests LeBron did not attend Kobe Bryant’s public memorial, despite initial media reports. The real story is how and why these small but symbolic details become flashpoints for media culture wars.
• Celebrity Politics Absurdity: Polling for Stephen A. Smith’s presidential prospects reveals both the emptiness and the entrenched performativity of contemporary American politics, with “talking” and “presence” at least as important as policy or experience.
• The State of the Democratic Party: Major takeaways are the leadership and charisma vacuum — and fears that “vibes” matter more than vision.
• Memorable banter: Tim and Wyatt roast both the premise and their own complicity, finding the humor and absurdity endemic to the conversation.

---

For listeners and non-listeners alike, this is a revealing, funny “state of the culture” episode, as Pablo Torre and friends use sports and pop spectacle to lay bare deeper truths about the American moment.

Transcript

[A]

Pablo. I'm Pablo Torre. And this episode of Pablo Torre Finds out is brought to you by Remy Martin. 1738 Accord Royale. Exceptionally smooth cognac for all your game day festivities. Please drink responsibly, because today we're going to find out what this sound is.

[B]

If that name had been Pikachu, do you think it would have also gotten.

[A]

2% right after this ad?

[B]

You're listening to Giraffe Kings Network.

[A]

We have paperwork in front of us. Tim Miller Wynak reuniting. Not an expert panel, but almost like an exploratory committee.

[C]

Yeah, an exploratory committee.

[A]

That's a term of art and politics, isn't it, Tim?

[C]

Yeah. Oh, yeah. I've been on a couple of those.

[A]

You have?

[C]

For Jeb and John Huntsman. More often than not, it's a candidate that. It's like, I want to see if.

[A]

The water's warm for me and Wyatt. I do want to just estab the following question. Have you been following this feud between Stephen a. Smith and LeBron James?

[B]

A little bit.

[C]

I have a Twitter level of knowledge about this.

[B]

I have a Mastodon level knowledge. Is that more or less?

[C]

Less, I think.

[A]

Okay, well, we can just watch this.

[D]

I am pleading with LeBron James as a father, stop this. Stop this. We all know that Bronny James is in the NBA because of his dad. And I turn around, and he's right here in my face. He said, yo, you gotta stop talking about my son. You gotta stop with my son. That's my son. That's my son. And I was like, what? I thought it was weak. I thought it was some bullshit.

[E]

He's, like, on a Taylor Swift.

[C]

Yeah.

[E]

Tour run right now.

[B]

Oh, yeah, yeah.

[C]

We're watching it. We're awesome.

[E]

He's gonna be smiling from ear to ear when he hears me talking about him.

[D]

Oh, my God.

[E]

He's gonna get home and grab some.

[D]

Ice cream out of the freezer and.

[E]

Sit in his chair and his tiny whities on the couch.

[A]

Which led to Stephen A. Smith going on first take and escalating all of this by saying this.

[D]

I suggest that he be happy with the things that I haven't brought up. I never brought up really. And never really discussed why you were not at Kobe Bryant's memorial service. I never really.

[A]

And so this is where I need to start today before we get into our packet of research, because the question that is embedded in what Stephen A's take was there was obviously explosive. It got aggregated. There's a community note over On X. And the Community note said, this quote, this is incorrect. LeBron was in attendance. According to the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and Entertainment Tonight, they all list James as among the attendees at the memorial. LeBron James requested to not be film at the memorial. And Stephen A. Smith during the show, apologized on air and also on Twitter, saying that he misspoke.

[C]

Can I just ask, what is even that theory? Like, why would this be a slight? Like, what are people upset about? Yeah, I guess that's the part. I don't get that part. Why is this the thing that merits a cover up? What would be the failure of LeBron here that people would be upset about?

[B]

And also, if he didn't go to this funeral, what's the big deal, right? Like, he's like, yeah, why? Like, why does he have to attend every basketball funeral?

[A]

This was kind of a state funeral in the world of politics. Have you ever been to a state funeral of any kind?

[C]

No. I mean, I've been to, I guess, the viewing in the Rotunda, but I've never got to like, go to the A list funeral. You know, maybe one of these days. But that is a big deal. I mean, Mark Leibovitz's book, like, starts at the McCain funeral and it's like all the who's sitting next to who. So there is a lot of, you know, political drama around these sorts of events.

[A]

Yeah. Have you ever been to an A list funeral, Wyatt?

[B]

No, I just go to the after parties.

[A]

Yeah, this A list service. To be very clear, LeBron's attendance at the memorial service turned out to be a subject, according to a high level source that is close to the Lakers. Quote, a topic that people throughout the Lakers organization, top to bottom, have been grousing about for years. LeBron James, to put us back in January of 2020. Right. So the tragedy happens. And LeBron James in public, he really did take the lead on being a spokesperson. He spoke up in a team meeting, reportedly saying, quote, God gave me wide shoulders for a reason. He got a tattoo of Kobe Bryant, the Mamba posted on Instagram. And then before the Lakers first home game after the crash, he tossed his notes aside and gave a speech at center court.

[E]

Now I got something written down. No, they asked me to kind of stay on course or whatever the case may be. But Laker Nation, man, I would be selling y' all short if I read off this. So I'm gonna go straight from the heart.

[A]

And then he even dunked like Kobe Bryant, and he equated the dunk to The Marlon Wayans classic the sixth man by saying quote, Kobe came down, put himself in my body and gave me that dunk on that break. And he even referenced the upcoming memorial himself. And so what I wanted to do is just take a fact based approach to this question. Tim and Wyatt. And so what we did here at Pablo Torre finds out was talk to eight sources who are directly familiar with this situation. The bottom of a mystery that has been hiding allegedly in plain sight.

[C]

I'm fascinated. It's there's waiting with baited breath to see what the result.

[B]

I just want to know why Byron Scott told you all this or Nick fan Axel.

[A]

So this memorial service, it was Lakers executives, the producers of the Grammy awards, it was Vanessa Bryant, Kobe's widow, Gigi's mother. All of these people in this planning group creating a live televised memorial at Staples center in the arena itself that was intended again to be both very personal but also incomparable in how a list and exclusive and produced the whole spectacle was going to be. It was February 24, 2020, which happens to have been the day my daughter was born. So Violet came into the world. I missed all of this.

[C]

And so you didn't have the memorial on in the hospital?

[A]

Second screen. Yeah, it was the view of my wife's birth canal and then Michael Jor and crying.

[C]

Yeah, that would have been good Instagram content.

[A]

And I'm just investigating these claims to be very, very clear on a purely factual basis. Like I, I'm not here to talk about motives, but claim number one. There's a video of Diana Tausi who spoke at the memorial Yukon basketball star, one of the great women's basketball players ever and she told a joke while complimenting 11 year old Gigi Bryant and her level of skill. And it sounded like this. I mean, who has a turnaray fightaway jumper at 11? LeBron barely got it today.

[C]

It's a roast.

[A]

Which is a pretty good joke. A pretty, A pretty bold joke from funeral joke from, from the goat. And she does, by the way, gesture off screen left. But what we did, of course was look at multiple angles of the broadcast of that very direction at various points in the broadcast. And no LeBron James. You see Pau Gasol.

[C]

James Worthy.

[A]

James Worthy, that's right, James Worthy, your.

[C]

Source who's.

[A]

Kuz is wearing the big glasses, the big sunglasses.

[B]

Is he also wearing those super long sleeves?

[A]

I like to think that his black tie was super long sleeves as well.

[C]

Like this is a common tactic, you know, a rhetorical, rhetorical tactic. You're gesturing at somebody. I don't, I don't think there's anything to go with there.

[A]

No visible LeBron at all in the photography. And then what I did was confirm with multiple sources that Diana Taurasi never saw LeBron James at the memorial that day. So she, this person held up as the proof, did not see LeBron that day. So claim number two that LeBron James was there, but he chose to be left off camera. And what we did was we talked to a lead producer on the memorial, a longtime award show producer named Ron Basile. Ron Basile helped coordinate everything from Beyonce's 6:40am sound check to Michael Jordan's eulogy. And the producer told us when we asked him about any directive from LeBron James about having him on camera, quote, the off camera thing is end quote. And so I want to be careful here. But he wasn't stage left, he wasn't off camera. And we can further tell you that according to two additional independent high level sources involved in the planning of this whole event who were in attendance, what they tell us here at Pablo Torre finds out is that they did not see LeBron in the building. They don't know of a single person who did see him in the building. And one of the people who did not see Lebron at all that day was in fact Lakers owner Jeannie Buss. So as one of the sources who spent that morning in the event's VIP areas says of Lebron, quote, there's no way he was there. If he was there, he was Casper the Ghost, end quote. My personal belief, by the way, is that I don't care how anyone chooses to grieve at all. Yeah, but LeBron James, the face of the Lakers who got the tattoo, gave the speech at center court, threw away his notes, was the face of mourning for this person. What LeBron did not do was what LeBron himself had chosen to do in the weeks before. LeBron did not take center stage at all. And multiple high level sources told us that LeBron was not invited to speak at Kobe's memorial. We had a third source involved in the planning of this go back to an early wish list of speakers and performers. This was shared between the Lakers, Vanessa Bryant, event producers, and as this third source puts it, quote, he's not on the list. Vanessa's on all these emails. It wasn't just the Lakers. It was a family thing. There was a lot of emotion. The word LeBron isn't even in here. We did reach out to LeBron's camp and they did not comment, which is totally fair. They also wanted to make clear that they're not talking about anything that has to do with Stephen a. Smith. But LeBron's agent, Rich Paul, told Stephen A. Smith himself at the time that LeBron was, quote, in his own space. A very carefully worded answer for was LeBron at the memorial service. And LeBron was asked for comment at Lakers practice by ESPN's David Menamon the day after the memorial. And LeBron's answer is conveniently on tape.

[C]

Did you attend the ceremony?

[E]

Like I said, man, it was just. I respect your question for sure. Very emotional, Very emotional day. Very tough day for myself and my family, for everyone involved. One thing I can, one thing I can come out is how strong and how bold, how powerful Vanessa is to stand up there the way she did, to give the speech, the way, the way she gave that speech, I commend her. My heart is with their family still, with his three daughters that's still here, his wife, with his mom and dad, sister. It was just very difficult day, obviously, celebration, but it's a difficult day for all of us. I appreciate it.

[A]

So in that answer, you heard what.

[C]

That he wasn't there. The guy, the white guy in the corner with the cell phone that was taping it, his face kind of reflected everything, which was kind of like, I don't think you're actually answering, like, why are you talking about this? Like, what is your non answer? So I don't know, but it seems like it would be a no to me.

[B]

Yeah, that didn't.

[C]

Was there not a follow up question?

[A]

That's where it was left for roughly five years until I realized that this would be a thing that no one had actually followed up on satisfactorily. And by the way, what I want to make very clear is that I don't think that LeBron was obligated to do anything. There is stuff under the surface here that I can't fully definitively say.

[C]

Well, Vanessa Bryant is the key source here, so I don't know who your sources are, but it is notable that in his answer he goes rightly into a very lavish compliment of her. He was like a person and it.

[B]

Was a great celebration.

[C]

It feels like that'd be the point person to untangle this. You know, Pavel, I don't know if you know this. When Trump won the first time and I went to a place of dark depression where I was like, I should quit politics through a friend I interviewed with the Lakers to be their flack.

[A]

Is that right?

[C]

And yeah, And I had an interview with them and with Jeannie and them. It was very pleasant. It just wasn't really a fit for a variety of reasons, but, like, I'm. I'm hearing this whole story and, like, imagining that alternate life for me where I'm like. I'm, like, trying to spin this on. I'm like. I'm like, who am I spinning for right now? Jeannie or LeBron or Kobe's legacy and Pablo's calling me. I'm happy to be on this side of the mic, I guess, and to not be a Lakers flack trying to navigate the Kremlinology of the Kobe funeral.

[A]

It is. It's genuine. It is Kremlinology.

[C]

It is.

[A]

What are people not saying, but clearly feeling? What are the power dynamics and incentives at play? And why won't Tim Miller return my calls?

[C]

Why would you just answer this? Was he there?

[A]

All of which is to say that when I'm trying to get the answer to that question. We were also conducting a legitimate political poll about whether one of the people involved in this would be a legitimate candidate for President of the United States.

[B]

Hey, I mean, I'm not looking forward to where this is going.

[C]

Foreign.

[A]

These packets in front of us are the results of a truly exhaustive attempt relative to the just pure speculation that is surrounded whether Stephen A. Smith is actually going to do the thing that he's been talking about for months now and actually run for president.

[B]

No.

[D]

And, you know, I'm half joking, but I. I kind of mean it. I mean, I have no desire to be a congressional figure or a Sen. But if you came to me and you told me I had a legitimate shot to win the presidency of the United States of America, I would definitely consider it. But I. Here's the problem. So you want to break through the line. Oh, that's right. I'm a moderate. I'm a centrist, and I'm the kind of person that. Do I believe that if I committed myself to knowing politics the way you and others know it, do I believe I could win a Democratic nomination? Hell, yes. Particularly the state of affairs that exist. I think it would be a cakewalk. I think I'd take them all out. I really, really believe that. I really think I could take them.

[A]

Why? Welcome to the exploratory committee. Wyatt Zenaki. Didn't know you were joining it, but you are.

[B]

Bull. Like, everything he's saying is bull. There's just like. He's like, oh, if I put the time in, I could totally run for President. He might as well say, like, if I put six months in, I could totally fight Mike Tyson. Like, there's like, all he's doing is just talking. There's nothing serious. He is the most unserious human being who just likes the attention. And that is what you are giving him with this. Congratulations, Pablo. You just fell into the trap. The egomaniac wants people to talk about him, and you just did it. And you tricked me and Tim into taking part of this. And I want no part of it, Pablo. I don't want it because he doesn't want this. He just wants attention.

[C]

I'm kind of intrigued. On the other hand.

[B]

Damn it, Tim.

[C]

Damn it.

[B]

I thought you were with me.

[C]

I'm spiritually with you, but I don't know. My shadow self is tingling.

[B]

Don't let the shadow emerge.

[C]

My shadow self is tingling.

[A]

I find it hard to disagree with wise fundamental points, but I also deeply value him as an important part of the exploratory committee.

[C]

Yeah, same.

[A]

Which is like the guy who's going to actually.

[B]

The hostage in the exploratory committee, the.

[A]

Hostage slash opposition opinionist who's going to establish that the research that we are presenting should be viewed with a healthy dose of what Wyatt, I believe, expressed as bull.

[B]

Is there any way.

[C]

Seems like running the Red Team. We have a red Team project. Like, you pretend like you're on the other side, and so we'll have you on the exploratory committee pretending like you're host Hostel, but really you're just kind of testing out the ways for Stephen A. To. To, you know, defeat his haters. Sure.

[B]

To help me do this. Is there any way we could get, like, some rope to tie me to this chair so that to Anyone watching on YouTube, they can see I wanted no part of this? I'm clearly a hostage in this conversation.

[A]

All we have are two bottles of Remy Martin and a hat.

[B]

So, yeah, I'll take some.

[C]

This.

[A]

We might need to. We might need to dip into the reserves early. But the thing that kickstarted this whole enterprise truly is that there was this single throwaway question in a McLaughlin poll in January that went viral immediately because it gave Stephen A. Smith. Why it's an Axe favorite person. A 2% chance as a wild card against the field of 15 other potential candidates for the 2028 Democratic primary. And Stephen A. Goes on Hannity, and he says he had no business being on that list.

[B]

He did not.

[A]

And so we wanted to actually fact check this. Like, okay, that's one throwaway Line in a poll. What if we committed actual time to trying to do an exclusive? Pablo Torre finds out first of its kind political poll.

[B]

Before you go into this though, can I just ask a question?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

So there was a poll where they had 15 names, or was it 16?

[A]

15 other potential candidates.

[B]

So they had all of these names and Stephen A. Smith's name is on there.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

And he gets 2%. If that name had been Pikachu, do you think it would have also gotten 2%? Like, it wasn't? Like, I don't. I just feel like the fact that you're putting the name on the list legitimizes the name in a way that at least a few people will be like, well, I'll check that box. Sure.

[A]

To Wyatt's point, polling as an instrument. Flawed, limited. Right. There's an epistemological question of like chicken or egg. Is this real because you asked about it, or is this real because someone felt away about it when you asked them about it? So all of that is a very useful, both qualitative and quantitative context for the fact that we commissioned a legitimate survey with Rasmussen of 1021 likely American voters with dozens of questions connected over two days online and by phone. Basic demographics of the survey, 52% women, 33 Democratic, 35 Republican, 32% unaffiliated. And Rasmussen, Tim, you know, again, it's a public opinion firm. That is a thing. It's a real thing.

[C]

Rasmussen is a legitimate polling operation.

[A]

Can we dive into these cross taps?

[C]

Let's do it.

[A]

Chart number one. We asked a survey of 1021 likely American voters. Who would you consider a stronger Democratic candidate for president? Hillary Clinton in 2016 got 36%. Stephen A. Smith in 2028 got 34%. Not sure. Coming in strong with 30%.

[C]

I would assume that most of the people that took the poll were familiar with the fact that Hillary Clinton lost in 2016. So they have that kind of base bias here when they're trying to answer this question. Well, so even if Stephen A. Smith had a 2% chance of winning, you would think, well, that would be better than the 0% chance that Hillary ended up with. So I'm not fully. My brain isn't fully blown by this quite yet. Yeah.

[B]

Who would you consider the stronger candidate? The person who, you know, lost in the past or the person who in the future. Who knows what could happen?

[A]

On that Note, chart number two, same question, except Joe Biden in 2024.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Coming in at 27%. Stephen A. Smith in 2028 coming in at 36%.

[C]

It's an article out this morning from where Joe Biden's first chief of staff, Ron Klain is quoted where he gives some backstory and the debate prep for the debate that ruined America. And he gives some anecdotes about how Joe Biden left debate prep to go to the pool and fell asleep and how he couldn't remember things and how he was focused mostly on how he didn't think that. Why people weren't happier that leaders of Germany and France thought that he was doing a good job, why that wasn't resonating more. So, I don't know. I mean, I'm kind of surprised that Joe Biden got 27% there. I guess I would say that's maybe not a great sign for Stephen A. Smith's potential campaign that he's only coming in at nine points ahead of the.

[A]

Guy who went to the pool before the debate.

[C]

Again, I'm with Tim on this chart.

[A]

Number three, narrowing the poll now to 654 likely Democratic primary voters. Margin of error now up to 4%. If the 2028 Democratic primary were held today, who would you vote for? Kamala Harris coming in at 45%. Stephen A. Smith coming in at 24%. Other 17% wouldn't vote, 6%. Not sure, 9%. And so this is a head to head matchup between Kamala Harris.

[C]

Why would you answer that question as a recipient of this poll? You got a phone call, somebody on the other line, Rasmussen, Wyatt Smack. Who would you vote for in common? Harris or Stephen A. Smith? What would you have said?

[B]

If it's just those two, I would have said Kamala Harris. But I feel like the other thing that feels mushy here is not sure is 9%. Other is 17%. Not sure and other are basically the same thing. So let's just call that 26%. So it's Kamala 45, other, 26%. Stephen 24%. Because we don't know who other is. Other could be anybody. It could be Pikachu. So this again feels flawed to me. He's coming in third behind.

[A]

Oh, chart number four. Another head to head in the primary. Alexandria Ocasio, Cortez, 32%. Stephen A. Smith, 28%. Other 18% wouldn't vote. 7%. Not Sure, 15%.

[B]

The other Not sure collective, 33%. So let's just call it what it is. He's still coming in third.

[C]

A little discouraging for aoc.

[A]

That's that this is where in the cross tabs, I was like, okay, this is getting a little dark.

[B]

But that also doesn't surprise me where I think AOC would be a good candidate. I feel like if you're talking about the people who are involved in this poll, I would imagine there are probably a number of more centrist Democrats who also view AOC in the same way that I feel like probably many centrist Republicans and then far right Republicans see her as being too left of their ideals and policies. And so I could see where she would come in at a lower number just, just solely based on their perception of her without her actually being able to go and lay out what her campaign would look like and what her goals would be.

[A]

But AOC just in the cross tabs of this did have a net favorable rating from the people polled. So not simply people who are predisposed to not like the left, but moderates who actually did see value in her. Although in this case, 32 to 28 is right at the margin of error of 4%. Which again is where my brain was like, okay, well what about to Wyatt's point though, about a more, let's say deliberately moderate positioned candidate like Gavin Newsom. Chart 5, head to head Gavin Newsom, 31% Stephen A. 28.

[C]

This is bad news for Gavin Newsom. I think if you're looking at this, I mean he's. Him and Stephen are competitors across multiple vectors. Now. They're both podcast hosts. Yes. They are both potential presidential candidates. And you would think that Gavin would have a little bit more space between him and Stephen A. You know, in this situation, Governor of California has some experience, people are basically like either seem fine. So I don't know if that's good for Stephen A. Or seems like it's not great for Gavin.

[B]

I think still though great for other. Not sure who's. Yeah, coming in at 35%.

[A]

Chart number six though. This is, I think something like a bigger reveal. This is a head to head matchup for the White House. Okay, 2028 presidential election. In a legit political poll, the Rasmussen reports, Pablo Torre finds out survey more than a thousand likely American voters with a margin of error of 3%. If the 2028 presidential election were held today, who would you vote for? J.D. vance, 38% Stephen A. Smith, 34%. And as a person who worked in politics, Tim, this result indicates what to you?

[C]

Well, it indicates that there's about a third of the country that would literally respond in favor of anybody over J.D. vance, formerly J.D. hamill, formerly J.D. bowman.

[A]

He did a lot of separate names.

[C]

He's changed his name several times, which I think is a sign of sociopathy.

[B]

Stephen A. Smith, was it check cashing?

[C]

Unlike him, I don't think it was related to check cashing. Has Stephen A. Smith multiple names or is his birth name Stephen A. Smith?

[A]

I believe he has been Stephen A. Smith for decades now.

[C]

I think this stands out a little bit less as encouraging for Stephen A. Smith and more as discouraging for Vance. I mean, Trump just got 49%, right. So he's 11% below that.

[B]

Right.

[C]

And I think that leads us to, you know, something that is pretty obvious, which is that, you know, he has less appeal than Donald Trump to certain. To certain groups of people.

[B]

People aren't that excited by a potato face with a beard. Like, if you just put a beard on a potato, that's J.D. vance.

[A]

But what if that potato also loved to post?

[C]

Really loved the post.

[A]

It's like arguing with people on X all the time.

[C]

Do you have any mixed feelings about J.D. vance over that? Because I gotta tell you, I really dislike him at a deep level. Like, in my core, I find him to be probably the most unappealing person in all of public life. But he's a poster. And as a poster, I do feel like I have some kinship with him that I'm grappling with.

[A]

It is disturbing to be on and constantly refreshing the platform that JD Vance in a somewhere out there sort of scenario is also scrolling and refreshing at the same exact time. Yeah, that's worrisome to me. But I think the point, the takeaway point is what if it was Trump without any of the charisma? And also he wasn't funny. And also he wasn't even vaguely entertaining. I think truly, like, part of the appeal of Stephen A. Just to now get into why some might be at all energized. I think there is the part of it that is like, we are on a desert island, like in a cartoon, and you see something and you're like, that's a steak. And it's not a steak, it's a coconut. But you're so hungry that you're like, that looks like the greatest meal I've ever had. And there is just like that dysmorphia around who and what Stephen A. Is actually. And then there is the added desperation and hunger for someone to just get into a debate, to own these guys and just go after them in the way that we impotently watched the guy.

[C]

Who went to the pool passed out.

[A]

Go to Bed instead of getting in the ring.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

And I think we just want a champion who will go into a televised debate and take some big swings.

[C]

I agree with this. And this was where I disagreed with your earlier statement. We kind of got distracted. But you said something like, you know, like, the only thing he can do is talk or that. Like that there's. That getting ready for the presidency is just figuring out how to talk. And it's more than that. Are we sure? Maybe that's not true, actually. Maybe ability to post and talk and to own JD Vance to his potato beard face is really all we're looking for right now.

[B]

But is that truly satisfying? I feel like. Would that truly be satisfying? Because I just think about. There were moments where, like, I remember during the Obama administration where Obama went to the House and do you remember this? Yeah, sure. And he just kind of was like, I'll take all your questions. And it was this thing where, like, people just threw questions at him. And at that time, people were like, nobody's ever done this before. Like, he just went and he was like there. And he was on top of it. And he got his points in. He got in some zingers, and it was like, all right, great. And he did that. And a week later, nobody cared. And it just felt like, oh, that get. That was oxygen for just a brief little moment. Is that what we want?

[C]

What we want versus what we deserve? I think. Is it our two different questions or what we need and do a hero.

[A]

We Commissioner Gordon might need.

[C]

But, like, is it more than talking? I mean, obviously the presidency is more than talking, but the more appealing talker, maybe not the better talker, has, like, basically won every time except for the COVID election recently. Obama was a very good talker. Sure. The Democrats have put up the last three times. Kamala Harris, who had some skills talking, but also some demerits and deficits. She was not particularly strong speaking off the cuff.

[B]

But could she have gotten better?

[C]

Like, had she had more time? Yeah, maybe.

[B]

Because I also feel like that's the one weird thing, that when we're looking at this, we're looking at it with an asterisk of. Okay, yeah, you ran a shortened campaign and still, like, it was close in the popular vote, for sure.

[C]

Joe Biden couldn't talk at all and literally couldn't speak. So that wasn't great. Hillary, not exactly a dynamic talker, really. We'll put it back to my people, Jeb. And I love Jeb. Like, personally, you put the exclamation point. I Did. I didn't actually, but, you know, I emotionally put it in there. Howard Dean did it, Jeb, but like, he was a terrible talker. And I do think we convince ourselves because there's this thing that we want to believe it's about more than that. We want to pull people's higher angels, think about people's better angels, and think about all the serious problems that the country faces. And we need a person of depth. And it's kind of like, I don't think the people really want a person of depth unless they're a good talker. Maybe we just need to accept that talking is a pretty key part of the job and that the Democrats should probably orient themselves to finding somebody who's really, really good at talking. And then all the other skills are kind of secondary.

[B]

Yeah, I mean, I will, I will see that. That, yes, there is an element of it that feels like, as president, you are America's spokesmodel.

[C]

Right.

[B]

And, and so with that in mind.

[C]

America's next top spokesmodel.

[B]

Yeah, you like, you are, you are Vanna White, just turning the letters on democracy. And with that in mind, though, I think that's also there is that part of it that is both domestically and internationally. Could Stephen A. Smith actually, like, would he just be seen as a joke to everyone outside of the US when he has to go overseas and actually interact with foreign chancellors and other foreign presidents, Are they just going to be.

[C]

Like, we have a weekend Fox host running the military right now? Yeah.

[B]

And I don't think anybody takes that guy seriously.

[C]

Yeah, I know, but it seems like Stephen A. Would be an upgrade. I don't know, but he's not. I bet Meta Fredrickson of Denmark would be thrilled to see Stephen A. Smith right now.

[A]

I. I do just want to express as somebody who's worked with Stephen A. Smith and has been sports for a very long time, it is insane how plausible all of this conversation is. It is very disturbing to me, truly, that the people of our country, Wyatt, might want to just buy a vowel. And the vowel is a. Stephen a. Winning by 28% in this head to head matchup with J.D. vance among black voters, winning by 12% among moderates, losing by only 2% among independents. And I'll just speed through chart number seven, which is that if Stephen A. Were to run as an independent in a three way matchup, now we're looking at a bit of a problem for Mr. A. Smith. J.D. vance, Republican, 40. Kamala Harris, Democrat, 37. Stephen A. Smith, Independent, 11% and the head pollster at Rasmussen, Mark Mitchell, tells us that, quote, he's not a spoiler is what we're learning from these numbers. He was taking equally from both JD Vance and Kamala Harris. Again, speaking to the more moderate, centrist style candidate.

[C]

I would look at this as really bad news for Kamala, actually, because you notice JD Vance number went up when we added Kamala to the picture. So people, when it was just JD Versus Stephen A. People were like, I'd like to learn a little bit more. But then when there are 2% of the people that are like, once Kamala is even a possibility, they're like, no, it JD Vanced Potato beard.

[B]

So here's my question. I feel like his name comes up and these other names come up because there is this conversation of like, the Democratic Party is in turmoil. What is the direction of the party? But I'm curious, when has there ever been a clear direction of the party? Like, when has it ever been strong? Because I don't feel like it really has. Like, when I. When you look back in history, it's like, okay, even when Obama was running Obama, like, it wasn't like Obama was saying things that other candidates weren't saying. It's to your point. He was saying them better. Like at that time, he wasn't running on same sex marriage. Like, same sex marriage happened much later. But prior to that, he was very much openly against same sex marriage just to woo voters. And whether he believed that in his real life or not, he was just very charmingly playing it down the middle as closely as possible. And to me, that raises a question of both parties seem to always be playing it as safely down the middle as they can until Trump to just kind of like win over some very specific demographic.

[C]

And I think you're unintentionally making the case for Stephen A. Smith right now. You're coming. You're coming. No, I'm not.

[A]

Are we writing all this down?

[C]

I think you're kind of unintentionally making the case for it because I agree, like, the policy part of this is, you know, you can kind of co opt a bunch of things that are already out there. What people don't like about the Democratic Party right now is it feels leaderless and listless and it doesn't feel like there's a fight. It's not really like there are a couple specific policies, like people were pretty unhappy with crime rising during COVID but that's coming down anyway right now, right? Like, there are a couple of policy things, but a lot of it is vibes. And if you look at the Democrats who've had the most success, they haven't come out of sports journalism, but in your history, Kennedy, Clinton, Obama, they all did, they all did kind of break the mold from before, and they were very charismatic. And this was. And all of those were kind of in a. Before Internet time. Right. So, you know, I think that the traits that were required then are even required, like on steroids now. Sure. And so I don't, again, like Stephen A. Smith. I don't know. We're about to get into the other kinds of names that they throw out there. But to me, it's like, is there a way that the Democrats could, could put a front man up there that like, really doesn't change a whole lot, but makes people feel like a lot has changed? It's like, oh, man, he's fresh, but she's new. They're fresh. They don't have the baggage of Hillary and Biden.

[A]

I mean, why, to your point, he's. Stephen A. Is not actually even a Democrat. Like, he would be wearing sort of like the label.

[C]

Right.

[A]

Which would be a fundamental change in the product because discernibly Stephen A. Is the guy who goes on like Hannity's show and talks. He's the guy who's friends with Bill O'Reilly. He's the guy on First Take arguing with LeBron James.

[B]

Right.

[A]

He's not actually a Democrat in really any discernible political way. Even if the Venn diagram might have them. Again, as the centrist with some overlap of both parties, that's a weakness.

[B]

Well, and I guess, I guess for me, the question is how much is this a Democratic candidate and how much is this focusing energy in different ways? Because again, thinking about like any of those moments in history where we have seen, like, great change within civil rights, whether that was in the 60s, whether that was same sex marriage, those things weren't coming internally from the White House. Those were external pressures from organizers, from, like state legislation, from judges, from things like that that were pushing those things forward and then they eventually would get to a president's desk. But it wasn't a thing that like some president was leading the charge on these things. And so I just wonder on some level how much of this is, you know, that energy that we're looking for the party. Is it something that we're looking from a candidate or is it more? When you think about those moments in time, those movements were people outside of direct politics who were trying to push for Change and were able to mobilize people not only in, you know, raising awareness, but mobilizing people to then get out and become a voting bloc that then those politicians had to actually respond to.

[C]

So I think here's the fundamental disconnect with the, with what you're arguing, okay, that you are looking for earnest, genuine change reform in the country. And what, what this exercise is, you idiot, is trying to figure out who can be a vessel for that change by flapping their jaws successfully enough to put J.D. vance, like back in that girl's bathroom where he hung out in high school with no friends. All right? Like, that's what the people are looking for, somebody to put J.D. in a corner. And then after that, once you found that person, then maybe the goody two shoes people like you and activists out there in the world could like kind of provide them some sort of positive, you know, positive vision to execute upon.

[B]

I just wonder if that's even when you're talking about somebody like Stephen A. Smith and you're. And the metric now is comparing somebody to Trump. Like, yeah, then it's. Who's to say that like a Stephen A. Smith is going to then want to do those things?

[A]

I mean, I just gotta remind us all that we're talking about Stephen Colony. Stephen A. Smith.

[C]

I don't know how did I end up on the Pro Stephen A. Smith. I don't know how this thing, call me sas.

[A]

It's, it's. I will end this segment by pointing out that according to the pollster who worked with us on these, on these cross tabs on this data, he looked at the top line numbers and said, quote, based on what I see in these numbers, he should run, end quote.

[C]

The one thing that is missing from the Stephen A. He is trying to do this. Like, I'm a common sense, independent guy and like he's not like doing that. I'm really going to take the fight to the bad guys. Like, if Stephen A. Wanted to do this, like, we need first take Stephen A. Owning J.D. the way he owns Skip, you know, like, and that's not what he's giving us.

[A]

No. He is actively trying to be the guy who is the reasonable person and is actually not political. Like he's sort of angling for that lane right down the middle is what I can tell.

[C]

Your boy Kang wrote about this.

[A]

Yeah, Jay Caspian. Kang was the person, by the way, that Wyatt should really be mad at.

[B]

Yeah, I am mad at Jay. But I also know this is what Jay does. Jay just loves to drop cherry Bombs in the toilet.

[A]

New Yorker.

[C]

Yes, I wrote down what he wrote because I thought it was really smart. He was like, he thinks the Democrats need a hostile takeover and new candidates who stand far outside the establishment's tepid choices. The policy positions of these candidates, I believe, do not matter as long as they're within reason. Which means that everything from full bore leftist economic populism to staunch performative centrism is on the table as long as they fight the Trump. Like, that's his point. That is what the people are demanding out there. Somebody who is not tepid and limp and has been in Washington forever.

[A]

People are tired of being dunked on 50 times in a row and are like, can we get someone else to do that to them, please?

[C]

So Jay's point's like, give me an aoc. They'll take him down. Give me somebody that's in the middle that'll take him down. Like, what we need is somebody that can actually compete against them and out meme them and own them. And that might say something really horrible about our society.

[A]

It does, to be clear.

[C]

Yeah, sure. But I do think that it is channeling a real feeling out there, particularly among Democratic voters.

[A]

No question.

[C]

It's like not very ideological at all. And so this is, I think, Stephen's biggest failure, which is like, if he's going to do this, he's got to be first. Take Guy.

[B]

Just looking at demographically how people voted, when you look at it by race, overwhelmingly non white people vote for Democratic ideas and Democratic policies. White people vote overwhelmingly for Republican ideas and Republican policies. And if you look at all the last elections, and I think it's like the last 30 years of elections, it breaks down where if the Republican candidate gets 55% of the white vote, they lose. If they get 56, they win. If the Democratic candidate gets 43% of the white vote, they win. 42, they lose. And that's how it's broken down in the last five elections. I believe McCain got 55%. Obama got 43%. Biden, when he won, got 43%. Trump got 55%. This last time, Trump got 56%. Kamala Harris got 42%. And to me, it feels like that is the thing to look at is like, what is it about that 1% that it seems like both parties just seem to be playing for that 1%. And when I, when I hear people talk about their sort of disappointment and disillusionment with the Democratic Party, it might be in part because it feels as though Democratic Party has Just sort of assumed that every other race is going to overwhelmingly vote for Democratic ideas and Democratic policies and they have just chosen to get into this battle for this 1%. Is it a thing where then you can bring in a Stephen A. Smith and it's like, okay, all of a sudden, yeah, now you're gonna have to like, can you both figure out what this 1% that these two parties have decided that they're gonna fight over? Are you the person who's going to be able to argue that and are you the person who's going to be able to instill confidence in all of the other voters that have that are going to be okay with the fact that in this public thing you are not addressing their concerns while you continue to have this fight for this 1%?

[C]

I don't know what the first take demo is, but maybe.

[A]

Yeah, yeah. I. I mean, what I can tell you though is that if there is a bit of a compromise solution for the exploratory committee to consider, it would be okay. What if we get a real Democratic candidate top of the ticket and what if Stephen A. Smith did the thing that he is loathe to do in any sector of his life and be the vice president, be the secondary figure? And so we did ask our sample of over a thousand likely American voters who would be the best 2028 Democratic candidate for Vice president. And the results were as Wyatt is already having his head in his hands. Mark Cuban, 14%.

[B]

No.

[A]

Stephen A. Smith, 12%.

[B]

No.

[A]

Dwayne Johnson, 12%.

[B]

No.

[A]

Matthew McConaughey, 10%.

[C]

All right, no.

[A]

John Stewart, 9%. Oprah Winfrey, 7%. Pablo Torre, 1%. No, not sure. 35%.

[B]

Yes.

[C]

Oh, God, Mark Cuban. Yeah.

[B]

By the way, such a great job with the Mavericks.

[A]

We should say that when we reached.

[C]

Out, wasn't Nico wasn't one of the ideas.

[A]

Well, he did hire Nico Harrison. I do want to say also there.

[B]

Was all that sexual harassment stuff.

[A]

Well, we did reach out to Mark Cuban for comment on the fact that he polled at 14% and Stephen A. Smith pulled at 12%. And he wrote back in an email as this is want quote, I need to reconsider my life if I only beat STEPHEN A. By 2%.

[B]

No, you don't, Mark Cuban. You don't stay the out of politics.

[A]

At the end of every episode of Pablo Torre finds out a show about finding stuff out and also torturing Wyatt's an act and making him question his friendship with me. What did we find out today, guys?

[C]

I found out that Stephen A. Smith is a viable minor candidate for the Democratic nominee in 2028, but maybe not as viable as he thinks. And I found out that LeBron James was right in his argument with Stephen A. Smith about whether he should be talking about his son. Because you shouldn't be talking about somebody's son. And I found out the LeBron James might not have been right about his presence at Kobe Bryant's funeral.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, Wyatt, what did you find out today?

[B]

I found out there's not enough Remy.

[C]

Martin.

[B]

To have done this podcast today. I'm taking both those bottles and whatever else you got, but that's still not going to be enough. I you're both delightful people.

[A]

What I really found out today is that Widen is the new campaign manager for Other Not sure other not sure.

[B]

2028 put it on a T shirt.

[A]

Thank you both for doing this. Pablo Torre Finds out is produced by Walter Averoma, Ryan Cortez, Sam Dawig, Juan Galindo, Patrick Kim, neely Loman, Rob McRae, Rachel Miller, Howard Carl Scott, Matt Sullivan, Claire Taylor, Chris Tominiello and Juliet Warren. Our studio engineering by RG Systems Our sound design by NGW Post. Our theme song, as always, is by John Bravo and we will talk to you next time.