Podcast Summary: Tangle – PREVIEW - The Friday Edition: Everything We Got Right and Wrong in 2024

Host: Isaac Saul
Release Date: January 11, 2025
Platform: Acast
Website: readtangle.com

Introduction

In the episode titled "PREVIEW - The Friday Edition: Everything We Got Right and Wrong in 2024," host Isaac Saul embarks on a reflective journey, evaluating the Tangle podcast’s analysis and predictions throughout the tumultuous year of 2024. Saul discusses the successes and missteps in covering pivotal political events, aiming to provide transparency and accountability to his listeners. This episode serves as a comprehensive review, offering insights into major political developments and the podcast’s performance in interpreting and predicting these events.

Grading Methodology

Isaac Saul explains the method used to assess the podcast’s past content:

• Archival Review: The editorial team revisited over 200 newsletters and podcasts from 2024, focusing on the most impactful stories.
• Grading Scale: Each analysis was graded on an American letter scale from A (excellent) to F (poor).
• Focus Areas: Emphasis was placed on major national and international events that garnered significant public attention and feedback.

Key Analyses and Reflections

1. Trump Wins Iowa Caucuses

Original Take:
Saul confidently predicted Donald Trump’s dominance in the Iowa caucuses, asserting that Trump was almost assured to be the Republican nominee based on polling data.

Reflection:
“Reflecting on this, it’s funny to imagine this was something that needed to be said at the time. I’d been writing since August of 2023 that Trump was basically assured to be the nominee.” (03:15)

Grade: A
The prediction held true, as Trump solidified his position, and Saul maintained that his analysis was accurate and well-founded.

2. ICJ's Genocide Ruling on Israel’s War in Gaza

Original Take:
Initially, Saul argued that Israel was not committing genocide in Gaza, citing reasons such as delayed ground invasions, treatment of wounded, and opening corridors for aid.

Reflection:
Over the year, Saul’s perspective shifted significantly in light of new evidence and reports from organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. He acknowledged the evolving situation and the mounting evidence suggesting actions that could meet the definition of genocide.

“The enemy Hamas, is, by Israel’s own telling, greatly diminished and defeated. Yet the bombings continue. Over 300 people have already been killed in the first week of this year, including dozens of children.” (07:45)

Grade: D
Saul recognized that his initial analysis did not account for the escalating severity of the conflict, leading to a lower grade for this assessment.

3. Supreme Court Hearing Trump’s Immunity Case

Original Take:
Saul anticipated that the Supreme Court would rule that Trump’s actions fall outside the scope of presidential immunity, allowing the case to proceed.

Reflection:
Contrary to his prediction, the Supreme Court took an unexpected stance, leading to a convoluted and unworkable legal precedent that Saul did not foresee.

“I was way too optimistic about the court’s views aligning with my own, and they ultimately broke in a way I really did not expect them to.” (12:30)

Grade: D
The misjudgment regarding the Supreme Court’s decision warranted a lower grade, highlighting the unpredictability of judicial outcomes.

4. Iran’s Attack on Israel

Original Take:
Saul emphasized Iran’s role as the primary aggressor in the Middle East, arguing that Iran’s direct attack on Israel marked a significant geopolitical shift.

Reflection:
Although his analysis on Iran’s aggression was largely accurate, he overestimated the potential for escalating conflict into a broader regional war.

“The cost, as I note in my thoughts on the genocide in Gaza, has been incalculable. But there’s a reason many Israelis are celebrating these recent developments.” (15:50)

Grade: B
While Saul’s assessment of Iran’s actions and their implications was largely correct, his prediction about the escalation missed the mark, resulting in a moderately positive grade.

5. Biden’s New Asylum Rules

Original Take:
Saul critiqued President Biden’s executive orders to restrict asylum requests, predicting that the rules would be struck down by courts and that they were desperate measures.

Reflection:
Although the executive orders did lead to a significant drop in illegal border crossings, much of his prediction regarding legal challenges did not materialize as anticipated.

“Illegal border crossings dropped to a four-year low, so we missed the big thing about whether these rules would hold up to court scrutiny.” (18:20)

Grade: B−
His analysis was mostly accurate, though he missed some key developments regarding the legal standing of the asylum rules.

6. Economic Signals and Inflation

Original Take:
Saul analyzed the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ report on inflation, stating that while Biden was emphasizing stable inflation rates, it was insufficient to address voter concerns about affordability.

Reflection:
With inflation rates stabilizing and becoming less of a pressing issue, Saul’s assessment proved prescient, validating his concerns about the administration’s messaging.

“Maintaining a debatably acceptable inflation benchmark is just not good enough reason for Biden to ask for an undecided voter’s support.” (20:00)

Grade: A
This analysis accurately reflected the economic trajectory and the administration’s challenges in addressing voter sentiment.

7. Hunter Biden Trial

Original Take:
Saul speculated that Hunter Biden had a strong chance of conviction and that President Biden would refrain from pardoning him, considering it a persistent issue.

Reflection:
While he correctly anticipated the likelihood of conviction, Saul misjudged President Biden’s decision-making regarding a pardon, leading to an incorrect prediction.

“The odds of Hunter getting convicted in this trial are strong.” (22:15)

Grade: D−
The inaccurate prediction about the pardon overshadowed the correct conviction assessment, resulting in a poor grade.

8. President Biden Dropping Out of the Race

Original Take:
Saul advocated for Democrats to replace Biden with a stronger candidate to reset the race against Trump, predicting eventual withdrawal due to internal party pressure.

Reflection:
His analysis was largely accurate, suggesting that Biden would step aside in favor of a more viable candidate, which aligned with actual campaign developments.

“With intraparty challenges mounting, I’m increasingly confident Biden will exit the race.” (24:30)

Grade: A
Saul’s foresight regarding Biden’s potential withdrawal was validated by subsequent political maneuvers within the Democratic Party.

9. Trump Assassination Attempt

Original Take:
Saul emphasized the unpredictability of violent actors’ motivations, cautioning against quick partisan assignments of blame.

Reflection:
His balanced approach in assigning responsibility primarily to the shooter and discouraging partisan conclusions remained accurate as the motives remained unclear.

“Few of us remember that the man who attempted to kill Ronald Reagan did so because he wanted to impress actress Jodie Foster.” (26:00)

Grade: A
Saul maintained a nuanced perspective, correctly handling the sensitive nature of the assassination attempt without succumbing to partisan rhetoric.

Overall Performance and Learnings

Isaac Saul concludes the episode by acknowledging both the strengths and weaknesses of Tangle’s coverage in 2024. He credits the growth of the editorial team and his own development as a writer for the improvements, while also recognizing the areas where predictions did not align with actual outcomes. Saul emphasizes the importance of accountability and continuous learning, committing to more thorough analyses and reflections in future editions.

Conclusion Quote:
“If you spend a whole year talking about politics every single day, you’re bound to get a lot of things right and a lot of things wrong.” (01:10)

Future Content and Membership Information

Saul announces that a more detailed written review will be available on the Tangle website, with additional grades and analyses to be explored in a bonus newsletter for interested subscribers. He encourages listeners to subscribe for full access to content and to support the podcast.

Notable Mention:
“If you are a free listener listening with ads, you’ll get a preview of the show and then you’ll be asked to subscribe to listen to the whole thing.” (05:00)

Production Credits

• Writer: Isaac Saul
• Editor & Engineer: John Lawrence
• Script Editors: Ari Weitzman, Will Kaback, Bailey Saul, Sean Brady
• Logo Designer & Social Media Manager: Magdalena Bokova
• Music Producer: Diet75

Final Thoughts

This episode of Tangle serves as a transparent and introspective look into the podcast’s analytical journey through a challenging year. By grading past content and reflecting on its alignment with actual events, Isaac Saul provides valuable lessons on media accountability and the complexities of political forecasting. Listeners are encouraged to engage with the content, provide feedback, and consider supporting the podcast through subscriptions to gain deeper insights and comprehensive analyses.

Listen to the full episode and subscribe for more detailed analyses and exclusive content on readtangle.com.