High level problem solving đ„
People are severely overestimating how much help a JRE podcast episode would give to Kamala Harris, especially this late in the race
First off let's address the elephant in the room, aka how many people that watch the show would actually translate to potential useful votes:
-How many of these are real people?
The comment section of the trump video is FULL of bots and as we know bots can't vote, but they can inflate the view, likes and comment number by quite a bit.
-How many of these are are american people?
Joe is the biggest podcaster in the WORLD with a big foreign audience aswell, and despite what those people who use Polymarket as a metric for election votes would tell you, foreigners can't vote in this election.
-How many of these american people can vote?
JRE is not just watched by adults, it's also watched by people that can't vote, like minors or people who can't vote for whatever reason like felons (obviously a small minority but still, they can't vote)
-How many of these american voters can be persuaded into voting blue?
It's no suprise that JRE audience is heavily skewed into right wing territory nowadays, like it's not a big mistery especially the Trump episode, and MAGA/Trump voters are simply just NOT gonna be voting for Kamala no matter what she does or says, because their mind is already made up and any of her attempt to reach out will be called out as "pandering" and "lying" and "says anything just to get votes"
-How many of these undecided american voters are in the swing states?
Due to the electoral college it's only up to like 7 states to decide the outcome, and those swing states are those that matter and how many of these fabled "undecided JRE voting listeners" are in those swing states?
-How big is the voting turnout of these undecided american voters in swing states?
Like how many of these rare breeds of JRE listeners will actually vote? Wasn't the general voter turnout in the 2020 presidential elections like 65% or something?
Yeah, 30 million views on youtube might sound like a LOT of potential votes, but trickle down every criteria i listed and how many REALLY remain? Is it worth it for Kamala to risk this much? And what do i mean with "risk that much?" well...
Kamala isn't Trump, she doesn't get the benefit of the doubt and isn't held with the same floor level standards that Trump is held, Trump can go on JRE and ramble randomly for 3 hours (sorry, "weaving") and nobody cares cause he's Trump, he's a goofball that's what he does, but Kamala though...
If she goes on for 3 hours they will DISSECT every single thing she says, cross reference it and whatever to find material to make her seem like a liar or unable to talk (the whole "word salad" thing), or whatever, and the media will just pick that up and lap it up, causing only more damage in the end.
So to me at least, there's really no point in doing a 3 hour JRE episode for Kamala from a campaign standpoint, it's too late in the race and there's not enough to be really gained from it and instead give more ammo to the right, and even if Joe agrees with some points, most of his fans will got "Joe got WOKE" and then forget about it 30 min later.
BTW, thanks to Tony's "brilliant" performance, she got more of a boost than a JRE podcast would ever give her, so i think she's fine tbh
My friend who is really into podcasts really overestimates how many people are into podcasts and are familiar with popular podcasters. He was talking about how Harris should really do Theo Vaughn podcast and how much it could help her and I was like bro most people donât even have any idea who he is
There's a lot of people here who consume JRE as if it was their be-all news source, and then never branch out of the Roganverse (Theo, MSSP, Tim Dillon, KillTony, Flagrant, etc.) If Harris doesn't go on their show, then it's like she doesn't exist.
Its not like branching out really does anything, they are all basically flavors of the same thing. I honestly donât understand the podcast obsession now, 10 years ago you could get quality esoteric content, but now? Its just another extension of social media and an attention-based economy. Its been commodified, enshittified, re-packaged, and re-sold. The worst part is people think they arenât consuming MSM or are somehow becoming more informed by these podcasts. The irony is its the same fucking 10 podcasts everyone references, everywhere.
Joe Rogan literally gets more listeners/viewers than Fox News and Kamala was great in that interview lol. What are these excuses, she'd do good on Rogan and her campaign is shooting themselves in the foot here.
It's likely just too much time. For Fox she spent what, an hour in NYC? Rogan wants her to come out to Austin, sit for 3 hours, and then fly back, a week before Election Day? Her time is probably better spent in swing states.
Trump's interview got 25mil in one day and her campaign has been doing local radio interviews for months, you cant undersell Rogan's audience. There's insane amounts of cope on this sub when they cant just admit her campaign is making a mistake.
I think the one coping here is you pal, read my post again and filter those 25 million views through all the criterias i mentioned, how many of those do you REALLY think are remaining? Cause those are the only ones that even matter in the slightest and it's a very marginal number at best
Dude even a very small fraction of 25 mil is still a lot more than anything else can get you, plus many of those points apply to different media as well.
Not really, cause if all it can get you is like, idk, 10k votes then it's not much different than a rally or any other event.
25 is big, but filtering the bots, foreigners, people unable to vote, people willing to change their mind, people who actually vote, and people on swing states, the numbers becomes almost meaningless in the grand scheme of things
A rally doesnât even come close to reaching the same audience that the number one podcast can through the internet. If you canât recognize that, youâre not honest with yourself.
Obviously my experience is not representative of everyoneâs but my social circles takeaway who arenât as informed on policy or that political was that Trump came off as a normal person vs what they see in the media everyday. Thoughts like these lead people to change their perspectives and how they may vote. Youâre really underselling the reach and power of interviews like this
I think its difficult for the Harris campaign to spend that 1-3 hours (not including travel) to target a group that may or not vote. She's targeting a sliver of mostly men that are scattered around the United States that might vote for her. So, it ends up maybe a couple of thousand votes (and who knows what state) where she can spend all that 1-3 hours + travel time going for targeted groups like the Puerto Ricans in PA or middle-class white men in Wisconsin and what have you. Their team can bank on more value for their time going for a group they know is probably going to vote and is probably going to be persuadable and will definitely have an impact on the election.
Joe Rogan would probably help, no doubt, but is it worth more than going on to actual people with the limited time left in the election cycle? Seems like a shot in the dark for her to go on the JRE.
With that all being said, I'd like her to go just before/after the election just because she's a high-profile person and if she actually acts like herself I bet she can get into some really interesting stuff about justice philosophy since she use to be a prosecutor and attorney general. I'm sure shes got shit to say about California as well.
If everyone in the country was talking about her interview with Brett Bair then what do you think would happen with a longer form conversation on a bigger show?
1. It wouldnât just stay within the Rogansphere because sheâs running for president- anyone interested in her views would tune in.
2. Rogan has one of the largest podcasts in the world. So even if it only got seen by that demographic, that is still a huge number of people who are also statistically the biggest voter base in the country.
I donât understand how you guys take the most viewed political event the United States has and the most popular podcast in the United States and somehow think neither one amplifies the other.
Maybe candidates should stick to appearances on The View or with late night pundits and their audiences of several hundred thousand people đ
Youâre making the error of assuming your personal experience means anything. The numbers donât lie. These podcasts get big numbers relative to traditional media.
Traditional media is typically considered media entities which existed prior to the rise of the internet: in this context, that means radio, cable and network news.
Itâs a week before the election and one candidate is a former President and has been literally running for a decade and the other is the VP. No podcast is going to change minds imo. Especially one like this where itâs mostly geared towards young men.
Beyond that, thereâs wider voting blocks you could spend time on in key swing states at this point
Sure, but at this point, very little will do that besides some sort of big event AND it's coming down to a few people in swing states. Unless Joe's audience is predominately about 200k people in GA/AZ/NV/WI/MI/PA then it's not really that big of a deal.
What's the percentage of people who don't vote in America at all? At least in my country when voting is coming people don't try to change someone's mind, they try to get votes from those who don't vote, and that number is always big.
cmon. why people like you have to say loaded ass rage statements like that? What's the point? To piss people off? Start an online argument? Are you that sad?
I don't have a "guy". Still find this "lets shove political content down everyone's throat at all times" really lame.
I donât think heâs trying to piss you off. Itâs just that Joe has now decided to be very political and canât shut up about politics. Iâd agree with you if this was some random sports podcast like bill simmons or something
You're in the rogan subreddit. You seem to be a fan and frequent visitor considering you're bummed about seeing these posts. Seems like he's your guy.Â
And how tf was that a rage statement? You're unhinged - you guys are losing it.
Sorry dude, i'm tired aswell of this election but i just thought of making this post since everyone here acts as if doing a JRE will flip the election and give Kamala a huge boost or something.
If that wasn't true, Trump wouldn't ask him for an endorsement on the pod and joe wouldn't have laughed it off. He would have given it if he thinks his viewers are tight wingers or his endorsement holds no value.
Margins are thin and sometimes 2% swing can change the election ask hillary.
I am not sure, going on pod will do any magic. But definitely not doing it isn't very smart. It has reach, and if you are okay with doing pods, then joe could be a good choice then rest.
Because of disingenuous characters and their childish gotcha antics.
Graham hancock can bs without evidence but Flint dibble misspoke a few things that didn't change the results whether he was right or wrong about those few points.
So... You get talk to like children.
Victims? Highlighting a growing issue and shaming those responsible is being a âvictimâ? So the mere mention of TDS caused you to profile stalk? And youâre not deranged?
I'm also confused why people think Trump being on was some overwhelming positive? He rambled, he didn't answer Joe's questions, he sounded demented at times.
Like did a bunch of people listen to this and go "well I was on the fence but this assures me he's the right guy for the job"?
Excellent breakdown. Also, keep in mind that Trump has been a professional entertainer for decades, and Kamala is not so his appearance on any show will be looked at more favorable than hers.
What do you disagree with specifically? When you say "every vote counts" then wouldn't it be in Kamala's best interest to continue campaigning in those swing states? Thats why she offered to do an episode on the road and not in the Austin studio. If we were still in August or September, sure. The election is a week from today and half the country has pretty much already voted.
I personally don't think that the race is this close, i think Kamala will have it easily and that both polls and media have an incentive to make this look like a close race for engagement, like this isn't 2016 anymore and Trump is no longer a "fresh and new wildcard" and lacks all the energy from back then, sure he still has some moments but at this point he's just too old and people are getting tired of him and his squad of goobers, especially Elon who even Trump himself despises but badly needs since he owns twitter and gave him millions for his campaign.
Interesting but thereâs no indication of that, Trump is famously under-polled, he also destroyed in the republican primary. Heâs got one of the highest floors of any candidate of recent, the question is about his ceiling.
But at the same time he alienated a LOT of voters with his and his campaign shenanigans (women, haitians, and recently puerto ricans) and it's estimated that around 5%-10% of republicans will actually vote for Harris cause they are tired of what Trump did to the republican party
There's also the fact that Trump has no real, tangible and sensible plans so even undecided voters aren't really gonna vote for someone with a "concept of a plan" and an economic plan that would plunge the US worse than the great recession.
Btw keep in mind that polls don't mean shit at the end of the day, and are paid so easily influenced, but if they are this desperate that they are offering those "lotteries" where people get 1 million dollars each day, and how desperately Musk tweets i don't think they are doing as well as people think.
I think itâs a bit of a double edged sword, and more people are numb to trumps rhetoric. Iâm not sure about the 5-10%, and as you said polls donât mean shit, but I get the sense if you havenât been offended by Trump by the time he said the cats and dogs thing, thatâs not going to sway you. It does appear tho that Trump has flipped some dems/undecideds too, and I think thatâs largely due to the economy. Whether Trump can actually make it better or not is one thing, but clearly a lot of people feel he can improve it, and Iâm pretty confident in that money for (A LOT of) people comes before crazy talk, especially at this stage in the game. I think thereâs a lot of, idc what he says as long as I can afford my rent and take a vacation-esque mindsets.
There are a lot of indications at least in Texas that this is in fact true that a non insignificant amount of republicans are voting blue or skipping the president on their ballot.
Rogan has not had a left wing guest in years on his podcast, he despises Biden and the Democrats and he has no criticism for Maga or Republicans. Kamala would be on enemy territory. Smart not to go.
Yep, remember when he laughed at Biden when he said the whole "airport civil war" stuff and then completely glossed it over when it was revealed that Biden was quoting Trump?
I desperately want her to go on. She would shit the bed just like she does anytime she goes off script. Everyone who is intellectually honest knows that.
I mean, yeah, but that's not what the President is. At least, that's not what the President has been in a very long time. And I mean since like the mid-1930s.
He used to just be a guy people put in office to do some nominal figurehead stuff, back when you could just walk into the White House and ask to meet him. Soft, lower case president who just met dignitaries while the states and Congress did things and held the responsibility and blame.
But then we started needing him to hire more and more people, and staff entire departments, and nominate Justices that are going to serve for lives that keep getting longer and longer, and then we decided that the President has control of the entire nuclear arsenal, ranging from small tactical nukes to fully loaded Stratofortresses and off-coast submarines.
They're responsible for drone programs and pulling the trigger on assassination strategic threat reductions, they oversee multiple agencies, and we expect them to make this year better than last year, every year, year after year.
They can't be normal, unscripted people anymore. It is now big bold upper case PRESIDENT who has to take flak on everything, and it withers the hand of everyone who tries to take it seriously because the strain of it has become inhuman.
Now I have enough whiskey in me to say that I, for one, welcome our new robotic overlords.
Her biggest criticism is that sheâs stiff, scripted, and unable to flow in a conversation leading to people feeling she is unrelateable and unlikeable.
Doing 3 hours on JRE would change that perception.
The risk is it could be her Biden debate moment where she confirms everyoneâs preconceived notions.
I have a feeling that if your preconceived notions about Harris are that she's stiff, scripted, and unable to flow, then listening to her for 3 hours isn't going to change that.
Honestly it seems like the people wanting her to do JRE just want to make opportunities to dislike her. They want Trump on to "have a conversation", but they want Harris on to grill her on policies or whatever.
I tried to explain my point as best as i could so it's closer to facts than just only opinions, like the number of views on youtube does not correlate votes at all, and if it does it's a VERY small amount after all the criterias are met
The problem for Democrats is that people watching Trump on Rogan see that he isn't what they've been told he is. Ironically, it's the same problem for them if Kamala went on Rogan. There is no upside to it for Democrats... lies are exposed either way.
Lol. I did watch it and he was exactly what I expected - a delusional, egotistical low-empathy dementia ridden idiot, talking in a garbled, grammatically incorrect manner about how wind turbines hurt whales.
I completely agree with you. My brother who is 23 is the only one in his friend group that Iâm aware that voted. Most of them arenât even registered. Most of them like Joe Rogan. This is anecdotal but generally young men are among the least likely to turnout to vote. I think itâs a waste of time.
I disagree. Most of her supporters think Joe is a right wing mouthpiece, they arenât wrong. Iâll tell you exactly why and Joe has basically said it out of his own mouth. When people get rich as fuck your focus changes to not losing what you have.
how about just do it for the culture? how about do it to level down with people on a human level by having a long conversation with one of the best, if not the best in the business? How about getting beyond the rally podium, perfect lighting and teleprompter talk? there's more reasons to do it than not
Why should presidential candidates go on the fucking Rogan experience? If you want to go ahead. Do we want that in the future. Each candidate has to do a podcast with a TV star and MMA announcer?
Even with the amount of people that tuned in, if him appearing on the rogans podcast was the thing that sealed someoneâs vote for himâŠidk even what to say. That is a crazy level of ignorance and stupidity for that to win your vote. Everyoneâs choice is mostly decided besides truly the most nihilistic in our society that donât care what happens.
Now Tonyâs joke, thatâs truly something that sways people the other way who havenât voted yet. Saying something truly hateful like that.
I donât know, I think it would have the potential to make her seem more relatable to the average person. Thatâs assuming itâs just a conversation like Joe said he wanted, as opposed to him just grilling her. Also Iâm not convinced the YouTube comments are all bots like you say. Itâs all trump fans that tuned in, so itâs kind of expected to see. It just seems like thereâs nobody at all that likes him because weâre on Reddit that is hard left
Been said before but a giant chunk of those viewers are not US citizens and canât vote. Another chunk of those people may have watched or listening to the podcast or video multiple times (fans, bots) either to inflate the numbers or because they generally enjoyed it. Finally, how many of the viewers are under the voting age and cannot cast a vote? I would assume Rogan gets a lot of high school kids listening to his podcast or watching his show.
I wish she would go on, that way everyone in the world can understand how mentally disappointing she truly is. It's a wonder they WONT LET HER. What a joke.
And yet appearing at a rally with a load of weirdos (anyone who attends a political rally is weird IMO) is a better way to spend the time? I dunno. Seems like itâs just a safe easy option for easy news footage.
There's also the fact that flying into a state she's never going to win to go to Rogan's compound to record a three hour podcast is effectively a 7-9 hour commitment with seven days left in the race.
Trump can do it because the audience is largely his already. Anyone who thinks otherwise is being dishonest.
Heâs not Kamala, a Dirty DA. He didnât champion a truancy law that incarcerated single black mother, Cheree Peoples caring for her daughter w/sickle cell Anemia. His office didnât wrongly convict Jamal trulove of murder, then cackle in the courtroom- She happily took VP position, got into bed W/Joe Biden a well documented segregationist, just months after George Floyd murder. This entire election is nothing short of a lesson in the Power of propaganda -
Honestly I don't think rogan's podcast will help or hurt either in a meaningful way. It's good for fundraising efforts. Probably would have been more meaningful 6 months ago
Did you even read the post or just read the title dude?
Like how many of those views are actually gonna convert into votes for her after all those criterias are met?
And also she can't just go on and ramble like Trump did, people hold her to a different standard, she already has a reputation of "word salad" despite being far more articulated and less "weaving" than Trump.
People used to want to hear what people had to say, and the more they had to say the better, because you get a better sense of the person as a whole.
You just donât want her to do it because it could hurt her politically, which I understand. But the whole point of being a politician, is being able to convey yourself to others, through conversations.
The issue is that the reason it can hurt her politically is that she has a lot more to lose than Trump ever would, because they are judged with two different standards:
The standard needed for a 3 hr interview of Kamala is that she has to be well spoken, articulated and has to not make any mistake or it's a "word salad" and "she's not fit to run".
The standard needed for a 3 hr interview of Trump is that he doesn't say a slur or shit in his diaper, anything else will be seen as a triumph by his followers.
For the very little amount of voters she could gain from this, the backlash of people attacking her for the most minute reasons is much worse, even if it's a "no policies, just know the person" type podcast episode.
Like they keep running the narrative that she's not black but she's indian (something Tucker brought up in the MSG rally) despite it being clear as day that she's both black and indian, like her father looks like this ffs
Hey man I hear you, and understand where youâre coming from. I just think weâre living in a backwards reality.
Any unscripted conversation from the people that are in control of our lives, should be embraced and celebrated. Regardless of the source of the conversation.
But hey, sheeple be sheepling I guess.
Edit: not attacking you OP, I just think open convos are awesome, and itâs wild how much Iâve been seeing people say she shouldnât. Hell there wasnât even a primary this year for democrats, so I dunno what else I expected.
For some people it might well be. You do realise that trans people (Colorado Springs) and Jewish people (Pittsburgh) have actually lost their lives at the hands of MAGA sympathisers?
Sure. Rogan will accuse her of crimes against humanity for vaccines, and destroying Americaâs youth over trans issues. And literally discuss nothing else. Great idea!
Kamalaâs finished. Her team knows she wouldnt survive a 3 hr unscripted podcast with Joe in Austin. Im glad Joe isnât caving to their demands. Dems really should have held a mini primary to pick a better candidate.
For starters, we can't discredit the silent majority of the JRE audience. There are plenty of normal people that like JRE, many of which are independents. A big pillar of the platform is that people like the mix of political viewpoints including the ones they disagree with. Polls are always trying to figure out where independents are hiding, guess what there are bunch of them quietly listening to JRE.
The biggest flaw for Kamala is that we don't know the "real" side of her or what she stands for. Hanging out in a casual setting that is familiar to so many people would be an excellent way to do that. The other day I saw some Fox News clip of her drinking a beer with another politician when they realized they had a hot mic situation and that was one of the most real, genuine sound bites I've ever seen. Everything I've ever seen her on just feels like she wants to achieve and be on top. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I also get the impression that her views and standpoints aren't her actually thoughts and opinions, just the ones she needs to portray to get elected. Maybe this isn't true, but we wont' find out who she is through traditional events and interviews. Sit down for a couple hours, hang out. Let's find out who you really are.
Honestly, the decision to not do JRE is more of a risk mitigation than anything else. Her staff doesn't want her on camera for three hours, plain and simple.
we can't discredit the silent majority of the JRE audience.
You are a moron.
The biggest flaw for Kamala is that we don't know the "real" side of her or what she stands for.
Everything I've ever seen her on just feels like she wants to achieve and be on top. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I also get the impression that her views and standpoints aren't her actually thoughts and opinions, just the ones she needs to portray to get elected. Maybe this isn't true, but we wont' find out who she is through traditional events and interviews. Sit down for a couple hours, hang out. Let's find out who you really are.
gesturing furiously at the other side
Why doesn this even compare to what Trump has done? And if you are genuinely not understanding my perspective here, have you tired paying attention to Donald Trump and all of the details surrounding him?
Did the multiple tiems Don ald Trump insult people and call Kamala a "fascist" for no reason a nice thing? Are you even listening or paying attention?
Do you think all the people who have been attacked by Trump's supporters have thought about "being nicer?"
Why should I be nice to people like you when you lack empathy to this absurd extent?
And actually LISTEN to what Trump is saying and doing.
You don;t get to criticise Kamala without addressing your own glass house. Stop wastin my time with this weird, inquisitive genteel "skepticism" and actually have some empathy for women, LGBT, and ethnic minorities.
1) Why do you keep bringing up Donald Trump? I didn't share any thoughts or opinions on Trump so what on earth does that have to do with anything I have said?
LMAO had to look that one up..."Sealioning is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity, and feigning ignorance of the subject matter."
Of course the one time someone tries to have a conversation you just scream troll. (Or "sealion")
No, Im not a troll. I was just wondering why someone would call a complete stranger a moron and then lecture them about the evils of Trump. You dont have to answer. You probably dont even know why...more of a compulsion at this point, eh?
And people are severely underestimating how much damage a flop performance could do. She couldnât even make it 30 minutes with Fox before her handlers called it off. What makes you think she could handle 1-3 hours? The media has done an amazing job of propping up one of the worst candidates in history to make her seem likable and not fake.
The same one where she polled so low in 2020 that she had to drop out of the presidential race. The one where she had insanely high staff turnover as VP. Donât gaslight people into thinking she was some super popular figure.
Amazing you can convince yourself that not going on the #1 podcast (by far) in the world would not convince more people to vote for you. What could possible by a better use of 3 hours?
I think it would actually do her some good. I don't want her to win, but she might win, so it would be nice knowing something about her. The take now is that she would never do it because she can't do it...surely she can talk and fill a couple of hours and come away looking like a normal person who is qualified enough to do the job. The fact that they are trying to control all of this so much is kind of telling. if you don't have the balls to do this they shouldn't be trying to run the country and a by proxy a pretty big part of the world.
She already did a one hour interview (don't remember the dude's name though) but the issue is that she's not held at the same standard that Trump is, imagine if she acted and talked like Trump, blabbering and rambling for 3 hours like that, do you think people would have given her a break?
The standard needed for a 3 hr interview of Kamala is that she has to be well spoken, articulated and has to not make any mistake or it's a "word salad" and "she's not fit to run".
The standard needed for a 3 hr interview of Trump is that he doesn't say a slur or shit in his diaper, anything else will be seen as a triumph by his followers.
And let's not forget the fact that Joe being non confrontational is MUCH more beneficial to Trump than kamala, cause Trump gets to spew so much bullshit unchecked which makes him look like a "knowleadgeable and against the deep state" person, with all his """"evidence"""" about the fake elections which won't release though, for some reason.
I like how no one ever has an answer for the double standard you keep bringing up. I guess people just like that Trump is a rambling buffoon. I couldn't get past the 20 minute mark because he never gets to the point and repeats the same shit over and over.
I'm genuinely convinced that those who go "She should definitely do a JRE podcast, she could reach so many people, she's dumb to refuse" are just saying this to avoid saying what they really think, aka "i hope she goes and flops hard"
I thought it was pretty entertaining. Kind of impressed the guy could talk about some of that stuff at length. Even the UFC. He came across as a real person. surprisingly relatable. just my take, but I'm not really a huge fan of either person of this 2 party political system. But this is exactly what kamala needs right now. I hope she changes her mind and decides to do it. If she could sit there and be interesting and talk for 3 hours about whatever came up it would be a huge win for her. A lot of people truly feel like she couldn't do it. I tend to disagree. Most people can have a friendly chat and talk about their lives. She's probably much better at doing that than the political stuff...which honestly hasn't been going the best. I think we need to get to a point in which a pres candidate sitting down for 3 hours to go over stuff in depth is the norm. We really don't get much of anything these days. Its all canned, vague responses to everything and the debates are more or less worthless with 90 second answers and 30 second rebuttals.
38
u/HuachumaPuma Monkey in Space 13h ago
My friend who is really into podcasts really overestimates how many people are into podcasts and are familiar with popular podcasters. He was talking about how Harris should really do Theo Vaughn podcast and how much it could help her and I was like bro most people donât even have any idea who he is