 If you ever wonder how people ended up drowning witches or killing neighbors in civil wars or following Chrissy Teigen on Instagram, you can bet hysteria was the driving force. For years, Greg Gutfeld has entertained and edified audiences by hosting Fox News Channel shows such as Red Eye, The Five, and the Greg Gutfeld Show, and by authoring bestsellers such as How to Be Right, Not Cool, and The Joy of Hate. Now the 55-year-old punk rock fan has just published The Plus, self-help for people who hate self-help, a funny yet serious book about becoming a better person. Basically, it's impulse control for people who have options that lend themselves to doing negative things. In a wide-ranging conversation, Gutfeld tells reason why he thinks Americans have so many problems controlling our worst impulses. Now we will eventually emerge better off from the COVID-19 lockdowns and why we will reelect Donald Trump in November. Greg Gutfeld, thank you for talking to me. My pleasure, Nick. It always is a pleasure. It's a pleasure before it begins and it gets less and less pleasurable as the time goes on. The regret goes up, the pleasure goes down, and the regret goes up. That's also known as Saturday night, right? Yes. Your new book, which I read with pleasure and joy in a steaming hot afternoon actually in Washington Square Park in New York, in quarantine New York, The Plus Self-Help for People Who Hate Self-Help, why did you feel a need to write a self-help book right now? First off, I love the fact that you read this book in public in downtown New York and you didn't get jumped. You know what it was? So I didn't have a contract for, I had a contract for a book but I didn't have to write one for another year or so, but I had all these weird proposals that were all linked, stuff about social media, stuff about cancel culture, mobs, and all this stuff. And it was all kind of bothering me. So I started writing these proposals as articles and then I realized I'm really tired of hearing me complain so that other people must be tired of hearing me complain. Meanwhile, I'm thinking about how to make my life better. And this idea was like, well, why can't I create solutions for these problems? And is there a solution? Yeah, so I mean, the controlling metaphor, the big idea in the book is in the title, The Plus, and you talk about, you know, basically you can either be a plus or a minus, not just to yourself, but to the people around you. Can you talk a little bit about, you know, flesh that out a little bit and explain the origins of this insight, which, and I don't think I'm overselling it when I say, you know, this is probably since the invention of gravity, the discovery of gravity and the invention of fire, this is probably the third most important thing since the, and also the Beatles anthology record being released around 2000, 2001. Yes, well, and dental floss. Yes. I put dental floss up there. There's nothing more pleasurable than using dental floss. But anyway, you were correct. So, okay, basically it's impulse control for people who have options that lend themselves to doing negative things. So I need that. And I think a lot of people need that. Maybe back when religion was a bigger deal, this would come up as super obvious. The idea of thinking before you act and wondering before you send off that email or that text or saying that thing to your spouse, do you wonder, is this a plus or a minus? Like, is what I'm about to do going to make things a little bit better or a little bit worse? Most people would call that impulse control. It was a practice of improving yourself because you knew you were flawed. And that's what religion was for. Religion basically said you were screwed up and you need the ten commandments, you need rules. But we've jettisoned all that. And so as you get older and you become, I mean, I'm not going to, as I became more successful in life, options present themselves in which impulse control becomes a huge deal. And I think, by the way, I think impulse control, or lack thereof, is a huge deal right now as we're seeing across America that we've had. How do you mean impulse control? Are you telling me that you don't think that people who are rioting, not people who are protesting and spending time and writing down placards and organizing, but rioters and looters, you think that they have an impulse control problem? I think anybody who commits crimes knowing that they, in the long run, it doesn't pay, we were taught that. That's the kind of impulse control. I would put myself in that. Well, you know what, a great example of lack of impulse control is drinking knowing you're going to have a hangover. The hangover, that's the most obvious way. And I mean, looting is a destruction of your community. And I think it's also a crime of opportunity. What happened in Chicago happened because they knew they could get away with it. But there would be some kind of impulse control that would say, you know, this is wrong. There are people that own these businesses. There are people that work here. I have friends that work at this place. They're not going to be at work on Monday because the store won't be here. This is the second time we've looted this place. They're not coming back. The insurance is no longer going to be there. It's like impulse control. I feel like we're living in a state where we see impulse. We see moral judgment or any kind of judgment is somehow bigoted or mean. What about Donald Trump? Does he have impulse control problems? I think so. But thankfully, it's almost entirely verbal. Like, he doesn't start wars. Right. He's not like that. We've had this discussion that generally, everybody gets mad at Donald Trump about his personality, but his personality doesn't lead to death. I would rather take a guy with 1,000 upsetting tweets a week over a guy that creates 1,000 body baths. I know that it's not, that's the prison of two ideas. I know that. Yes. Which is a great concept in the book about, you talk about the prison of two ideas, and you emphasize that journalist especially, and I think it's more than journalist, but journalists especially love the idea that it's this versus that. It's always yes or no. It's always binary. Yeah. And I just did it now. I did it now. But because it is such a relentless criticism for four years, and it doesn't change, it's like, dude, okay, we get it. Trump's obnoxious. Trump's tweets piss you off. But if you wake up every day surprised by Trump or by Trump's words, it's like being surprised that we wake up to a sunrise or that it's something that is going to be there until it's not. Well, both the sunrise and Trump are orange, right? Exactly. Exactly. The moment I saw the brain move. Can I stay on the self-help question a bit for a second? But one of the things you said, it's about being plus rather than minus in the myriad, all of the different interactions you have every day. Can you make people around yourself? Can you make yourself feel better or do better in each interaction? I want to cut to the chase though because we're roughly the same age and we have a lot of similar tastes, and we both were raised Roman Catholic, went to Catholic schools and things like that. I know for myself, and I don't want to speak for you, but I think I know you well enough. A lot of the stuff you like, you're wearing a Melvins t-shirt, there is so much negative energy that I draw on every day. And this is what I liked about punk. This is what I liked about the sex pistols and the clash and the angry Samoans and groups like the Melvins and whatnot. There's energy and being negative. How did you flip that switch? Because it is also true that if you're pouring acid all the time, eventually it starts getting on your shoes and it starts eating on your feet and moving up your body. How did you flip negative energy into being a plus? That is a great question because I've been thinking about it a lot in terms of music that you're right. I loved punk. I loved everything from the mid-70s on and a lot of it was nihilistic. That is so great about it. It is. I'm wondering, here's the thing. I don't know if it influenced me because I don't know if I understood the lyrics at the time. My favorite band was the Clash. And they dressed like outlaw communist cowboys and Sam, their triple album was called Sandinista. I don't know how old I was, but I was 1980, so I was 16. I didn't even know. I knew what the Sandinistas were. I had to do a report on something for my religion class at Sarah on Central American politics. This is like it's fallen into your lap, right? Yeah. But so now I have bought a record player and I'm listening to a lot of this stuff and I'm like, I don't like this. And the great thing about the Melvins, I have no idea what they're singing about. And I think that even King Buzzo has said that it's only, it's like he chooses words for how they sound. And the same thing with Mike Patton chooses lyrics based on how the words sound. And if you are reading into this, although I do think that the last Buzzo, King Buzzo album he's doing with Trevor Dunn actually has some lyrics that are pointed. But the other thing though is I am almost like I would say I've moved to 80 to 90% instrumental electronica ambient music because I find that lyrics, I don't want other people's thoughts in my head. I was never like that. I love having thoughts in my head, but I don't like other people's thoughts in my head. It's too crowded in there. I don't need to be, I don't need Billy Joe Armstrong telling me that. You're an idiot. You're an American idiot. Yes. If we're allowed to still use nationalist terms like America. I love, but that's a great album, you know, American Idiot or whatever. So I mean to me, one of the things that, you know, as I was reading your book in Washington Square being egged and pelted with garbage by all the opioid losers who are not social distancing in Washington Square Park, I was thinking of this irony and this paradox that there is so much great negative energy coming out of punk. But then you need to do something with that energy and that's what I like about the book. One of the points that you make in the book that I want to kind of talk about is at some point, and I'm going to butcher the exact quote, which is much better worded than what I'm going to say, but you basically said, you know, it's really important to take a couple of moments every day and recognize that when you get all pissed off and bent out of shape over politics, that it's not that important or that's not the limit of your life. Can you talk about what you mean by that general insight? Again, I apologize for paraphrasing it so bad. If I forget that the people that I'm talking to aren't in my profession or I'm just hanging out and that I realize that what I'm talking about, they have no idea what I'm talking about, like I could be and it's like, oh, I can't believe Trump love and they go like, well, what happened? And like, I have friends that work in auto and like classic cars and they like, they know I do a show and I have friends that are in rock bands. They know I do a show, but they don't even watch it. And it's like, so it's like, I don't even bother with, hey, did you check out the show? Some people do, but generally a lot of my side from my family, you know, and some friends, you know, it's like people are doing their own thing. They have more of an allegiance and an emotional connection to sports way more than anything political. They start thinking about politics in October, maybe. I think Trump has been different because he's been so magnetic that everybody, including the people that love him or and hate him are drawn to him. I don't think there's ever been a personality like this, right? Or they're pushed away like a magnet, like you either get stuck to him or you can't even get close to him. I guess the word is polarizing, which is an overused word. But I think, you know, I like when I'm around, nobody talks about politics unless they want to talk about it with you because you are in it. But generally it's not there. And then also it's like, it's weird. OK, so if you're not living in the city, you can get engulfed in social media and think the world's going to end, right? The world's ending. You're watching Chicago, Manhattan, Seattle, Portland, whatever. But then you go outside and if you're living anywhere outside of a city, there's no impact whatsoever. You can walk out, walk around the trees. And I do this. I bought a cabin in the woods a couple of years ago. And it's like it's a universe. Wait, I'm sorry. Did you say it's the unabomber that you are now going to be the unabomber? You're living in a shack in the woods. Yeah, here's an out of context. Yeah, a part of this interview, you know, he had some good points. There you can put that in there. Living out in the middle of nowhere is really good for your brain. However, you know, I can't like, let's say I'm going outside. It's the best way to get away from this stuff. The only problem is if you're living in Manhattan or if you're living these cities, that cloud still follows you. Also, if you're in the public eye, you can be canceled, whether you're on Twitter or not. Just because you don't look at Twitter or Facebook doesn't mean there's, you know, 50 people that are trying to generate this idea that you're a scores and you need to be completely blackball. And in the book, I mean, and if I get your position wrong, please correct me. But I mean, you're not saying that people shouldn't be, you know, going back and forth on Twitter. And, you know, and if you say something, you might you might get praised or you might get criticism. But what you're talking about is a kind of over the top cancel culture where people are not even in, you know, they're not interested in talking about ideas or even agreeing or disagreeing. It's about cutting, you know, cutting somebody's knees off every given moment. It's a power move that people who perceive no power or think that they have no power, engineer in this matter gives them a sense and it's maybe fleeting. But if I got rid of, I mean, I'll get people that are trying to come after me and and they'll be, I got you, you're going down. It's like, who cares? It's like, what is this going to do for you or your family? I don't understand this. And maybe, maybe there was, maybe I got a thrill out of this. I don't know. I don't think I ever did. I think I've always pretty much defended people who even I didn't like. And and these people never, almost never returned the favor. Could you, yeah, well, you, you, you tell a very good story in, you know, at like all good self-help books, you are the hero of every story you tell. Exactly. But, but you talk about how you were wrong about the Covington Catholic school kids. Nick Sandman, the, you know, the big showdown between the Vietnam War vet who was not quite a Vietnam War vet, American Indian protester versus, you know, punky, MAGA hat wearing, you know, upper middle class kids from a Catholic school outside of Cincinnati in Covington, Kentucky. What did you get wrong? And what did you learn about kind of eating your words on that, that instance? Well, the scenario is a familiar one for me. At Saturday, I'm drinking at a place and I've noticed that my tweets don't get wonky. They just get more frequent. So if I, if I'm sober and I'm eating, I will tweet maybe twice a day at the most. And they'll be pretty good. But then if I'm drinking, I'll have like 10 and they're not like stupid. They're exactly the same. But the fact that you do the more frequently increases the risk for trouble. So your sponsor, your, your, your sponsor has like a Twitter notification. Like, oh my God, Greg hit three in an hour. I've got to do it. And he's definitely he's definitely on the rosé. But so I was there and so I'm sitting there. It's like one o'clock. I'm working on probably this book and and I watched the Covington stuff. And there was a thing that I did, which is like, which is like, it's it's it was a strategy. So I'm watching this and I go, well, you know, if people are going to trust me in my criticism, I have to police my own side too. Right. I can't just go after Joy Behar or Bill Maher. I've got to go after this punk, this punk in D.C. making fun. You know, I said something. Like, wow, I think I wrote something like this guy. This kid should be taken home without supper and spanked or something like that. And then, of course, like two hours later, we find out that, you know, anybody like there's a couple of human weaknesses. Once the willing the desire to be first, you know, oh, I'm going to get there first. Then there's this mimicry that you look around and see what other people are doing. And you do that, which is the mob kind of thinking, which I actually hate. And I think I kind of played a role in that in a tiny little way. And then just the idea that you think that all of your thoughts are worth hearing. Like, why can't I just shut up? I know what you're saying. Shut up. I am going to shut up after this interview. But for now, why do I have to tweet? Why do I have to? Why do I feel like they're not even paying me? This is the stupidest thing about Twitter, Nick, is that I can be more likely be fired for doing something free than doing what I'm paid to do because I'm sitting on Twitter and, you know, I'm like, every time you're tweeting, you're kind of jumping off a little clip. You know, so stupid. I don't understand why I'm doing it. But anyway, when I realized I was wrong, I went out of my way. I wrote a piece on it. I think I did a monologue on the Gigi show and a monologue on the five because I felt that the restitution was necessary and perhaps it would help if people saw that, hey, I'm going out of my way to say I'm an idiot and other people will like, oh, OK. No, I mean, it's a really nice moment in the book. And I remember that kind of in real time. But I think it's a great example of trying to, you know, to walk the walk that you're a terrible line. I'm sorry to finish it this way. To walk the walk that you're talking in the book. How does how does the you note in the book? You started writing this, I think in January there about. So it was before the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown. How does that fit into the scheme? Like, you know, because one of the things that the pandemic has done is really, I mean, everybody's kind of pissed off. Nobody trusts anybody because we're being told, you know, one day we're being told by Tony Fauci, don't wear a mask. They don't do anything. Then the next day, oh, now you really got to wear a mask and I was lying to you. And he's the least objectionable figure in this whole drama. Obviously, you're good friends with him if you call him Tony. You know, as an Italian American on my mother's side, I have, you know, there's a club that we belong to. But what I'm saying is, you know, this is a particularly bad moment. I mean, on top of everything else that's happening, you know, this has really rubbed things wrong. How does the pandemic, you know, intersect with being a plus or a minus? What are the ways to do that? Because you take a bunch of potshots at Governor Andrew Cuomo, Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York, rightly, I think. But, you know, everybody is mad. Everybody's angry at somebody. Yeah, you know, the book was sent off to the printer before the pandemic. And I pleaded with them to add that first chapter on it to talk about it because there were ideas in the book that applied directly to this issue, including the prison of two ideas where you're faced with, we're not faced with a choice of lockdown or back to work. And then back to where people will die, lockdown economy collapses. That's the prison of two ideas that we're constantly going over every single day. And it's like, no, we have adjusted phases that can go back and forward and lateral and whatever. The other thing too that I try to say and to your point about blaming and not blaming is if people made decisions with the information that they had, and then the information later proves them wrong, you can't really blame them for taking a stance. Especially if they change it immediately, if they go like, like so many doctors, including Fauci, said, no, keep, you know, go on that cruise. I think Fauci needs to keep going on those cruises. And you don't need to wear a mask. And then, of course, all that changes. And you realize the reason why they were saying don't wear a mask is they didn't want to run on masks, which is what you were kind of seeing anyway. So they basically tried to lie to help and is a burden, so to speak. And then they backtrack and say this, so nobody trusts them. But I said that you can't keep pointing fingers. Now, the reason why you can point fingers at de Blasio and Cuomo is the fact that, that's a weird noise, that de Blasio was wrong on almost everything he was saying and going after people who were trying to do right. And also just the rest home thing is just idiotic. And I think what bothered me most about Cuomo is CNN kind of because they have his brother and that they had the brother show, the Smothers Brothers. There is a sick joke in the Smothers Brothers. Why do I hate that? But I'm not going to say that joke. People always killed you first. Yes, I'm not going to. So you have these guys being lauded by the media while 6,600 people died in the rest homes in New York who didn't have to. And they're lecturing us and going outside and wearing masks. And then they just shunt all these contagious patients. So the signing blame you got to be if somebody has some skin in the game and took a risk and said, do this and do that. I don't get and they end up being wrong. That's as long as they change and they adapt. That's how it works with the pandemic. You don't know. And by the way, we are all going to go back to like this death rate that's going to be really low once we realize how big the contagious it was. Like, I think it was like in March, I think it was the death rate. Nation-wise was like 6%. Now it's over at one. And I bet it's going to go at 1%, by the way, still high connections. And it was probably go down even more as we realized how large this thing is. But so everything keeps shifting and we have to be fairly compassionate to people when they are wrong. But I really don't like people who don't say anything until afterwards. And then they aren't to your quarterback and saying, oh, it looks like you really had a terrible plan. It's like, what were you doing? And I want to talk briefly about how you think that we might end the polarization that seems to be everywhere. But before we do that, do you think things are worse now? And the book, you do talk about kind of media and social media and new forms of media, the hyper politicization of everything. Is it worse than say, in the late 70s or something when you started being conscious of a kind of adult world of discourse and people likened Reagan to Hitler, people likened Bill Clinton to Hitler. Everybody has five minutes. Andy Warhol was wrong in the future. Everybody will be likened to Hitler for 15 minutes. Is it worse? And if so, why is it worse? And the irony, the one person who wasn't likened to Hitler was Hitler. Somehow he escaped that. Well, he's a wily old fox, right? Yes, still alive in Argentina. But is it, do you think it's actually worse than it used to be? I think it's just more, there's more platforms to make it feel overwhelming. And I think the proper model for news, because of social media, is now about discontent. It's like, they realize, they've done the research, they know that the clicks are driven by that inside feeling of like, I just saw a great story about, it was a headline from an English newspaper. You spent time in England, so you know how the press works there, which is kind of paradigmatic of this, but it was about how a guy said that when he was a fat kid in the 70s, Ellen DeGeneres fat shamed him. I know. So, I mean, now we're going to go back. We're going to go back. Okay, so did you, I'm pretty sure I teased somebody in third grade, and I'm sure I will tease, but I mean, like, this is where we're going. And they actually print that article. They print that article. Everything is publishable. Everything is publishable. Which I thank God for my own, you know, for my own outlets, but yes, it's a bit much. Tell me, let's, we'll wrap up in a couple of minutes here, but how do you propose to reduce polarization or, you know, to escape the criminal, the mental criminal justice reform to get us out of the prison of two ideas? Greg Gutfeld. I do believe that the first thing we need to do is conquer cancer culture, because I think that keeps people scared. So, we need to share the risk. Everybody needs to defend other people that they don't even like. And I know that's altruistic. There's also the idea of mutually assured destruction, which, you know, if somebody comes after Nick Gillespie by going to Reason Magazine and saying, you employ Nick Gillespie who cannibalizes, you know, I don't know, well, humans. And then that because you are human. Thank you. And then you have the, I know it's not often I can give you a compliment. But, but then you have the right to call that person's place of work. So I feel like I would love to see a law, though I don't like laws. Like people who come after the cancer, we need to know where they work. I would love that. But I think sharing the risk is the best, is the, is the only way we're going to get through this. And education, which is, I mean, you and I are probably the same pages. We need a complete overhaul because we are creating zombies and they're coming into our human resources. We're leaving the campuses. So we need innovation. I always, I've said this a couple of times. What Peloton did to education, I mean, what Peloton did to gyms, blank is to education. We fill in that blank. We change everything like Peloton, the gym and change the way people exercise, at least for now for rich people who buy things first. Do you think, do you think that the lockdown and the quarantine, which, you know, it seems to be sticking around longer than I think a lot of people expected. Do you think that might be one of the benefits that it is, it's, you know, even as we move more online, it's also kind of forcing people to rethink things. We are shaking the box on all things, including just like walking around the city. You can walk around the city with a drink in your hand now in Manhattan. And I don't think that's going away. The open, the open dining up until I guess until winter now, but that might end up being permanent. I think, you know, incorporating like online studies within classroom stuff is going to be permanent, but maybe we can even build on that. I think there's going to be a lot of things like a lot of the working at home stuff and the zoom stuff is going to be helpful. I do all my meetings at home and security is changing. So many weird things are changing. Oh, I mean, like, we're not going to be handling money much. We're not going to be dealing with people. If at all, I mean, remember all those restaurants that they're opening in airports three years ago, where you just go to the thing, you type in your Eggs Benedict bottle of wine. That was right. And then it would just somebody would come out and drop it there. That's the way it's going to be. That's a beautiful vision of the future. Hey, here's a here's a weird thing. Just did it. Have you rethought about eating out as like a weird kind of artificial pleasure? Because now you're at home and you're going like, how much money did I spend thinking that I had to go out and eat? And now we're talking to somebody with no kids and a young wife and I just we just go out. And I'm like, it's like now I'm living like a normal person. I go like, and I walk by restaurants and I go, I'll just go home and cook something now that they're open. I wonder if when you break a habit, when you break a habit, can you like even with watching sports, how hard is it to get back into it? Like, you know, when you love a team like the 49ers and then they have two bad seasons and then did you break that habit? So you don't come back to them or or whatever. Do you see my point? I don't know. I mean, I think you're right. And I guess the question now is we need to get busy on figuring out what comes next because we're kind of at the end of the road. Yes. We are the clash circa cut the crap clash. We know that the future is unwritten and we need to come up with new bands. Dynamite is reforming. So there's good news for that. You know, in the book, in your previous books, which I've read and enjoyed, you talk a lot in previous interviews and on your shows, you talk a lot about the influence of Andrew Breitbart on you and kind of as a culture figure where even people who are on the other side of the political fence actually have adopted a lot of the insights and a lot of the temperament and kind of sensibility of Andrew, but of the light Andrew Breitbart. In this book, you talk a bit about Scott Adams or he comes up pretty regularly. And you know, he's the creator of Dilbert. He is a somebody who has been identified as a Trump supporter even though he is pretty much at pains to say he expected Trump to win for, he predicted that Trump would win for X, Y, and Z reasons, put it out there was right. What is the value of Scott Adams? What do you think, you know, why is he so appealing to you and why do you think it's not just you that he actually is one way of thinking about a different way of talking about stuff that might actually bring us together rather than having us kind of at each other's throats all the time. Yeah, I would go as far as saying that he is quietly influencing a country, probably more than we think. It has a lot to do with the powers of persuasion. So he was interested in Donald Trump because he saw a master persuader, a person who could use words to great effect. And so it wasn't that he was a Trump supporter. He just, he was just like, wow, this guy's got game. And he also says, by the way, he says the same thing about AOC, which I agree as well. She has, she has definite skills and he talks about a talent stack of being good at a number of things. And I just discovered him by accident because I had read a book by Jesus called Influence by Childini. I can't think of his name, first name, but let's say it is Lassen's Childini. And I read that book and I thought, wow, this describes Donald Trump to a T and I don't think Trump was president at the time. So I wrote these articles, three articles on how Influence predicted Donald Trump. And then some guy on Twitter, and this is where Twitter helps, some guy goes, dude, you should just go read Scott Adams' blog. He just basically covered this six months ago. So I went and I looked and I go, holy crap, everything that Scott Adams has been talking about for the last, I don't know, two or three years, I thought I discovered. And then I started, he does his podcast every morning in which he gets up and he just talks about stuff from a persuasive point of view. And it's entertaining, it's, I think it's just, he's an original thinker. And I find that he rises above the left versus right by talking about what's persuasive. And also the idea of how to come up with new things as opposed to keep doing the same old thing. And I think it's always about questioning shaking the box. Let's see what happens. And I think it's a, you know, it's kind of weird how a lot of his ideas anticipate what happens next. Whether it's time to be coupling, you know, or shutting down travel for China. I mean, there's a lot of theory things that he predicts. It is. He's also an example, as you were saying, about doing new things. He, you know, he conducts these podcasts or these interviews or, you know, monologues really via periscope. And, you know, this is a guy who has a massive empire and kind of legacy media through the Dilbert cartoons, but then rushed into new ways of being in contact with an audience, which is pretty interesting. Do you feel that way? I mean, you know, it's funny now, you are hugely successful. If I'm right, if I believe I'm right when the Greg Gutfeld show on Fox over the weekend, on Fox News over the weekend does better than most other shows, even on network shows, much less other cable shows in terms of massive audience. Or do you, you're a kind of emissary from what's now considered legacy media. Do you see yourself shifting into new modes of interacting with your audiences that are different than what you've been doing? I don't know. I don't know. That's a tough question for the last week. Yes. Well, you know, let's We did three last questions and I have to go. I have to go to, I got to go to the, I got to go to the five. You got to go to the five. Okay. I got to go. Okay. Final, final question for Greg Gutfeld, author most recently of the plus self help for people who ate self help. And I'm going to put you on the spot. Not who do you want to win the presidency, but who do you think is going to win in November? Is it going to be Trump? Or is it going to be Joe Biden? And does it matter? I think it's going to be Trump. I do. I just don't. I think that we've got a lot of people who are pissed off and silent. I might be one of them. I don't think you're that silent. Yeah. And now that you're all plus, you're plus, you're happy. You can't be pissed off either. Yeah. Okay. Well, we will leave it there. We've been talking with Greg Gutfeld. He's the author most recently, as I said, self help for people who hate self help. Greg, thanks so much for talking to reason. Awesome. Thanks, buddy.