Hello and welcome to our discussion of post-election politics from 2000 to 2020. My name is Nikki Maddie and I'm a junior studying international relations and political science. And my name is Chichic Piazzio. I'm also a junior also studying international relations and Spanish. So for most undergraduates such as ourselves who only gained political consciousness in the past decade, the current political climate of bitter partisanship, chaos, disinformation, gridlock and constant challenges to electoral results may be their only portrait of American politics. In history and political science courses, we study a version of American politics that is guided by constitutional wisdom, bipartisan compromises, and democratic principles. However, when we leave our classrooms and return to the present, we are jolted by the contrast between what we have learned about the promise of American democracy and the stark reality of its fate. During the 21st century in the aftermath of a national election, the United States has often appeared to be more bitterly divided and united by the democratic process. We have watched five days before a national election whose results will shape the trajectory of the United States recovery from a deadly pandemic, a deepening economic crisis, and a reckoning with the lasting racial injustice that exists in our country. A conversation about post-election politics could not be more relevant. Before we begin this discussion, we would like to thank the Institute for Global Leadership, the International Relations Department, the Office of the Dean of the School of Arts and Sciences, and the Jonathan Amtish College of Civic Life for their sponsorship of this critical discussion. So tonight we're graciously joined by Matt by a nationally known journalist, author, and screenwriter. Matt graduated from Tufts in 1990 and participated in that year's epic symposium, The Militarization of the Third World. Starting in 2002, he covered three presidential campaigns for the New York Times where he was the chief political writer for the Sunday magazine and columnist for the newspaper. He then spent five years as the national political columnist for Yahoo News, and then in January 2020, he became a contributing columnist for the Washington Post. By his most recent book, All the Truth is Out, the Week Politics Went Tabloid, looks at the notorious scandal involving presidential candidate Gary Hart in 1987 and how it shaped the political and media culture. We are also joined by Ambassador Daniel Feldman. Dan is the senior counsel at Covington in Washington DC and participated in the 1988 epic colloquium on foreign policy imperatives for the next presidency. He graduated from Tufts in 1989 to begin his illustrious career. He served as an OSCE supervisor election supervisor in Bosnia, Herzegovina for local elections in 1997. And from 1999 to 2000 he served as the director for multilateral and humanitarian affairs at the National Security Council, where he helped oversee US policy on all war crimes issues, including the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The particular relevance to our discussion today, he subsequently served on the Gore Lieberman presidential campaign and was a crucial member of the election recount team in 2000. He went on to become the council and communications advisor on the staff for Senator Lieberman for the Senate government affairs committee, and he helped spearhead the first hearings into Homeland Security's issues after 9-11. He then helped build the first and only legal practice in the country in corporate social responsibility at Fully Hogue, which advises multinational companies on international human rights, labor rights and environmental standards. He was accorded the personal rank of ambassador by President Obama for his work as the deputy and then special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan. He served as a principal advisor to secretaries of state John Kerry and Hillary Clinton regarding Afghanistan, Pakistan and the broader South Central and East Asian issues. Ambassador Feldman will bring this wealth experience insight and knowledge for discussion and we could not be more excited to welcome him and Matt back to us today. And then before we begin, we encourage all attendees to submit their questions into the Q&A, and we'll get to those very soon. So this is for both Matt and Dan, but contrary to popular belief, if you're my age, quote unquote, hanging Chad is not when someone in a frat goes in for a high five and you leave them hanging. That is not what a hanging Chad is. It refers to the piece of paper hanging when a ballot is not completely punched through and was popularized in the 2000 Bush v Gore election, as ballot counters did not include them in the total vote count. If you can name one peculiarity to voting this time around in the way that the hanging Chad's were in 2000. What would it be? I think Dan's got to have a hanging Chad somewhere in that office. Absolutely. Several as a memento. Yeah. So, first of all, thanks to all the entities at Tufts, which, which invited us back, it's always great to be connected and reconnected with Tufts, even if virtually in this, these kind of bizarre times. Thank you to Nikki and Chichi and Heather and everybody else for for facilitating this. I do think it's a really timely discussion, obviously, and, and there is certainly a line connecting where we were in 2000 and in Florida and where we are 2020 now, and the hanging Chad piece is part of that. So I like everybody else had no idea what a hanging Chad was until elect the day after election day. I was on the campaign in Nashville, and then doing completely non legal work communications work and and some policy work. When it looked when we started having a recognition of what was happening transpiring in Florida they pulled everyone who happened to have a legal degree down from the campaign down to Tallahassee I was in that initial group that went there. And we set up shop in this small little law office in Tallahassee with about 20 of us in stuffed into into maybe three rooms and I had a utility closet with a with a card table on it, and a sign outside the door that said Chad boy, because we were figuring out what it hanging Chad actually meant. And you're right. For those who don't know it was the indentation and a ballot, where it didn't fully fall out but was still there, but you would hope from the hanging nature of it that you could tell the intent of the by looking at that and so all the ballots that either weren't counted because there was some confusion about it or potentially miscounted really made up the difference in Florida and this incredibly contested election and the vote total that just separated Bush and Gore came down to 537 votes. And had we actually counted all the ballots my firm belief 20 years later still is that more people in Florida went to the polls thinking that they voted for Al Gore than they did for George W. Bush and that that probably could have been determined. And if you had actually looked at the intent of the voters in the ballot. I think that that same since since then, what we have seen is a is a Republican Party that is increasingly dependent on seeking to disenfranchise voters and to suppress voters, and is not interested in determining the will of the voters in every instance in the way that we saw it in 2000, and that we're seeing now in a plethora of ways look at all the court cases I've been not just in the last few days and was constant in Michigan and Pennsylvania and Texas and Alabama and you know do you put only have one receptacle for absentee ballots per county and can you help disabled voters at the at the curbside and can you count ballots that are mailed before election day and come in all of these efforts by the Republican Party are to system systematically disenfranchise the will of the voters and I think that is a clear through line to your one question on on what would be the equivalent. In this election I just, you know, before this call saw that the New Yorker hasn't has an article basically suggesting calling Pennsylvania and Harrisburg can well be in 2020 what Tallahassee was in 2000. And that's the case and all boils down to Pennsylvania, which doesn't start counting absentee ballots until the day of election, and where the number share number and magnitude of absentee ballots have been sent in is just staggering compared to what had been done historically, and that there are very clear efforts by Republicans to try to discount as many of those as possible and the, the, the Pennsylvania example in particular there's, you know, per Pennsylvania law, you have to have two envelopes to cast an absentee ballot you need an envelope, a secrecy envelope and then you put it inside another envelope. And there have been now court rulings that if you don't have both envelopes you can throw out that ballot and so this idea what they're calling naked ballots missing that second secrecy envelope, I think could well be used to undermine the will of the people in Pennsylvania at potentially numbers that would really change the outcome of that state and the outcome of the national election considering that millions of ballots could be impacted in that way, and only 45,000 votes separated. Trump and Hillary Clinton four years ago so we'll see if if naked ballots or secrecy envelopes becomes the new hanging Chad, but it's efforts like that that I think could well occur. That's pretty good the naked ballot I never heard that I like that. Well, let me just, let me just echo Dan and thank you for doing this I'm always surprised when Tufts is so happy to have me back but I appreciate it. And, and, and Nikki and she she and Heather you, it's, you know, it's, it's fun to talk to you all and hear about what's, what's going to see that the campus is vibrant even though there's nobody on it. I think it's off the record that Dan is older than I am you heard that in the bios. He's, he, he continues by months not years. And he made all that stuff up if you used to call him ambassador. I will say, you know, it's funny because we've had this conversation for many years between us or versions of this conversation, you know, 10 years ago, maybe 15 years ago I would have said that Dan was being hyperbolic to talk about a Republican argument on denying people the vote is sort of a systematic philosophy. It's hard to argue with now I mean it just this is what they're doing you see the papers every day. Obviously demographic change has not been kind to the Republican Party I would say the Republican Party has not been kind to demographic change right they've had plenty of opportunity and plenty of potential candidates to get to to be able to get to be for that changing vote younger vote a less white vote in a more urban vote, and they seem to have not been able to do that and now they are resorting to literally trying to stop people to vote everywhere they can it's, I don't I look I know a lot of people lunch with a Republican today you know I mean I have, I have spent, you know, years talking to a lot of Republicans of conscious I don't know how you get up I mean I understand that a lot of them now are anti Trump, but you do have to get up at some point look in the mirror and say what am I doing here what is my mission and is my party systematically trying to stop people from voting, as Dan says. I mean, look, I would preface this place and I think there's a very good chance right I mean, you know, I say this like, you know who knows, sitting here today I think there's a very good chance that none of this will matter all that much. Pennsylvania is clearly a trouble spot and there are others. My guess if I was sitting here today and not that anybody's asking me to guess is that we're looking at something a little bit less like 2000 and more like the end stage of the Clinton Obama race in 2008 where everybody kind of knows where it's going. The numbers are clear but it's got to play itself out so they'll file suit in a couple states and they'll count a lot of ballots for weeks and there will be arguments and court cases. But the margin seems to me today to be too large to make any to make that matter for the outcome, you know I mean it's one thing to win an election by two points in the popular vote and lose the electoral college and we've seen situations like that now twice and in the presidential campaign which is unprecedented American history and in all your lifetime talking to students. That's the nature of a presidential campaign right if somebody gets somebody wins by five points it's a landslide but that's not actually the history of American politics. And you don't win an election by seven eight nine points in the popular vote and lose the electoral college that we're not that urbanized we're not that polarized it's, it can't I don't think that can happen. I don't think that can happen. I don't think we're there yet if it's possible but so you know to me it looks today like we may not be looking at one state for the next two weeks. I didn't know about naked ballots, I really like that one. I'm kind of intrigued I'm not an expert I'm not nearly as much of an expert in the mechanics of the of the ballots, but I'm intrigued by the postmark non postmark ballots there's also an issue in Pennsylvania elsewhere where you know, I think it's in you're not, you know, you can throw out a ballot that's not postmarked, but not all ballots get postmarked so I don't know I call them, you know, I call them ghost ballots right it's like ballots that exist but they don't really exist they're not, they're not postmarked and therefore they're floating in some kind of another world that to me seems like it could really become another serious issue in the counting because, you know, if you've got a ballot and you know it very likely came in before Election Day it's sitting in a pile and it doesn't have a postmark, which for some reason a lot of them don't. I don't know how you can deny that that vote from being counted but people will try to find a way. I'll also say one other thing we can get into this I'm not going to go on about but I would be curious to hear Dan talk about it at some point, I think it's curious know how the Supreme Court would if this really does matter where the court nets out, because I think we're all looking at these decisions this week and trying to free this out it's not cut and dry it's not like oh conservative court, Trump's golden, there are a lot of layers to that, and I don't think anybody quite knows how this would get resolved there are a lot of different it seems to me on the court right now, there are a lot of different philosophies about how you defer who you defer to and how you defer back to a to a state jurisdiction. I think the decisions are still coming so fast and furious that it's hard to make those determinations at this point I mean you had the decision which curtailed counting about that after that weren't received by Election Day that was what Kavanaugh wrote. And that was a, I think a five, a five to three decision you had four four decisions that favored voter enfranchisement and so that the more progressives voted with the Chief Justice and that upheld a more progressive lower court. You know, the one thing that we do know is that the Supreme Court is usually quite reticent to get involved in these they really want to see everything else transpire first it would really depend I think on how it ultimately percolated up to the Supreme Court through what sorts of filings was it a state Supreme Court decision was it through other federal district court or appellate courts. What was the, how narrow was the question at stake. You know, ultimately, if it is the four four breakdown at this point that we saw, I think on the on which will have the recent Pennsylvania decision that allowed for greater enfranchisement what happens with the wild card of where Amy Coney bear comes out and she decides to hear those and decide in this case or not. Clearly, I think that, given we've now have at least three alums I think on the Supreme Court of the Bush v Gore legal team, all on the Bush side with, I believe, Kavanaugh of course it's and and and I think Robert's too I think was it Robert's also the maybe the maybe it wasn't corsage I may be wrong there. I know it was Kavanaugh and Barrett and thought there was a third but but but regardless. I think, you know, on these voter suppression issues in general that they still reverts fundamentally to to conservatism there, but it would depend on on the on the nature of the of the filings and the appeals. I think to a certain degree on where the country is at that point I mean they don't they really don't want to wait in to these broad issues that impact, you know, civic strife and a whole range of other issues but where if we're in a you know, for instance, it's been, it's been quite clear that Biden has well surpassed the 270 electoral vote threshold and and the president is is refusing to concede or anything else you would hope that those will be the circumstances that the Supreme Court, regardless of partisanship would stand it for the rule of law and the fundamental tenant to the democracy. Switching to another area of post election politics that I haven't heard y'all touch on is kind of about the fears of violence that we're seeing exhibited on social media and indeed last week the Boston Globe ran a piece entitled with fears of a contest election growing. More Americans are stocking up to write out any discord. The article describes how families have begun stocking up on essential items and even arms for fear of violent conflict as a result of the election. So I have to ask how warranted are these fears or worse are preparations like this more likely to lead to a post election complex. Well, I mean, I'll do I don't know the answer I don't think anybody knows the answer. I've worried about it for a long time and I think in the last couple weeks. There's been more reason for that fear because there are these clashes breaking out all over and between protesters and counter protesters that are really not surprising but but troubling. I don't think we're going to have mass unrest in the streets of the country but I do think there will be angry groups no matter what and I think there will be you know there there is there are a loud and dangerous minorities of voters you know in particularly on the conservative side particularly on the Trump side, who, you know, who probably will not accept the outcome no matter what. So, you know, I look I think the potentials there I would I would say the potentials probably never been greater than it is right now I don't think it's Armageddon I don't think you need rations I don't think we need you know shelters.  And it's definitely spilling over into violence and look, I mean, that's going to be the first task of Joe Biden wins a selection I think he's going to. I don't think the Senate will go democratic as well but it's hard to say. You know, that's his first task that's his first job right he's knocking at the country overnight, but he is going to have to keep social order and create a sense of calm and a restoration of normalcy. And it's going to be it's not a slow burn crisis I think it's going to be urgent I think that's something he needs to do first and urgently. And I think he's able to do that is my guess. And he's really made that a hallmark of his campaign, I mean in terms of the battle for the soul of the nation but also, you know his talking about the importance of institutions and in trying to heal the country recognizing that will be extremely important. I mean, look, I, I like not I mean also obviously nobody knows what the nature of this is I mean I, I tend to, you know, having been an alum of the of the 2000 Gore campaign the 2004 carry campaign in the 2008 and 2006 Hillary campaigns. I'm a classic PTSD Democrat and I tend to worry. And I won't stop worrying I don't think until January 20 because there's a lot to worry about. All the parade of horribles that we are now thinking about in addition to the systemic voter suppression efforts and everything else but the, you know, the buying electoral slates by state the civic unrest, foreign information and foreign interference and disinformation National Guard I mean all these issues that have been surfaced recently, you know, have some basis in, you know, they have some legitimate basis there's a reason that people are surfacing them because of how polarized we are and because there will be set people on both sides but particularly Trump supporters who will not take the victor or the other. But, and so I would say sure be prepared in the same way that we've been prepared for the last eight months go you know stock up on toilet paper and you know get staples that you may not be able to get the time. On the other hand, I think that the goal of President Trump over the last few years and especially over the last few months is to try to delegitimize the election and and and in all this talk about voter fraud from day one of his presidency through the, you know, casting doubt on absentee ballots and voting ballots and everything else, and the more that we all talk about it and and give into our, our, the darker forces and worrying and everything else the more I think it confirms the deletion de legitimizing aspect of it. And so I think we need to be prepared.  And we should, we must prep for them. But by the same token, I hope that we, you know, we have to continue to keep confidence in our electoral system. It has not been fraudulent. And so, um, Council on on voter integrity found there was no widespread fraud the FBI director said this again earlier this year I mean, there is no proof of this we have to have faith in our institutions. And, and, and we need to make sure that there is a smooth transition and peaceful transition. Thank you so much for that. So now we're transitioning into our audience questions. Like we said, feel free to submit your own the other Q&A. So this first question, maybe from someone you all may know, but it's from soul, gentlemen. And essentially the question is Republicans are Dan Republicans now, but is it voter suppression in American DNA.  But isn't this what has been going on for centuries, and all political parties in this country. And it said Dan but I'm sure Matt you can answer to. I don't want to hear from me. It's just because always make sure to call me a class I think. Look, I saw obviously knows this better than anyone and, and I would give anything to be back in one of his history classes and have the broader context on all this and I'm delighted so that you're I guess and of course I'm sure every bit involved as a as a public citizen as you as you always were and and inspired in all of us to be. Yes, absolutely, voter suppression goes back centuries and there are many, there are many examples of it particularly post civil war and Jim Crow south and elsewhere. And I think that's why by both parties in in those days and especially you know by the by the Democratic Party the late 19th century early early 20th century. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be calling it out when it's happening right now in a particularly systemic manner and and so for any number of reasons for a functioning and healthy democracy I think we have to have far more standards and rights and we should be looking at redressing this. I think through through federal legislation, I think that would include making sure that people could take off election day so that they can vote in a way of mind that there are certain standards for how ballots are counted how many days out. And that there is the ability to on a much more wide scale basis for voter education. So we're looking at voter mobilization and and ensuring that voters are supported in their efforts, and that, and there are any number of examples on ways to address this and we're looking at whether felons can vote in Florida, we're looking at whether or not we're encouraged from voter rolls can can can seek to vote how do you should we have same day voter registration, are there laws that can demand signatory matches and things like that there are certainly things that can and should be done in this that we have not been able to do before in our national history and which I think any healthy and well functioning democracy should have as as the core of its right. So let me piggyback on that a bit. I agree and I and I'm going to push back a little bit on saw because I've been doing that for 30 years and he expects it from me. But I, you know, I don't I don't like arguments in general like leaving voting aside. I don't like political arguments that begin. Well wasn't it always true. Right like didn't we see a guy came to within an inch of his life on the house of the floor so on the floor of the United States House and Senate so clearly you know we're not. Clearly, we, you know, we've always been a divided and polarized country well okay but you know there were a lot of things that were true in the 1800s or the 1900s that aren't true today the point is as a country. We get better and better we actually evolved we don't take every step forward we have dark moments we tumble backward from time to time in various ways. But the, the mission here, the charge of every generation is to build a better country in a better system and we do we are a more tolerant country today for all the issues that you see in the paper every day, then we have ever been certainly more tolerant than we were 30 or 40 years ago. We are, you know, we are a more prosperous country than we were 100 years ago for all the inequality for all the problem we, we, you know, we do get, you know, evolve and change in a way that I don't think any other country has. And, and so I don't really accept like you know there's always sure there's always been some level of voter suppression I mean I guess you could say that it's just built into the end of the country but but I think we we work to get better at it and we do and more people get to vote today obviously holy women are voting African Americans voting you know a you know that that wasn't true for a lot of the life of the country. It was shameful but as a country we evolved and so you know I don't think that I don't I don't think that's and I don't think solid saying this I don't think that's an excuse for us or to say either that this isn't new or this is what you'd expect or this is just the way American democracy is I think I think we're better than we were and we need to continue getting better and we have to really sort of denounce and marginalize forces that would take the country backward because that's that's not how we, not how we grow from Matt's answer. Absolutely. I mean in order to build a more a more perfect union. This is this is what we do as we mature and evolve and, and where is our, you know, we have advocated leadership in so many areas I mean I think this past year, it's been someone who's involved in national foreign policy I mean, it's been so demoralizing to see the eyes of the rest of the world look at our code response and say where is the America that I grew up with where's the leadership where's the ability to go out and and be creative and address these challenges, and we should be in the same way on on on voting rights as well I mean if we are holding ourselves out as the as the model of democracy if we are encouraging this in our, and our alliances and our relationships and foreign policy, and it's incumbent on us to keep doing better and keep getting better and we should be out there, making sure that that actually transpires. Something that's been weighing really heavily on me is that in the midst of such a historical seeming presidential election it's been easy for local elections to fall under the radar. I was just wondering if there's anything across the board regarding the local elections that should that we should keep an eye out for and I also wanted to tie this in with a question from Professor Rogers, where she asks if it either of you are aware of state or local actions to protect the polls, especially on the election day or preparations to respond to violence if it occurs. That's a great question I don't know the answer off the top of my head but I would be very interested if anybody does. I would say it on the state and local piece. The answer is, yes, it matters and it's something that I think Democrats did not focus on at their peril. This is our disadvantage now for many, many years I mean it mattered in 2000 in Florida, because at the end of the day, the one certifying the Florida electors was the, you know, not only the governor of the state having to be the but the Republican Secretary of State and who was the co-chair of his campaign in Florida and there has been a very strategic, consistent effort of Republicans to look at races and issues that have not gotten as much public attention and really changed the train and I would say the exact same issue on judicial nominations where, you know, it has been a concerted campaign now for several decades to make the judiciary much more conservative in a very strategic manner and they have focused on state and local elections and especially in a year like this when it controls redistricting, they will be critical and in terms of some of the, some of the extraordinary circumstances we've talked about such as states that could wind up with having electoral slates. I mean that happens when you've got, you know, a legislature of one party and a governor of another. They're talking about it happening in Pennsylvania in particular given the Republican legislature and the Democratic and so reclaiming many of these state houses will be very, very important. It's an area that I wish we had focused on, you know, 10 years ago, 20 years ago but it's the old, you know, Chinese proverb of the best time to plant an oak tree is a generation ago and the second best time is today and we have to focus on continuing to work on those issues now. Yeah, I mean, look, it's funny, I like Joe Biden, I've always liked him and, and, and, you know, I'll happily vote for him I've said as much in a bunch of columns and I'm not, I'm not a party guy but I think he's the right guy for the moment. Having said that right if Joe Biden somehow loses this election next week or two months from now when they're done counting votes. And after some time, the looming question will be, historically, at a critical juncture in the country will be, wait, how did you elect, how did you nominate a 77 year old white male 50 year politician, you know, at a time of such dynamic change in the country in the party. And the answer is this the answer is because they've done no development at the local level they've not developed who are the star governors in the Democratic Party I could name a bunch I think are really good because it's my job but go ask the average American right I mean when I was a kid. You know Mario Cuomo was a huge figure in national politics Jerry Brown was a huge figure in national politics, Dick Celeste in Ohio who no one remembers right the leaders of the Democratic Party were governors. You know, and, and the, as Dan says that the Democratic Party has just done a terrible job of building the bench of caring enough about local leaders and empowering them and giving them platforms and frankly, the leaders of that generation I'm talking about, you know, you know, I don't really, you know, millennials say, have done a pretty terrible job of seizing that spotlight they seem to have nothing to say there's no clear agenda they don't band together.  It doesn't really matter I do think there's a very good chance that we walk away from this election. With a major shift on the local and the national level I mean I think the Republican Party, there's a distinct possibility the Republican Party will be dealt a really serious blow and retribution for what they have allowed to happen for the last four years. I think that's kind of where the public is. And, and if that happens it will be a real opportunity to do what Dan's talking about and, and to focus a little bit on what you're doing at the local level what you want to achieve and who you want to promote. Awesome. Thank you so much for answering that that was incredibly insightful. I have another question. And so this one kind of elevates us from the state level to a more national. I guess national level so this question says we just saw Chileans enter a referendum to rewrite their 1988 Constitution with the US, which the US had a hand in engineering in order to create a more inclusive society democracy. How likely is a referendum of this magnitude to happen in the US when we consider the grievances against the electoral college. That's a Dan question. Just because it originated in Chile. About the world and all that you know. I mean I think the thrust of the question is, you know, can we see such is it feasible, you know, politically feasible and pragmatic to see such overarching reform in the US. And would we have something akin to another constitutional convention at some point, it's hard to imagine that it's, it's particularly hard to imagine that if, if someone like Joe Biden is the, is the president because he has been an institutional list and because he, I think believes also in, in those significant also kind of incremental change and so I think you will see it slowly I mean it's his answer to oil and fracking and these things happen over a period of time you can't go in and change the system overnight in this way. So I don't necessarily see, you know, a successful effort to abolish the electoral college right away if you were given president were to have sweeping reform, like in a constitutional convention, I do think that there will be a very, you know, especially if you take the Senate which I'm, I'm hopeful for and keep the house and your bias president I think there's, I know that there is an enormous focus on what can actually have impact, most immediately, and how to start governing and passing significant legislation and and rectify and remediating the all the devastating actions of the of the Trump administration as quickly as possible and so I wouldn't be surprised if if a Democratic Senate had got rid of the filibuster at the very outset and started passing legislation that that really makes a significant difference and I think some of these things would include fundamental voting rights reforms. I think it was HR one that was introduced, and it has to be in the session, which is still kind of a blueprint for for some of those. So I do think that there will be action but I think it will be in a in a fairly modulated manner as opposed to something, you know, all at once. You know, it's funny, I'll say I'm torn about the electoral college and I'm probably the only person left in any urban zip code who's torn about the electoral college but I, you know, I still feel like I I understand how people thought I've always felt we do live in a Republic of States, I, you know, having spent a lot of time looking at the politics on the local level in states. I think there's something valuable about that I think it's been important in keeping the structure of the country and the social fabric together I think I think it's good for states to have local control. And I think the fact that the system is structured in such a way as it's not just sort of the mass the, the, the tyranny of the majority but that smaller states can matter and get a say in that the states do send their electors their representatives to Washington to take part in a sort of in that in that amalgamation that Confederacy I like that system I think it was smart and I've generally felt that, you know, this that we're in a weird period we had this weird moment in 2000 we had a weird moment again then in 2016 where the electoral college, you know, I'm partly because of demographic change with the electoral college and the popular vote we're at a sink, but it's extraordinarily rare and I've generally thought that it kind of works itself out after a particular moment. I don't know though like I said I'm torn because you know look if we have another election like this not necessarily next week but at any time in the next 20 years, if we're looking at now a series of elections. where the country has just urbanized gotten so out of whack to the point where increasing margins of popular vote victory are nullified by the electoral college. Then it just can't hold you can't you can't do that right you want the social fabric of the country can hold the political system can hold and we won't make good choices. So, you know so so I'm interested I mean I my my hope for this election is that it puts a few things back in alignment and one of them would be that the popular vote in the electoral college send a pretty consistent message and I think they will. I would say, I mean, I do disagree on the electoral college because of these two seeming aberrations in the last 20 years, where it wasn't the tyranny of the majority but in fact the tyranny of the minority, and that you're increasingly seeing this. And it's institutionalized as well, including in our court system now and and judges that have been nominated by Republicans, particularly Trump and over the last few years, and where they're out of sync with where the majority of Americans increasingly are. I agree that if they aren't that if the popular vote and the electoral college are together, it's powerful. But you know, if we were to have another circumstance, where they're not, then I think you're looking at, you know, a very broad swath of American society that feels completely disenfranchised and not represented at any level of the government. Yeah, that's right. I have another great question from our audience that ties into exactly what you guys were just talking about. This is from John Miller and he was asking, should the Democratic Party win the White House and the Senate, do you expect that they will take a page from a Republican playbook. And if so, what page. All the wrong ones. John, John Miller is, he's just baiting me now because look, I, I, this is a big thing of mine and I've written it a bunch of times and I think over the years because now I've had a lot of years to do this that that's the biggest danger and we've let me preface it this way. We've had three straight, I gotta update this we've had four straight Presidencies where we've seen President's lose control of the House. If Trump were to somehow be re-elected I think we'd see four straight Presidencies where we've seen President's lose control of the entire Congress at one point or another. That's never we never been close to that in American history we never saw that twice before in American history. You know, there's a ton of volatility in the system and I think one of the reasons is that people misread their mandate, you know that the public is furious and wants change and punishes incumbency, pretty consistently. And parties win on this anti incumbent wave and the first thing they do is look in the mirror and go I won because people agree with me. They agree with me about everything and now I'm going to enact my whole agenda and two years later they get tossed out again, because people are not really making a statement about ideology or direction they don't really trust anybody they just want someone to come in and and and govern competently and make things work better. So, I think the thing I worry about for Democrats is that you will get a big wave perhaps next week, and or some version of the Democratic victory, and they will immediately assert that they have a mandate to enact a lot of power. They really haven't explained very clearly and then are not at the heart of why people are voting the way they are. And I think it's incumbent on a president and a party, not to assume that mandate but to then go out when you're in power, and make the case for what you want and build some public support for it and it's harder, and you risk losing your window of opportunity, but you also then have the potential to stay in power for a long time and build something sustainable instead of getting tossed out for years. And, and unfortunately I think I think it's just too easy for parties to tell themselves a different story and overreach in the first year or two of an administration. I say, look, if there's anybody in my mind that is responsible for breaking, breaking democracy in America is probably Mitch McConnell, or at least Mitch McConnell in conjunction with with with Donald Trump. And though, you know, I'm, I'm sickened at much of what he has done culminating in, you know, the pushing through a Supreme Court justice, eight days before an election after the treatment that they gave to Merrick Garland. I think there are lessons to be learned there I hope they're the right lessons is not to max it to accrue and utilize power at all means, but it is to use power strategically, and to ultimately benefit and have impact on your constituency So if the Democratic lesson is, if in fact, the filibuster, there's filibuster reform, and we can pass legislation by a simple majority that is signed into law by a by Democratic president very quickly. And we hope and expect that Democrats will use that to do some pretty fundamental things, including COVID relief which we haven't been able to do in many months now, including hopefully securing either current or the next iteration of ACA or economic care or Biden care or whatever you call it, looking at fundamental, you know, jobs training at economic initiatives given where we are doing infrastructure was been talked about for years I mean, we have been at stasis, because we have been so unable to deliver and given the partisanship and there is a crying need for for legislation. The Supreme Court itself has suggested that saying, you know, well if you disagree with our opinions, legislate. And I would hope that that the that the Democratic lesson is to is to use power strategically and wisely. And I hope all of the Democratic officials in the world we're listening and are on this call. But this question this next question actually comes from Dean Glazer thank you so much for joining us. If there is another electoral misfire, namely a popular vote victory with an electoral vote loss, it would be three times in the past six elections. What will slash should be should the response be. Well I mean, I mean we just talked about this a bit. Thank you Dean Glazer for tuning in I appreciate it I, I, I don't think that's going to happen. But as I said before, I mean, that's right if you have a third example of that in this period then I you know, obviously, the system has to be reformed. And I think it has to be reformed for a very pragmatic reason in addition to the fairness of the electoral process which is the nature of reform is that you do the things that are obvious, so that you do not incentivize the things that are radical and that are obvious. And I think we've seen that you know I some of the calls for reform I really don't agree with that don't agree with that the Senate is an example of inequity the way the Senate is constructed I actually think that again as part of a pretty mechanism created by the framers we have a really, fraudulently balanced democracy that, you know, that that sort of represents a genius of compromise and amalgamation and, and changing the electoral college, if in fact we were to get another election like that not only this cycle but the next couple of cycles I mean I think the public would demand some kind of change and absent that I think you'd get a call for more radical reforms that I don't think would be good for the country so I'd certainly be on board with that but again I don't think it's going to happen and I think as just as good a chance, you know, you know, by the way Democrats spent a century benefiting from the network from the electoral college and granted you know the popular vote didn't differ from it but they were not complaining when all of those rural states were voting just because it happened in the past doesn't happen to that. But look I think there's at least as good a chance of that. Maybe I'm being too much of an optimist as, as that we've just gone through a really strange and unusually divided and divisive period in American politics that it has felt like all of your lifetimes but in fact, 20 years is not a huge amount of time in American politics, and that you know we won't see it again, you know that it will come back into alignment and that we won't see it again for a very long period of time. But, but acknowledging that there is the possibility that the increasing urbanization of the country and the changing demographic could create an unsustainable dynamic but I continue to believe you know that and this is related to the electoral issue. But I want to say it even that it's tangential because I think it's important. I really do believe that Trumpism whatever that is, this reflection of intolerance and an exclusion and entrenched isolationism that we see in aspects of the society is a dwindling force, not a growing force. You know I often say to people you can sit on a train platform, and going slowly and a train passes you going much faster, and you could say that you're going backward, but you're not. You're actually just experiencing an illusion because the next train is going really fast. I don't think we're going backward as a country I don't think the Trump movement whatever it represents is driving the country is a loud dwindling dying ideology. And, and similar that I think you know I think as, as this demographic change takes hold as younger voters become larger parts of the electorate. I just, I don't think we're going to feel quite so out of sync, and quite so caught between moments as, as we do right now. I think the question is, can we make it to that point in a peaceful and stable manner. I mean, and, and so, you know, thanks, Dinklage for being on. If that if that were to happen, I mean just to clarify, it would only happen with Biden winning the popular vote and and Trump winning the electoral college I mean there's not a chance that Biden will lose the popular vote at this point I mean he will likely be up, you know, more than the two or Hillary was many fold. No, what significantly more. Yeah, I absolutely agree. So, so the question is, you know, is, you know, and though it may be very narrow at this point there is a path to electoral college victory for for Trump that probably goes through, you know, Pennsylvania and Florida and a few other key states. So then your question is if that happens, you know, is there is there a call for for fundamental reform which means a whole bunch of disenfranchised Democrats and progressives and others with with Trump staying as as president it's hard to imagine that there will be any real reform while he is while he is president I think you will see a real increase in civil strife I mean I think that we will start, you know, looking. I hope at least that we would start looking more like kind of the 60s and people kind of really starting to express what this means to them. And that there will be far more kind of mass movements has a way to address it but I don't think you'll see any effort to to rectify it from the from the federal government as long as Trump is present. What I what I do firmly agree is exactly as Matt said I mean the Republican Party has now positioned itself in a long term, you know kind of losing trajectory, where they're increasingly reliant on a dwindling of, you know, white, usually non college educated, mostly men, and, and that is not sustainable, given the democratic growth, the demographic trajectory. And so, at a certain point, it does, it has to right size and there are those in the Republican Party that recognizes I mean after I think it was after the Romney loss I mean they commissioned this autopsy which said all these things we have to go out and get involved, you know, that they're that that we have to engage Latino and black voters and be more socially progressive on on on LGBTQ issues and any number of things and it's exactly the direction that Trump turned the page on and went back to just exciting his his base. If Trump loses within and with any luck, Republicans lose the Senate. You know this is a real moment of reckoning for the Republican Party and they will have to think very seriously about where they where they move I think that I am not as saying when unfortunately that Trump isn't isn't here isn't here for a while I mean I think it's, it has worked and that there's a constituency for it, and whether it's carried on by his kids in 2024 or Tom Cotton or Ted Cruz or any number of others I think that that will be a hallmark of future campaigns. But I hope that the rest of the Republican Party kind of wakes up and does some real reckoning. If they are locked out of both houses of Congress and the White House on where they what they actually stand for at this point. You know, are they still a party that claims surprise democracy and trade and economic opportunity and many of the things that they have fiscal conservatism all the things that they have turned their backs on over the last few years. And how they restructured themselves for a constituency that that can actually be that can actually be competitive. So I think until we are at that period of alignment. I think that there will be a voter vote and that that that hopefully will happen next week but if it doesn't will happen at some election at some point soon. And the question is, what is our degree of stability between now and that point. I means of bringing this discussion together we have a final question from an anonymous attendee who is wondering, given the origins of anonymous. I don't know if it's healed but given the origins of the Electoral College and intentional gerrymandering and voter suppression tactics, which deport rich disproportionately affect historically oppressed populations in this country. What amount of reform is appropriate. Well, I mean I'll say look I, you know, we've touched on a lot of it I think and and there's always reform that's appropriate. And so, I would like to see changes in the way redistricting gets done I think it's I would like to see changes in the way people vote you know cities and municipalities have been experimenting with open primaries and rank choice voting I would I would like to see voting go online I know all the security experts tell us it's impossible and you can't do it but this doesn't seem to be a great way when the Postal Service can't even deliver the balance and by the way I can go do my banking and credit cards and mortgage and that doesn't seem to be destroying the universe so I do think eventually Americans will demand something like that. But again I, you know, I, I do think you know it is possible to get too focused and obsessed with the margins in a sense of the democratic process because we've been through this incredibly contested tumultuous period in politics and what you see is it's a little bit like your bathroom scale like you want to get on your bathroom scale and found out find out you know, if you lost 10 pounds since you last went in that's that's fine that's going to be easy but if you're looking for half pound gradations you're going to find that every time you get on the scale, you weigh something different, because it's not exact and when you're deciding elections by one point in it or half a point in a state, or half a point as a country.  It is, you know, it's, it's, it's never going to be an exact measuring instrument and when your elections turn on tiny margins I think it exaggerates the importance of a lot of the technical aspects of the vote, but I, I don't think that's a permanent state of affairs for the reasons we've been discussing and I think the history of American and the and the direction the future direction Democratic change suggests that that we won't always have elections decided by one point or half a point. And we will, we are capable of being a country with enough consensus and enough, you know, enough predictability stability in the system, so that we don't have to, you know, be always concerned about the technicalities of the electoral process. And I would just say, look, I think there's an enormous amount of reform that is necessary, but this is also, you know, we're not. We're not starting from from at a blank slate I mean we know we know some of the things that we need to do to help to help heal ourselves, and there's plenty of proposals out there and again. And since I had mentioned HR one just making sure that I was right about it and and I think that you would go back to that. Certainly I think a Democratic House with speaker Pelosi would pass that again. Very early in the next session and a Democratic Senate, which doesn't need a 60 vote threshold may well pass it and and it goes to some fundamental aspects of a healthy democracy that includes its focuses on expanding voting rights. And addressing extreme gerrymandering and overhauling campaign finance reform get overhauling campaign finance issues or campaign finance reform, all three of those issues obviously have a really corrosive effect on democracy right now. And I think if we can start to address those that is a really, that's a really good start. And, and there's obviously going to continue to be more and more to be done but we have a we have a blueprint for it. Hopefully we will have the, the, the means in the vehicle to move to move forward with it after, after we see what happens next Tuesday. And the voting rights part is the most critical one as you mentioned Dan I the campaign finance thing to me feels overrated at this point because I think it matters less and less although locally it probably still has a huge impact, but I think you know the lowest out there is the voting is, you know, rededicating legislatively the country to voting rights everywhere I mean some of the suppression stuff we're saying it's that really is a step backward in southern states and and and you know Republican states is really, you know we we had laws on the books against it's intolerable, and that you know fixing that I think is probably the top priority. Amazing amazing.  No, no, I just going to agree and say let's hope we have the opportunity. And, and we'll see we haven't really even talked about, and I know we're at time and we haven't really talked about the election. I am a, I am a, I am a warrior. I've taken, I've taken online that Secretary Albright, who I've worked with fairly closely uses which is that she remains an optimist, but an optimist that worries a lot. So, with that in mind, we'll see what happens next week there's certainly many scenarios that keep me up late at the moment it comes down to Pennsylvania, or some of these other states and, and given, given what Trump has done in terms of trying to do legitimize this, this election, there are also quite good odds that it could be fairly clear cut that that Biden is the winner and even if he refuses to concede that at a certain point, his enablers in Congress and elsewhere, tell him that that it is time and, and that we have a hopefully smooth transition of power which is the hallmark of our democracy, it may still be a hostile transition I don't expect his administration to necessarily work closely with with the Biden team, but, but certainly preparations are in place to move quickly if there is a Biden administration and to start redressing the many, the many inequities in the last few years. Thank you so much I think hope and optimism. I think that's going to resonate with all of us but as we close out this critical discussion. I think one thing that we would want from you two is just how do we go forward what do we read what do we watch how do we carry ourselves. Going forward these next few days this next week. I think you know many people have said it but the most important role in a democracy obviously isn't is an informed citizen. And I would come back I hope Saul is still on the line because I will always remember and I tell my kids and everything else I mean that his, his decision when he was provost to make sure that every freshman had a New York on their on their doorstep when they, when they started school and and how to how to digest news in a critical manner and make sure that that you keep abreast of these issues and I think what has transpired in the 35 years since I was a freshman is really remarkable in terms of the proliferation of social media and the rise of disinformation. And so making sure that we are all critical readers and assessors in terms of our information that we're out there trying to ascertain what the truth is and that there is still an objective truth despite what Trump says and that we act on those and I think that there is reason for hope and much much better and look at what look at the the increase in and youth voter activism and and and efforts by you and your peers. I see it with my kids who are in high school leading the voter mobilization efforts and and to continue to inculcate that that activism and an effort for citizens to be truly engaged in the process and and and I hope that we have of many years of that ahead of us. Yeah, I really agree with what Dan said about that and just being being informed and I do believe there's a lot of cause for optimism. And so I think you know part of what's happened is that this president as Dan said earlier is dedicated himself to delegitimizing institutions it's basically how he has conducted his entire career even before politics. And it's the reason he's been successful where people thought not possible and everybody says why how can you go after John McCain and generals how do you go up to the CIA the NFL the Pope he'll never survive this he always survived. And the reason is that Trump understands that the institution is not the people that if that Catholics are are concerned about the church and baseball fans feel that the commissioners corrupt and soldiers feel that the generals are and that you know we have we have developed it's incredibly anti institutional bent in the country over tumultuous couple of decades and he's really been able to exploit that. And, and so my you know I think the danger is that you can oppose his ideology and be activist and vote and do the things that a citizen should do. But if find your delegitimized find that it bleeds into your worldview, and you can start to see the institutions of government is less legitimate, and the institutions of media is less legitimate, and start to feel, you know, as though nothing can be trusted because, because Trump and his administration could not be trusted. I think I think it's going to be incumbent upon all of us I mean that you know I don't mean that as a cliche I mean all of us working in the media, and working on the political side and all of you going out and working in jobs and we have institutions to show it up and take this really seriously and I hope that Joe Biden should he be elected next week you know at least on the media piece takes this very seriously to and is very deliberate about how he builds his operation in the White House to rebuild trust between the media and the White House and between the media in the country because we need that. It's partly the media's fault but not entirely.  And so I would ask you to guard against cynicism because you've got to be part of the solution if we can't restore the trust in those institutions and they have that the country just can't function I'm just worried but optimistic note, I'd like to say thank you so much to both Matt and Dan for joining us Chichi for helping us all run so smoothly to all of our sponsors for helping make this happen and to our audience for participating and being a part of this important discussion. Thank you for sharing a part of your evening with us and if you haven't already, please vote. Thank you all so much. Thanks for having us. Thanks guys.


QuickBooks Online, Vertical Analysis, Profit and Loss, P&L, Income Statement. Get ready to start moving on up with QuickBooks Online. We're going to be using the free QuickBooks Online Test Drive, searching in our online search engine for QuickBooks Online Test Drive, choosing the option that has Intuit.com and the URL into it being the owner of QuickBooks. Support Accounting Instruction by clicking the link below, giving you a free month membership to all of the content on our website, broken out by category, further broken out by course. Each course then organized in a logical, reasonable fashion, making it much more easy to find what you need than can be done on a YouTube page. We also include added resources such as Excel practice problems, PDF files and more like QuickBooks backup files when applicable. So once again, click the link below for a free month membership to our website and all the content on it. And we're going to be choosing the United States version of the software and verifying that we're not a robot. People often think I'm a robot because of my Superman-like strength, but no. Anyways, we're going to scroll in a bit by holding down control up on the scroll wheel currently at the 125% on the zoom in. We're going to hit the cog dropdown, noting that we're in the accountant view as opposed to the business view. We'll try to toggle back and forth between the two views to see where things are located within them. We're going to be duplicating a tab up top to put reports in as we do every time. Right click to duplicate the tab. Right click the duplicated tab for a double duplication back to the tab to the middle. As the tab to the right is thinking reports on the left and then the balance sheet. And then as that's thinking, I'm going to go to the report on the right or the tab on the right and then the report on the left. And then the profit and loss or the income statement, the P to the L. Then I'm going to close the hamburger and also known as the hamburger and then change the name from 010122 tab 123122 tab run it to refresh it tab to the left. It's still thinking you're still thinking. I'm going to go up top. We're going to close the hamburger and range change 010122 tab 123122 tab run it. That's the setup process we do every time back to the tab to the right. We're now going to be doing what we would call a vertical analysis. So remember these are our main two financial statement reports balance sheet income statement, otherwise known as the P and L profit and loss. And we looked at comparative or horizontal analysis last time, which often takes the place of or looks like or will look like having one period compared to a prior period. And then the difference between the two and a percentage change. Now we're going to do a vertical analysis. Now note when we did the vertical analysis on the balance sheet, it's kind of a little bit more straightforward because we compare everything to like the asset line. But on the income statement, it doesn't really make sense for us to compare everything. Well, it's not the most common thing to do to compare everything to net income, the bottom line. It makes the most sense to do a ratio analysis of vertical analysis structure to compare everything to the goal of the business, which is revenue generation and that's income or revenue. So we're going to compare everything to the revenue line. That's the most common format. So let's see what that looks like. It's quite easy to do as long as you can pick the right item here. So we'll hit the dropdown and you've got these percent of rows. That's not quite as useful on an income statement. Usually unless we're breaking it out in some way, you've got your columns, which you would think maybe that would be the way to go for a vertical analysis and then you've got your income. That's the one we typically want. You could have a percent of expenses as well, not quite as common. You could do a percent of the column, but not quite as common, the percent of the income. That's what we want because income, revenue, that's the goal of the business. That's the main point. So we want to compare everything to it. So now we're going to pull out, let's pull out the trustee calculator for some calculations. And then, so now we've got our income. We can tell that this is a comparison to income because the bottom line of the income here, 100%. So it's comparing it to itself. Now it makes sense to look at the income line items and you're saying, yeah, it makes sense up here. Everything is a percentage of income. Just like on the balance sheet, everything was a percentage of the assets. Let's go to the balance sheet just for a comparative view. And you'll recall when we did this on the balance sheet, if I hit this dropdown, you've got a bit different choices down here. We don't have as many choices because it's a point as of a point in time report. And we're going to choose the percent of the column on this one and then run that. And this compared everything to the assets, which makes sense. And the liabilities and equity to liabilities and equity. And you visualize a nice pie chart when that happens.  I can break that out into a pie chart. It's kind of like looking at my investment portfolio, investing in bonds versus stocks and whatnot or something like that. And these are investments in my assets in the business that I'm using to generate future revenue compared to the total assets. If you look at the income statement, then usually we compare to revenue. The top half looks similar. These are all the income line items compared to total income. I can make a pie chart of that if I wanted to. So this would be 2246.5 divided by the total 10200.77. Two places over on the decimals 22.202. So that makes sense. But note that on the revenue side of things, you usually don't have this many accounts. You usually only have like one to five revenue accounts. They have more here because it's a construction kind of company. But on the expense side, it doesn't make as much sense. You're like, okay, well, I would expect then all my expenses to be compared to the total expenses. But no, we're going to compare all the expenses, those things that we have to consume in order to generate the revenue. That's what an expense is to what we use them for the revenue line item. So you can't create a nice pie chart with the expense side of things. This isn't going to add up to 100% in other words, because we're comparing to the revenue line item. So I can go up top. You could do a bar chart if you wanted to, if you want to do a graph on it. So if you're feeling like you need some kind of visual. But we can then do the 471.86 divided by the total income, which is here divided by the 10200.77. If we move the two places to the right, you get 0.73%. So we're comparing everything to income. Note that the cost of goods sold is usually if you just sold inventory quite high. That's why we have this comparison of the gross profit. And it's usually going to be something that if someone just sells inventory, they're quite aware of the relationship between the cost of goods sold and the income. And then we can look down here on a percentage basis and we can see the dollar amount and we can also see the percentage as comparison to the revenue. The revenue in essence, what we're pulling in or earning the expenses, what we consumed in order to generate that revenue. Note that if I'm comparing my data to prior data, I can compare the dollar amounts. But if I'm trying to benchmark to the industry average or to another company, which is usually larger than my company because I'm trying to get better. I'm trying to increase oftentimes. Then I can't compare the dollar amounts, but I could compare the percentages. Like I say, okay, how much is their cost of goods sold? How much is the industry average percentage cost of goods sold compared to their income, which gives us an idea of what their markups are for the inventory that they're selling? How much do they spend on advertising? Do they spend a lot on advertising? Advertising is one of those areas that's quite confusing for a lot of people, including myself. It just drives you kind of crazy because there's so much money that you spend on advertising. It just seems ridiculous. But in any case, then of course, insurance, how much are they spending on employment? You can look at the key line items here and compare them to the income line item. Okay, so then if you go up top, you could do the other kind of vertical analysis just to test them out, but they're not as common. That's the one you want to know. If you go to a percentage of the column just to take a look at it, the total column adds up to net income. So now we're comparing everything to net income, the bottom line. So here it is 100% on the net income. And if I was to compare some other line item to it, you're going to say expenses are 5237.31 divided by 1642.46. If I move the decimal two places to the right 318. So you're going to get some funny numbers. This might be helpful for some ratio analysis, but it's not the most common way you're going to see this kind of report. So it could be useful in some cases, but it's probably not like the standard report that you would be generating in a package of reports. You could then do a percentage of expenses. So now you're comparing everything to the expense line item, which is probably useful down here when you're looking at the actual expenses. Because now you can kind of look at it more of a pie chart analysis in terms of your expenses and see where you're spending the most money in relation to total expenses. Here's your total line item. So all of your expenses right here will then total up to 100%. And you could think of it in a pie chart format instead of comparing your expenses to the revenue generation. So that could be useful. I would think just for this expense area, but probably not as useful comparing your revenue to total expenses. It's probably not as common of a technique. So I'm going to hit the dropdown again. Your most common thing here would be comparing to income, boom, run it. And then you could also have multiple periods where you include a vertical analysis. So for example, I could say I'm going to hit the dropdown and change it from the totals to month or let's go to quarters, quarters. So now you've got multiple quarters that also give you the vertical analysis. So when we're starting to think about how we're going to present these reports, I typically think of the technique to be I'm going to start simple with a simplified profit and loss, possibly a single step profit and loss, if I can, and then get more detailed going into it, assuming that the people I'm dealing with aren't accountants oftentimes. They don't want to be overwhelmed with data, but sometimes they do. Sometimes you might say, hey, I don't need this redundancy of multiple reports that have the same information, because I still have the total over here. Maybe you make one report that has a lot of detail on it and therefore you don't need the more simplified reports that are giving you the detail or the same information in less detail. And then you've got to compare how many reports do I want with a vertical analysis? How much is that going to add versus clutter the report? And then how many reports do I want to be putting together in terms of comparative type of reports? You probably want to break that out on a month by month or on the basis of, I'm going to group my reports to those I'm going to give in a month by end and a quarter end in a year end. That's how I would think of it. I'm going to go back to the totals and then I'm going to just say that I would then customize it up top and then get rid of the cents, brackets, red. This is what we do every time if I was going to give it to someone externally. I'm going to change the header. I'm going to make it a income, let's say vertical, let's say income statement, vertical analysis, and then get rid of the date, time, report basis, boom, and run it. I was running, so there you have it. And then you could save that beautiful report, save customization so that when you're going to print these out on a monthly basis perhaps, I can go to the first tab. I can refresh that tab so it's fresh stuff is in it. It's just like eating a salad right from the garden. It's nice and fresh. And then I'm going to go to the reports and then custom reports. There it is. There it is. That looks good. Okay, so let's just take a look at the business view just to see where we've, where our stuff is located on the business view. We've only been looking at the reports. So it's pretty straightforward here. You'll recall here's the home page, the get things done page. That's what they call it. I don't know why. It's a little seems a little, but whatever home seems easier to say get things done. I get I'm going to the get that's you got to go away from home to get things done. Usually unless you work at home, I guess like most people anyway. So here's the reports standard customization. There it is.


Germany supplies Ukraine with air defence radar, bridge layer tanks and military equipment. Germany reported about another military aid package sent to Ukraine which includes an air surveillance radar station TRML-4D. The radars are designed for Ukrainian iris TSLM air defence systems. TRML-4D uses the latest active electronically scanned array radar technology with multiple digitally shaped beams. It is capable of every detection of various types of aerial targets such as aircraft, helicopters and cruise missiles. It ensures the rapid detection and tracking of about 1,500 targets in a radius of up to 250 kilometres. The radar station is equipped with an onboard generator and can be transported by any truck. The TRML-4D is the latest version of the TRML family of medium range C-band radar developed by Hensalt in 2018. In addition to the TRML-4D, Ukraine received three beaver bridge layer tanks, a portable demining system, two border guard vehicles and 16 Zetros off-road trucks. Last week, Germany supplied Ukraine with a new batch of military assistance which included high precision guided projectiles. In addition, an unspecified quantity of Patriot surface-to-air missile system rockets has been announced for delivery.