‘The Republican Brand Could Collapse’: CNN’s Harry Enten Warns Trump Will Pay Steep Political Price on Economy

Few people track the pulse of American political opinion as closely as CNN’s chief data analyst Harry Enten — and according to him, President Donald Trump’s second-term agenda is already colliding with serious warning signs.

“This economy is his,” Enten told Mediaite editor Aidan McLaughlin on this week’s episode of Press Club. “If [his tariffs] raise the prices even further, there will be a political price to pay.”

So far, voters aren’t thrilled. “His net approval rating with independents is 22 points underwater,” Enten said, “which beat the old record — Trump in his first term, when he was 16 points under the water at this point in his presidency.”

Looking ahead to 2026, Enten warned Republicans could pay dearly if the economy continues to falter. “It is completely on the table that the Republican brand could collapse. It has not yet — absolutely could, 100%,” he said. “If the economy goes south, it will take Republican House members with them — and some senators too.”

But Democrats aren’t necessarily positioned to capitalize. One reason Trump’s approval hasn’t totally cratered, Enten posited, is that his opposition is in shambles. “The Democratic Party’s brand is in the absolute gutter,” he said.

“It used to be that when you took the working class in general — because you combined both Black and Hispanic working class with White — that Democrats would win that group,” he said. “And it just ain’t the case no more.”

Yet while their brand may be far from unified, one strategy that seems to be working for the Democrats is targeting Elon Musk. “Why are Democrats wise to go after Elon Musk?” Enten said. “In poll after poll after poll, he is unpopular.” Enten pointed to a Fox News poll showing Musk 18 points underwater nationally. “It’s bad. It’s tremendously awful.”

And after Musk poured $25 million into a Wisconsin court race and traveled to the state for a rally, he became the story. “He becomes the face, and then all of a sudden — political poison,” Enten said. The conservative Musk backed in the state ended up losing. “It’s awfully difficult to claim victory when the candidate you support lost by 10 points.”

That’s not the image Trump wants, Enten noted, and is a potential reason Musk has been more removed from the spotlight as of late. “If there’s one thing that Donald Trump has taught us,” Enten said, “Don’t lose. Always be a winner. Win, win, win. Claim victory.”

Enten also spoke about the nonpartisan nature of reporting on polls, his predictions for the next leader of the Democratic Party, and why he thinks Democrats have lost voters they once relied upon.

Mediaite’s Press Club airs in full Saturdays at 9 a.m. on Sirius XM’s POTUS Channel 124. You can also subscribe to Press Club on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. Read a transcript of the conversation below, edited for length and clarity.

Aidan McLaughlin: I keep seeing different headlines about Trump’s approval rating. One day, I hear he’s at a record low; the next day, I see Karoline Leavitt in the briefing room boasting that he’s at a record high. Broadly speaking, what is the state of Trump’s approval in America today?

Harry Enten: He’s underwater — at least according to an aggregate of polls. I’m sure you can find some polls that might find him slightly above water, but if you take the average of polls, depending on how you aggregate it, you’ll find his disapproval anywhere from three to six or seven points higher than his approval rating. Ergo, his disapproval is higher than his approval rating. And where does that place him historically? Well, he is in a better spot than he was in his first term. But compared to every other president at this point, he is doing worse. There are only two presidents in history who have had a net approval rating underwater at this point in their presidency. The first one was Donald Trump in his first term, and the second one is Donald Trump in his second term. So that’s where we are.

I have two ideas about that. One is that sometimes that surprises people. Trump is generally an unpopular political figure, but not everyone knows that, because he’s enormously popular amongst a certain segment of the country.

He is.

And they see that as a majority. But he’s never really above 49 percent in the polls.

Very rarely.

The other side of that is, okay, I think a lot of liberals would be very surprised to hear that he’s faring better than he did in his first term, because they see the things that he is doing, and they are shocked that they’re not tanking his approval rating. But he’s not in the 20s now. My assumption for why that is — and correct me if I’m wrong — is that 77 million people voted for him. They are going to be more forgiving at the start. They’re going to give him some slack to execute his policies and to run the country as they elected him to, before they turn around and say, “OK, I regret it. This was a terrible idea.” Is that why he hasn’t truly seen a serious dip, you think, in his polling?

I think that’s part of it. I also think you have to consider what the opposition is. This is one of these things that I think is so hilarious in the back-and-forths. And you’ll notice, if you watch me on air, it would seem that half my segments are good news for Donald Trump and the other half are bad news for Trump. The reason for that is actually really simple. When you focus in on Trump and view him in isolation, he is not a popular fella. I think it was Joe Biden — I’m going to forget the phrase — but it’s, “Don’t compare me to the Almighty, compare me to the alternative.” And if you look at the alternative right now, the Democratic Party’s brand is in the absolute gutter. It’s garbage. It’s garbage. You look at the generic congressional ballot — Democrats may be up by a point in the average of that. That is way behind where they were in 2017 at this point. You look at party identification — Republicans actually lead on that measure. You look at something like the party that best will fight for the needs of people like myself — you’ve got a tie on that. Historically, Democrats crush on that. So I think what’s essentially going on here is you sort of have these two forces going up against each other, and one may be underwater, but the other one is even more underwater, and then it’s a fight almost to the bottom.

That was seeded in the 2024 election, when Democrats lost ground in almost every major group that they typically covet.

Oh, yeah.

Black men, Hispanic men fled to Trump in droves. He got a larger share of younger voters, I think, than…

Any Republican since George W. Bush in 2000, I believe.

And now, younger voters are more conservative than they’ve ever been, which is a really shocking trend for Democrats.

More conservative than they’ve ever been during our lifetimes. I think Alex Keaton was probably conservative on Family Ties.

When we’re looking at the 2024 election, have those trends shifted at all? Or is this still a nightmare scenario for Democrats — Democratic Party in dire shape, no idea how to win back those voters — and Trump still finding himself in a good place with the people that voted for him?

I think for the most part, he’s in a good place. If you look, for instance, there was the UMass Amherst poll that was published this week, and they asked a tiered question — whether or not folks regret their vote. And you could only find 2 percent of Trump supporters who said, “I regret my vote and I wish I had cast a ballot for somebody else.” And then there was 1 percent who said, “I would rather not have voted at all.” I have to tell you, that’s not a wide spot in the road — that’s barely anyone. That’s basically equivalent to the Harris numbers on those questions. So, no, I think that for the most part, the coalitions that held during the 2024 elections still hold today. Now, they may have shifted a point or two to the left, but for the most part, we are a very static country.

I spoke with Paul Begala recently. One thing he said — and was terrified by — was that Democrats, for the first time in his lifetime, had lost working-class voters making less than $50,000 a year. He called that an existential crisis.

I remember in 2000 — it was the first election I really followed — and it’s funny, I actually remember watching a certain Dan Abrams reporting from the United States Supreme Court. I had not yet gone through my bar mitzvah at that point, to give you an idea of how long ago it was. I watched ABC News election night coverage…

You went to the same school as Dan.

I did.

Did you say, “I want to be on television like him someday?”

Whenever you see somebody in a profession that is closely aligned to what you’re doing, you say, “Oh, they went to the high school that I went to,” it becomes more possible. “Oh, it’s not that insane.” Now, my father — funny enough, just like Dan’s father — was in law, but my father wasn’t Floyd Abrams. My father was a supervising judge of the Bronx Criminal Court. Still pretty gosh darn good. Not nothing, but not up there in the clouds, up there in the sky of the legal profession. I think anytime you see somebody who was in a similar position as you were at some point in some way, and then they achieved greatness, and I’m not just saying this because I’m on here. Dan’s built a media empire. I remember when I was younger and he became head of MSNBC, I was like, “Wait a minute — the lawyer guy is becoming that? What is going on there?”

Savvy businessman.

Savvy businessman — far more savvy than I am. I take my money and stuff it in the back of my closet, and I carry two-dollar bills on me. They’ll be worth something someday. But to the broad point, back in 2000, I was watching with bunny ears. We didn’t have cable when I was a kid, so it was about which channel could come in the clearest. That’s how long ago it was. I remember on that election night, West Virginia was a swing state, Arkansas was a swing state, Tennessee was Al Gore’s home state — a swing state. And we look at those states now, they are way to the right. Way to the right. That speaks to a number of things.

That speaks, one, to the losses Democrats have had among white working-class voters. But it also speaks to the unpredictability in politics. Who would have guessed in 2016 that Donald Trump would put in the best performance among Hispanics of any Republican candidate since the exit polls were first enacted in 1972? You would never have thought it. He got crushed in Miami-Dade — crushed. That was the whole thing: “Oh, Hispanics are coming out, they’re going to win the state for Hillary Clinton.” Fast forward eight years later — whoop — completely different. So, look, is it a problem for Democrats? Absolutely, it’s a problem for Democrats. You don’t want to be losing support among core parts of your constituency, or what used to be core parts of your constituency. But is it unsolvable? Is it something that will hold five or ten years down the line? I don’t even know what I’m having for dinner tonight, so the idea that I’m going to know what’s going to happen in five to ten years down the line in politics? I’m gonna take a pass on that one.

What’s your best explanation for why? How did he win over those voting blocs that Democrats previously thought they had locked up?

I think there are a few things going on here. First off, let’s go to the overarching idea — that is, “Oh, well, Hispanics are immigrants, and they’re going to hear what Donald Trump is saying about immigrants and go against him.” Well, that’s what Democrats thought. What apparently Hispanics saw — and of course, Hispanics cover a wide group of voters — is that Donald Trump was saying that about immigrants who are in the country illegally. And I think it’s so important to point out that most Hispanics who are in this country are not here illegally. So they heard what he said and thought, “Oh yeah, they’re taking jobs,” or “The Democrats aren’t focused on the economy.”

If you think about it, where were the first real signs that you saw Democratic support among Hispanics falling? You saw it in 2020. That was the first real sign, right along the Rio Grande Valley in Texas, where historically very Democratic counties — counties Hillary Clinton won by 60 points — Joe Biden won by like five. That’s a big freaking swing right along the border. So you talk about border issues, you talk about the economy, Trump says, “I’m going to get you the jobs and make sure we address inflation.” These types of messages very much hit home for working-class voters. And we know that a higher percentage of the white population has a college degree compared to voters of color, among Hispanics, and among African Americans. So it would make sense that the movements we saw among the white working class would eventually be seen among the Black working class and the Hispanic working class.

I think it all funnels from the idea that you have these people who are seen as elitists on the Upper West Side of Manhattan dictating their cultural values. It’s funny — when I was a kid, it was “Hollywood cultural values.” Now, I guess it’s Upper West Side cultural values, Upper East Side cultural values. And you basically say, “What the heck is this? What is going on here?” And so the party of the working class — that was the Democratic Party — you look and you literally see in those exit polls, it used to be that when you took the working class in general, because you combined both Black and Hispanic working class with white, Democrats would win that group. And it just ain’t the case no more.

You had a segment this week that shocked me. You found that Trump had a whopping 22 percent underwater number…

His net approval rating with independents was 22 points underwater, which beat the old record, which was Trump in his first term, when he was 16 points underwater at this point in his presidency.

Look — it’s the economy, stupid… or “the economy, smarty-pants,” as I like to say. And that is the reason why, more than anything else, Trump’s approval rating has fallen to this point. Because if you look at his economic net approval rating in his first term, it was consistently above water. It was one of his best issues, and now it’s one of his worst issues. Inflation killed the Joe Biden presidency. And of course, inflation is the price of goods. So if these tariffs, and the uncertainty, et cetera — who knows where the heck we’re going with that — if that raises prices even further, there will be a political price to pay, you can mark my words.

That’s what I found so staggering about the political wisdom here, because Trump was elected, for the most part, because of inflation. That simple. A couple of other metrics — 70 percent wrong-track numbers — but prices were high. Joe Biden made this baffling, I thought catastrophic, political misstep where he refused to acknowledge that prices were indeed high, and that voters’ concerns about prices may have been legitimate. He told voters that, actually, the economy was great. Which, sure, the economy was in fairly good shape compared to the rest of the world. We had the lowest inflation of the G7. Great. But if voters are telling you they think prices are too high, you have to explain what you’re doing to combat that. And he had this contempt for those concerns. Trump turns around and says, “Everyone’s screwing you over. You’re getting screwed left and right, and I can fix this.” He’s going to get the job done. But the problem for Trump is that when you say you’re the person who’s going to fix things, and then you unilaterally start a trade war, you now own the economy. This economy is his. Now, my guess is, we could have a a nice run during this 90-day pause on the tariffs, because people are going to be buying a lot in anticipation. But eventually, do you foresee the trade war being catastrophic for his approval numbers?

First off, you talk about those economic metrics — consumer spending was up in March. The jobless claims actually seem to be pretty gosh darn good right now.

It’s a little weird.

It’s very interesting. It turns out what you heard a week ago doesn’t hold a week from now. I think it’s all a matter of what actually happens here. This idea that, yes, in theory, if prices go up due to the tariffs, or if people stop hiring because they’re uncertain of what’s going on, or people stop spending, et cetera — yes, that is a universe in which his approval rating will drop. But is that the universe we’re actually going to exist in? That’s kind of the fun of this all in my day-to-day, where I just think, “Okay, we’re going to enter this universe,” and then, “But what if we don’t enter that universe? We enter this universe instead.” That’s kind of what makes life worth living, isn’t it? Because we don’t know where things are going to go. Now, of course, that probably gives a few stock traders some agita, but for someone like myself, who finds it so interesting to see the unpredictability… Was that the theme song? “Unpredictability, the paperboy…” Was that Full House?

No idea.

I feel like it was Full House. I love Full House.

I don’t think I’ve ever actually seen an episode.

That’s a true shonda. Jesse Frederick wrote the theme for that. Anyway, yes, that’s what makes what we do interesting. Because we genuinely don’t know where things are going to end up, and we report it as we see it.

Now, as you note, voters have always seen Trump as having a good handle on the economy. He’s always had a high approval rating for his handling of the economy.

100 percent.

The funny thing about tariffs is that he did them against the wishes and advice of almost every — not just business leader who supported him — but also every expert weighing in, both conservative and liberal. People always mention Oren Cass whenever they want to provide the strongest case for tariffs. And the fact that they name one person — and even he doesn’t really agree with the way Trump rolled these out — tells you something about how much popular support there is for this stuff. So, assuming this does all collapse, and Trump, I think, is already underwater in terms of his handling of the economy.

He’s way underwater in terms of his handling of the economy.

Is there going to be a political price for that down the line? Could this be a disaster in the midterms?

Yeah, of course. It could be a complete disaster in the midterms. Absolutely. Going back into history, I remember after the 2004 election, Democrats were totally, “Oh my God, this is the end, this is the pits, it’s awful.” And then they won a net gain of 30 seats in the House of Representatives and took back the United States Senate. No incumbent or open seat they held going in did they lose. I think that might be one of the few times that’s ever happened. Because even when you get a big net gain, you usually lose a seat or two. And it was a combination of things — it was corruption, it was the Iraq War. You look forward now, of course, it’s completely on the table that the Republican brand could collapse. It has not yet. But it absolutely could. 100 percent. If the economy goes south, it will take Republican House members with it, and some senators too.

When you look at the Democratic Party, polling-wise, it is in its worst shape in decades. Just horrible numbers.

Horrible — and among their own voters in particular, which makes for interesting times.

Dire. How do you see Democrats getting out of the wilderness? Is there any political figure who is incredibly popular? Is there a way of opposing Trump that is popular? What is their way out of this, from a data perspective?

I think a few things. Number one, I make the argument that Trump will provide the lane. What seems to be unseeable all of a sudden becomes seeable. Where is his unpopularity? Why is he unpopular? That will provide a message for them. It is absolutely the case, if you look at the polling right now among Democrats, that they want fighters. They do not want to compromise with Trump, considerably more so than in term number one. But I think it is a mistake to assume that means folks want the party to go left. You can fight Trump from the middle, you can fight Trump from the moderate-liberal wing, or you can fight Trump from the left.

We all see the stadiums that Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie are selling out. We do know that if you were to ask — I think it was our CNN poll — “Who do you see as the leader of the Democratic Party?” Ocasio-Cortez is right there at the top. But it’s important to note that this is a plurality leader, not someone getting anywhere near 50 percent. In the poll, I think she topped out at 10 percent in an open-ended question, where people just name someone. So there’s definitely that faction. There’s also certainly the faction that might be a bit more moderate — led by Josh Shapiro, obviously — who has proven his electoral bona fides in the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Those are two folks who’ve gotten some press, to say the least. But then, you can’t dismiss Kamala Harris. You just can’t.

Really?

If you look at polling that asks the ballot test, she leads. And people will say, “Well, it’s just name ID…”

Is that just a sign of how dire the bench is?

Or is it a sign of how much name identification matters? And sure, once the other candidates become better known, that might shift. But name ID is worth a lot of dough. Look at Donald Trump — remember after January 6? You were hearing about political obituaries being written, etc. Then you looked at the first polls, and he was still polling at about 40 percent in the Republican field. That’s pretty gosh darn good. Those folks win about 75 percent of the time. Now, whether or not Kamala Harris actually ends up running — who knows? But I guess what I’m saying is, there are still a number of different lanes forming right now. Very rarely does someone come from absolutely nowhere. They’re usually someone who’s known.

I think the presidential nominee who came most out of nowhere in the last 40 years was probably Bill Clinton, who spoke at the ’88 Democratic National Convention. But really, the truly most unknown candidate to win a major party nomination in anyone’s lifetime, at least for people watching or listening to this, is Jimmy Carter. And of course, that was a very different time — not just in terms of politics and media, but also in how the primary process unfolded. People were still getting used to the idea of what it meant to win in Iowa, what it meant to win in New Hampshire. How would the press handle it? How do you build momentum? Part of the reason George McGovern won in ’72 — or probably the biggest reason — was because he knew the rules. He helped write the rules. That allowed him to understand the importance of caucuses, the importance of winning them, and how to rack up delegates. So now we’re in a completely different environment. But to sum up my long summation here, there are a lot of different paths that Democrats could take.

When I look at the two big issues Democrats are focusing on right now — the economy and Trump’s deportations — Trump’s deportations are a five-alarm fire. If he actually does defy the Supreme Court, that would be a serious problem.

Most voters would agree.

And then his handling of the economy has been very unpopular. Some Democrats argue that because Trump’s handling of immigration in general is something people approve of, they should not be focusing on deportations and immigration, or going to El Salvador to try and talk to immigrants who have been deported. Instead, they should only focus on the economy and inflation. What do you make of that argument?

I think there are a few things. One, you can walk and chew gum at the same time. So I think that’s certainly the case. But I’ll take the inverse of it, which is, if I were trying to tell Donald Trump where he should focus his political messaging, I would say focus it on immigration. Unless you’re going to change your stances on the economy. Now, that might not necessarily keep him from going after the Fed Chair, which is definitely off-message. I don’t think Democrats will find that they’re going to win the midterms because people are upset with Donald Trump’s immigration policy. They’re going to win or lose — and again, the midterms are still a while away — most likely, because people feel that Donald Trump was elected to fix the economy and then was unable to do so in the voters’ minds.

On the flip side, Senator Bernie Sanders and AOC are on this anti-oligarchy tour, which has targeted, among others, Elon Musk.

Good political figure to go after.

Why are Democrats wise to go after Elon Musk?

Look at Elon Musk’s popularity. There was a Fox News poll that came out in March, I think it was the 14th to the 17th. You’ll forgive me if I’m wrong on the dates there. The poll essentially asked, “Do you approve or disapprove of different folks in the Trump administration?” They asked about Trump, they asked about Rubio, they asked about Vance. Who was the most popular? It was Rubio. Who was the second most popular? It was Trump. Third? Vance. And who was way in the back of that bus? Elon Musk. In poll after poll after poll, he is unpopular.

Is it because he’s weird?

I think it’s probably a bunch of different things going on. Sure — he’s interesting. There’s nothing wrong with being a little weird. Where’s the camera so I can look into it? Wink wink. But I think when you come in as this billionaire guy who’s not elected, and suddenly you’re given all this power to essentially fire federal workers… The idea of shrinking the federal government is a popular theory — in theory. But in practice, the way they’re going about it, the actual approach, is not very popular.

Elon Musk keeps saying, “How could anyone oppose cutting waste, fraud, and abuse?” And it’s true, on a macro level, people love that idea.

Correct.

Because there is waste and fraud in the government. It would be good to cut that down. So that’s popular. But is what DOGE has been doing popular?

This is the fun part of polling — which question actually conveys how people really feel when they get down to it? I would argue the simplest way to know that is just to ask: “Is Elon Musk a popular guy or not?” And he’s not, and his numbers have fallen.

How bad are we talking?

Depending on the poll. In that Fox News poll, you’re looking at a net approval rating for Elon Musk of minus 18 points.

Among all Americans?

Among all Americans.

That’s violent.

Oh, it’s bad. It’s tremendously awful. Donald Trump doesn’t even get near that. Trump is like at minus four, minus five. Musk is at minus 18 — and I can find you polls where he’s under minus 20. It’s legitimately bad. In my opinion, it’s pretty clear that that’s a referendum on how people feel he’s doing. This is always the fun little thing, because in that one, it turns out the broad indication is the approach is unpopular, despite the general mandate for wanting to cut government. Versus asking a question about immigration, like, “Should we deport all 11 million undocumented immigrants?” And in February, according to a Washington Post poll, 56 percent of voters supported that. But then you ask, “What about the people who have jobs, etc.?” and suddenly it becomes much less popular. But if you look at Trump’s overall net approval rating, whether we’re on the right track on immigration, the broader question there actually covers it. So it depends on which way, which makes it interesting.

The funny thing about Elon Musk is that despite being an unpopular figure, he’s made the mistake of foisting himself into the public eye. Take Wisconsin, for example. He goes there and makes this $25 million push to get the conservative justice elected. I don’t think — and correct me if I’m wrong — that Democrats spent less than that. They spent an enormous amount of money on that race.

Correct.

But because Elon Musk inserted himself, standing on a stage doing a little jump, wearing the hat, acting like a bit of a buffoon, the headlines were, “Elon Musk pumps $25 million into the race and loses.” Nobody really acknowledged that Democrats also dumped a lot of money into that race.

They dumped a ton of money into that race. I believe — and forgive me if I’m wrong — if you look at ad dollars, Democrats actually outspent Republicans. And when you include all spending beyond ads, I believe they spent even more than the conservatives. But either way — very simpatico.

But because he put his name in the headline, suddenly he became the face — and it’s a very unpopular face.

He is an unpopular face. If my memory is correct, he was 12 points underwater in Wisconsin back in February. Look — it’s not hard to draw this line. He becomes the face, and suddenly — this is the phrase I like to use — political poison. You become associated with losing. And if there’s one thing Donald Trump has taught us, it’s this: don’t lose. Always be a winner. Win, win, win. Claim victory. It’s awfully difficult to claim victory when the candidate you supported lost by 10 points.

Do you think that’s why he’s gotten quieter?

I think that might be part of it. I don’t exactly have a hotline to Elon, but I wouldn’t be surprised. And Donald Trump is not exactly… let’s just say, he’s pretty smart when it comes to politics. And I think Donald Trump had a pretty good idea of what was going on.

Polling is nonpartisan — at least it’s supposed to be.

Yes.

So you go on air, and if there’s good news for Trump, you deliver that. If there’s bad news for Trump, you deliver that. How much heat do you get from viewers or on social media for your commentary about polling, and is that something you pay attention to at all?

No, I ignore it. If you are tweeting at me, I’m ignoring it. That’s not to say I’m not aware of the press that comes with certain things. You have to keep an eye on that. But there are going to be loud voices, and I have a job to do — and a privilege. I really call it a privilege. If you had told me 20 years ago that I’d be in the position I’m in now, I would take it every single time. I have a job to do, and that is to deliver, in a dispassionate, but hopefully entertaining way, the information, so that you remember it. And whatever that information is, I will deliver it. It will not come with a partisan bell around it — at least that is the goal I wish to achieve.

Do you ever take heat from the White House or politicians for your commentary on polling, or is it just viewers?

I may. I don’t hear from them much. Oh, I heard from one.

Okay, who?

I am not going to reveal who that person is.

No one is watching this.

That person knows who they are. They called me after a segment and said essentially, “I think you’re wrong.” They were perfectly polite. “I think you’re wrong. I’ll share my internal data with you,” and so on. The election results showed I was right.

You’re a Bills fan?

Huge.

What are the chances, mathematically speaking, that the Bills win the Super Bowl next year?

I’d say it’s probably — if I were being dispassionate — somewhere between 7 to 10 percent. I’d say 10 percent is a pretty decent bet.

Are you a betting man?

I do not gamble.

Smart.

But I’ll play your game.

Would you bet on the Bills next year?

I will always bet on the Bills. I will always bet on them. I think football and sports fandom at their peak are very healthy, very fun. It allows people to come together. I love the Bills Mafia. I love the way we come together. You know in Buffalo, on a Monday in the fall, whether or not they won or lost, based on how people are feeling. And I’m very similar in that way — you know how I’m feeling. But being an adult is losing the championship game yet again in the AFC, and coming into work the next day and doing your job, despite it sucking tremendously.