Now, Danielle turns to Mike and asks about the fact that he swore allegiance to her, and then he screwed her over. Mike strokes Danielle's ego by telling her that he's sure she was secretly aligned with everyone in the house -- which is just what she likes to think about herself -- and she immediately starts to smile as if she's being petted. For someone who thinks it's not personal, she votes with her feelings more than anyone I've ever seen, I think.
Howie brings up "bros before hos." He says that Mike should have anticipated that he'd lose Howie's vote by sending him home. Mike strokes Howie's ego by saying that he told Will it was important to get rid of Howie because Howie was so awesome. "I deserve a lot of credit for making that happen," Mike says of Howie's eviction. Would, say, Erika then deserve a lot of credit for making Will's eviction happen? No, no, I'm sure that's completely different. Erika didn't "orchestrate" anything.
Erika begins her closing statement by saying that she came into the game knowing that it was important to attack Will, but not knowing how to do it. She says that she ultimately decided that she would just try to get to F4, and then win the final veto herself. When she wasn't able to do that, she had to resort to convincing Janelle to take Will out. Which, of course, she did. Note that Erika does not, in any way, say that the entire game went as she originally planned, or that she masterminded anything. She says that she originally intended to go after Will, and that failed. So she tried to get to F4 and win the veto, and that failed. Only then, with no options, did she talk Janelle into voting out Will. She doesn't say that she's a genius; she just says that she did that one thing right, and she says that "in pure puppetmaster form, I had his best friend put him up, and his best girl vote him out." It's...what happened, you know? With regard to that one thing, she played it very well, working Janelle to do what she wanted, just as Will would have. Erika frames the question for the jury around "puppetmaster" Will, because that's what they all seem to want to do. She asks them if it's better, essentially, to vote for the person who just did "dirty work" for Will, or is it better to vote for the person who got Will out? It's a fair argument, and if they were actually voting based on the quality of game play, it's not unassailable, but it's the best argument she has.
Mike stands up (unnecessary; dumb-looking -- you're in the house; they're in another house, moron) and says that while none of them knew it, he lied to all of them, brought them all into Chill Town, and so forth. Of course, when he says "he" did these things, he means that Will did them. He also makes the world's most insincere, bullshit, suck-up speech about how every one of them gave him something -- the best part being where Chicken George "inspired" him. It's like...if you were going to vote based on who delivered the biggest pile of obvious horseshit, there would be no way to avoid voting for him on the basis of that speech alone. If, however, you were going to vote based on the illusion that secretly you were awesome, and even the person who won the game acknowledges that he was not as awesome as you, you'd pretty much have to give the money to him then, too.