What if the jury was instructed that what the attorneys said in their arguments were not evidence?

Finally, no harm could have resulted. Prior to opening statements and also before closing argument and the commencement of deliberations, the trial court instructed the jury that what the attorneys said in their arguments was not evidence. We presume the jury followed this instruction. (People v. Waidla (2000) 22 Cal.4th 690, 725 ["The presumption is that limiting instructions are followed by the jury"]; People v. Mickey (1991) 54 Cal.3d 612, 689, fn. 17 ["The crucial assumption underlying our constitutional system of trial by jury is that jurors generally understand and faithfully follow instructions"].)