Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1173 Scott Adams： Democrats Cover Their Tracks and Prepare for Coup 2.0 While Texans Reject the Biden Bus and Hoaxes Fall Like Rain

00:00:00.000 All right. I think I might be live now on both YouTube and Periscope.

00:00:07.780 Thanks for coming. Thanks for getting in here. I appreciate it every time you show up.

00:00:14.320 Well, tomorrow's the big day. We've got a lot to talk about, don't we?

00:00:19.160 I see some people helpfully suggesting Restream. See this $13,000 equipment behind me? Trust me

00:00:28.260 when I say I have tested every live streaming option and I have settled on the only one that

00:00:35.920 works and it only works 80% of the time. All of the other options are more like 30% of the time they

00:00:44.060 work and this one's 80% so I'll keep that. All right. But first, what's the most important thing

00:00:50.360 we have to do? Well, we need this simultaneous sip and all you need is a cup or mug or a glass of

00:00:55.540 tank or chalice or a stein in a canteen jug or a flask of a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your

00:00:59.440 favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit

00:01:07.500 of the day. The thing makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip and it happens now. Go.

00:01:13.220 Oh yeah. I feel the poles begin to converge with one sip. That's all it took. 0.99

00:01:26.780 So let me tell you why I think this periscope works. I think this periscope, meaning coffee with

00:01:36.580 Scott Adams in the simultaneous sip, is that there's something that I do differently from other

00:01:43.060 people who live stream. Do any of you know what that is? I'm just curious if it's obvious to you

00:01:49.900 what I do differently. And I will tell you, I give you a moment to see if you can think of it on your

00:01:56.440 own, but here's what I do differently. I don't treat you like an audience. I treat it like I'm talking to

00:02:04.300 one person. Now, if you watch the news and turn on the television, your news presenters are always,

00:02:11.600 they act like they're talking to a crowd. They're talking to an audience. And the way you present to

00:02:17.000 an audience is really different than the way you would talk to one person. Now, it's not exactly

00:02:22.760 like talking to one person. You know, it's a little modified. But I think that's what I brought to this.

00:02:28.860 The live streaming world is talking to you one-on-one, even though I know there are more than

00:02:37.960 more than one of you, I hope. All right. So how many of you have heard the podcast just came out

00:02:45.020 with Sam Harris talking to Andrew Sullivan? You really have to watch this. You got to watch it

00:02:51.880 or listen to it. And here's why it's so fascinating. So both Sam Harris and Andrew Sullivan

00:02:59.900 are very flexible thinkers, meaning that they're not necessarily just going to agree with a side

00:03:07.620 unless there are reasons. So they're two very rational people who are not stuck in some kind of dogma.

00:03:18.080 So much so that neither of them are fans of President Trump, to say the least. They're big

00:03:24.800 critics of President Trump. But because they're also smart, rational people, they say on the podcast

00:03:32.220 that neither of them believed the fine people hoax. They didn't believe it. So that gives you an idea

00:03:40.100 that they're capable of looking at data and facts and knowing that that matters.

00:03:49.040 But despite that, despite that mental, let's say, flexibility, mental acuity that they both have,

00:03:56.460 clearly both brilliant people. You can't take that away from them. But listening to them talk,

00:04:02.780 and I want to make sure that I'm saying this not as an entertaining insult, because we're sort of in

00:04:10.240 that mode where insulting each other over our politics is just sort of entertaining, right?

00:04:16.580 A really good string of insults against your political nemesis is just sort of fun and entertaining.

00:04:24.600 But that's not what I'm doing here. So this next thing I say, do not put your entertainment filter on it.

00:04:31.840 This is actually, literally, I'm not putting any hyperbole on this. When I listen to them talk,

00:04:40.220 it sounds like a festival of mental illness. Do you have that? And I have to wonder, 0.94

00:04:47.520 when the left hears Trump supporters talk, do they have the same feeling? Now, I'm not talking about,

00:04:54.980 you know, on the news, both sides like to do the trick where they'll find the

00:04:59.960 least informed voter from the other side. And they'll interview the person who doesn't know

00:05:07.000 anything. And they'll try to sell that as representing all Democrats or all Republicans.

00:05:16.140 But, and of course, they don't represent them, they're just individuals. But when I watch,

00:05:23.560 when I listen to that, it just sounds like they have some actual mental issues that they're working

00:05:29.980 through. And I don't mean permanent ones. Andrew Sullivan admitted on the podcast, that after the

00:05:36.880 2016 election, he had clinical depression. And he actually had to seek treatment for a mental condition

00:05:45.120 that he attributes to the election, to Trump getting elected. That's pretty serious. You know,

00:05:52.140 this whole mental illness thing over Trump is completely real. When Trump derangement syndrome 0.99

00:05:59.020 was first bandied about, and I didn't invent it, but I was one of the, one of the earlier adopters

00:06:05.300 of that phrase. And people would say, well, you know, that's just something you say. It's just something

00:06:10.800 you say to, to sort of, you know, diminish your, your opponents. But it isn't. It's not that at all.

00:06:21.800 And I don't think that I've heard, I've seen this kind of insanity since Obama was president.

00:06:28.680 Now, when Obama was president, there were a lot of Republicans, and you know, this is true,

00:06:34.140 who had a little bit of Obama derangement syndrome. It was a thing. But I've never seen it at this

00:06:42.340 level. This is, this is a whole new level. But the reasons that, and the things that stand out to me

00:06:49.280 as signaling mental distress, as opposed to good rational thinking, which both are very capable of

00:06:57.420 doing, as I've said, is that, at least in Sam's case, and I think Andrew's too, they focus primarily

00:07:06.160 on the internal thoughts of Trump. So instead of talking about, I don't like this policy or that

00:07:14.740 policy, you know, there's some of that as well. But it seems to be primarily focused on him as a person.

00:07:21.180 And Sam says directly, that Trump's character is not just a quirky character that you like or you

00:07:29.160 don't like, but rather, it's a, you know, an existential threat, kind of a bad character,

00:07:35.860 somebody who's such a bad person that they could end the world without even meaning to do it.

00:07:41.700 They're so bad. Now, that was the sort of conversation that made a little bit of sense

00:07:48.100 in 2016. Because we had not yet seen what a President Trump would do. But after you've

00:07:55.680 watched him for four years, don't you say you either want more of that, or you don't? You kind

00:08:03.600 of know what you're getting at this point, don't you? You know, in my case, I got pretty much exactly

00:08:08.800 what I expected with one exception. This might be true for you too. Everything that Trump did,

00:08:14.900 and didn't do, was pretty much what I thought he would do, and what he wouldn't do. The wild card

00:08:22.660 was COVID and coronavirus, because nobody really saw that coming. I mean, some of the experts predicted

00:08:28.900 it, but you and I didn't see it coming. And so if you had asked me in 2016, hey, do you think Trump's

00:08:35.740 going to be the best choice for handling this coronavirus? I probably would have said, I don't

00:08:41.620 know. Peace me. I mean, I've never been in a coronavirus pandemic. I don't know who's the best

00:08:47.600 choice for that. I have no idea. But I would say that he, maybe he wasn't. Maybe somebody else would

00:08:54.880 have handled it better. I don't think that that's demonstrated yet. There are things that I would

00:08:59.820 have done differently, things you would have done differently. But that's different from saying that

00:09:03.960 we would have gotten a better outcome. Don't quite know that. We know we might have done things

00:09:09.300 differently. But anyway, so both Andrew and Sam think that Trump's narcissism and his lack of empathy

00:09:18.780 and he only acts for himself and all of those things, which are interestingly unprovable,

00:09:28.000 meaning that everything you can measure looks a little bit better for Trump. And all the things

00:09:34.500 that you suspiciously, you can't measure how much narcissism is in Trump and how much is too much

00:09:42.860 for a leader. They need a little bit, but how much is too much? Can't measure anything like that.

00:09:49.980 So anyway, you have to watch, you have to listen to that podcast. It is genuinely entertaining

00:09:55.420 legitimately. Are you seeing the size of the Trump rally crowds? I'm kind of blown away by it,

00:10:05.040 aren't you? I mean, I'm not going to list the crowds because I think he had five of them yesterday. He's

00:10:10.020 got five more today. Somebody says in the comments, I meant to say this as well, that

00:10:20.180 make America great again was a great slogan in 2016. But of course, the president was playing with

00:10:27.920 turning it into keep America great again, which didn't really, or didn't really fit, right? Keep

00:10:35.900 America great. I don't know. It's just not very inspiring. But now that the coronavirus hit,

00:10:42.320 make America great again, now clearly means before coronavirus. It's harder to put that historical

00:10:50.020 is it a secret racist dog whistle or something. Because we all want America to go back where it

00:10:56.800 was, 2019. Pretty much everybody wants at least that much change, if not more. So I think make

00:11:04.020 America great again turned into the greatest slogan of all time for the second time in a row,

00:11:12.620 but for different reasons. The environment served up the perfect situation. Anyway, when you watch

00:11:19.960 the Trump crowds, it's hard to imagine him losing, isn't it? Can your brain wrap its head around the

00:11:28.060 fact that you look at the Biden crowds, and you look at the Kamala Harris crowds, and then you look at

00:11:34.320 the Trump crowds? It's really hard to believe that he's going to lose with that much energy. Now, I know what

00:11:43.820 the polls say, etc. Brett Baer was on, I guess, Tucker's show last night on Fox, and he was saying that

00:11:52.540 the talk of a Biden blowout has calmed down a little bit. You know, a week ago, two weeks ago,

00:12:00.560 people were talking about a Biden landslide, and it's just all Biden all the way. You don't hear as

00:12:07.480 much of that today, do you? It seems as if, right on schedule, and exactly as I predicted publicly a

00:12:16.300 number of times, others did as well, that the polls are fake, and that in order to maintain their

00:12:23.700 credibility after the election, because they can't keep that big margin, you'd see some of the polls

00:12:29.580 start to shrink and close because they don't want to look so wrong when the final vote comes out.

00:12:35.560 Sure enough, you're seeing a number of polls shrink. Then we're also seeing, I went over to MSNBC,

00:12:42.980 because I wanted to see how they were dealing with things lately, and over on MSNBC, they've got a

00:12:48.980 interesting article that I just tweeted that talks about the nightmare scenario where, uh-oh,

00:12:57.960 wait a minute, there's actually a path for Trump to win, and I don't know if they would have had the

00:13:05.120 same nature of stories three weeks ago when they were trying to get, you know, donations, and they

00:13:10.620 were trying to get everybody fired up, but now they can say it. So now they need to do a little bit of

00:13:15.720 the cats on the roof situation. Yeah, somebody in the comments is saying 58,000 people in Butler,

00:13:24.040 Pennsylvania. Whoever wins Pennsylvania will probably win the election. Trump got 58,000 people

00:13:32.500 to show up in Pennsylvania. If you're Biden, and you know you need Pennsylvania to win,

00:13:40.100 how does that make you feel? Do you feel like those poll results that used to show you in charge,

00:13:46.700 do you feel like they're still good? What about that margin of error? Brett Baer was asked about,

00:13:52.940 you know, why it could be that the polls are shrinking. Now, Brett, of course, is not an opinion guy.

00:14:00.240 He's a news guy, which we appreciate about him, which is exactly why he's awesome, is that he does

00:14:06.540 a really good job of keeping his opinion out of his public statements, you know, and just sticks to

00:14:12.900 the news. And he was opining, and this is fair, that as people get closer to election day,

00:14:21.080 they stop thinking of it being just about anti-Trump, and they see a stark choice.

00:14:26.900 Now it's Biden or Trump. It's not just no Trump or Trump. Biden or Trump. And that doesn't look so

00:14:33.900 good, maybe. So that's, you know, Brett had that hypothesis. There might be some of that. You know,

00:14:40.540 I made the same prediction a year ago, that when you're talking about a generic Democrat running

00:14:46.640 against Trump, that generic Democrat always looks great. But wait till you get an actual Democrat,

00:14:52.580 Democrat, and wait till Trump sinks his pit bull teeth into that Democrat and starts reframing them 0.51

00:14:59.940 and turning them into his chew toy, which is what he did with Biden. So at this point,

00:15:08.500 it's a real choice against a real person, and that real person is Biden, and it's not quite the

00:15:13.420 blowout scenario, perhaps. But I think most of the, correct me if I'm wrong, but are not all of the

00:15:23.560 swing states within the margin of error? Can somebody do me a fact check on that?

00:15:31.740 I just made a claim. I think it's close to true, but that might not be true, that all of the swing

00:15:38.260 states are within the margin of polling error. Somebody do a fact check on that. Or it might

00:15:44.000 be true that at least there are enough of them within the margin of error that Trump has a path

00:15:50.760 if he got all of those. Now, let's talk about that. I would like to suggest that the idea that

00:15:59.320 shy Trump supporters don't exist, or that they've been accounted for, is wrong for a really good reason.

00:16:09.180 And I'll say this clearer than I've said it in the past, because I want to get on record before the

00:16:13.360 election, just in case I'm right. And it goes like this. The shy Trump supporter is the one who doesn't

00:16:20.360 want their name associated with Trump, because, you know, it might be a reputational problem.

00:16:27.260 And I've seen some Democrats argue against it like this. Hey, look at those rallies. It looks to me

00:16:35.060 like Trump supporters are proud to put on their MAGA hat and shout their support for the president.

00:16:41.400 So why do you think there are shy ones? This is somebody who's never met a Republican or a

00:16:47.720 conservative, and it's just so in their bubble that that comment made sense. Let me explain it to you.

00:16:55.180 If you put 58,000 Trump supporters in the same place, it's safe to put your hat on.

00:17:02.060 There are 58,000 Trump supporters where you are. You're surrounded by them. You can put your MAGA hat

00:17:10.520 on. Nobody's going to punch you. Totally safe. Nobody's going to dox you. Nobody's going to take

00:17:17.180 your picture with the intention of ruining your life. Of course, of course the rallies are going to be lit,

00:17:24.060 and they're going to be extra lit because it's all the people who couldn't show their support

00:17:28.740 outside of the safe space of 58,000 or some number of Trump supporters. Now, the other argument I heard,

00:17:37.260 which was pure stupid, there are very few things that you can say, all right, you know, this is 1.00

00:17:42.720 actually just stupid. Most of the time you say, well, I have a different opinion, or I have different 1.00

00:17:48.260 data, or I've considered more context than you have. Rarely can you look at somebody's public

00:17:55.020 opinion and say, um, that one's just stupid. And it goes like this. I don't know. I don't know the 1.00

00:18:01.900 name of the person who said it was on MSNBC, I think. And, uh, no, it was a CNN, I think. And it

00:18:07.620 was some expert who said the following expert, meaning pundit, not really expert, but said the

00:18:14.500 following, that there probably is no shy Trump supporter because the automated polls get about

00:18:20.520 the same response as the human being poll. And his thinking was that if a human calls you,

00:18:27.440 you might lie because you don't want that human to think poorly of you if, you know, if they're not

00:18:32.460 a Trump supporter, and you are. So he's saying, well, but, you know, you're not going to lie if a

00:18:38.420 computer calls you because there's no person. Is that the dumbest analysis you've ever heard in 0.99

00:18:45.040 your life? Has anybody ever heard of databases? Does anybody, is this a pundit, is he the only 1.00

00:18:52.780 pundit in the world who doesn't understand that if a computer calls you at home, it knows who you are,

00:19:00.060 right? And it knows who you are, and it's going to attach your opinion to your identity. And somewhere

00:19:07.040 that's going to be stored in a database. Now, Trump supporters know that because we know what a

00:19:15.360 computer is. And if a computer calls you and asks you a question, do you think that you're saying

00:19:20.760 something to the computer, and then the computer is just flushing it, and it stops existing the moment

00:19:27.580 you tell the computer your opinion? No, nobody thinks that. They think it gets stored. So if you really

00:19:35.760 were worried about your reputation or getting on record as being a Trump supporter, and you should,

00:19:42.580 because Democrats are directly, directly, no hinting going on, they're directly saying,

00:19:50.240 maybe we should round up Trump supporters after the election, they think Biden will win,

00:19:55.020 and they should be re-educated or punished. So if you're in the class of people who half of the

00:20:02.320 country, at least people within that half, are talking about finding your name on lists,

00:20:09.420 seeking you out, and punishing you and or re-educating you like a Chinese Uyghur, yeah, 1.00

00:20:16.700 you might lie to the computer. I think you might lie to that computer a little bit. All right,

00:20:22.700 but here's what the shy Trump support people are missing. The biggest part of the polling error

00:20:31.200 is not shy Trump supporters, okay? And if you thought that I had been saying that, let me modify

00:20:38.620 that now. It's not the people, they exist, I'm sure they exist, people who don't want to say the truth,

00:20:45.700 but there's a much bigger group of polling liars, and it's what I'm going to call the world's greatest

00:20:53.400 dad joke. You've heard me say this before. Think about it. Do you think that the, and of course,

00:21:00.820 Republicans are lying to pollsters like crazy this year, like they've never lied before, it's obvious.

00:21:07.060 Anecdotally, literally thousands of people, thousands, really thousands of people have tweeted

00:21:13.860 at me saying that they've lied to pollsters. Now that's just people who tweet at me. You know,

00:21:19.600 it's not like I did a poll and I scoured the country looking for anybody who lied to a pollster.

00:21:25.920 Thousands of people have just told me on Twitter, yeah, I lied to him yesterday. Here's a text where

00:21:33.740 I lied to the computer. And so I think the much bigger category is the dad joke people. The ones who

00:21:43.060 aren't necessarily afraid of being on a Trump supporting list, but they think it would be

00:21:48.820 hilarious, hilarious to see more pictures of that Hillary Clinton supporters screaming at the sky 1.00

00:21:57.020 after the result is known. You know, we want to see that. We do want to see that. That's a thing.

00:22:05.440 And anybody who, and the Democrats are completely blind to this. The Democrats still think that a

00:22:12.480 shy Trump supporter means you don't want to admit that you're a supporter. And they believe that the

00:22:18.340 polls have adjusted to find those people so that now the polls have made their corrections. Well,

00:22:24.760 we're not going to make that mistake again. And maybe, maybe they won't make that mistake again.

00:22:31.620 This is a new mistake. And this, if I'm right, and I feel very confident about this, by the way,

00:22:39.480 I feel very confident that the people intentionally lying because they think it's funny,

00:22:45.900 because they think it's funny is the biggest category. And if this dad joke lands, and I think it's

00:22:57.160 going to, it's going to be epic. It will be the best practical joke of all time. It will be talked

00:23:09.000 about for hundreds of years. For hundreds of years, people will look back in history and they'll say,

00:23:16.960 you know, it was the greatest practical joke in history that all the Trump supporters lied to

00:23:23.160 the pollsters. I think that's where it's going. And the thing that makes it a great dad joke,

00:23:32.120 just in case you're not up on your dad joke humor, is because the left has made it so dangerous to tell

00:23:42.520 your honest opinion, if you're a Republican, they've made it dangerous to have free speech.

00:23:48.260 And so what would be funnier than screwing them with their own rule? You know, that would be fun,

00:23:58.320 right? Because the rule is you can't say you're a Trump supporter. Did you make that rule? You didn't

00:24:03.480 make that rule. That is not your rule. You're simply following the rules. You're just following

00:24:11.220 the rules. And the rules say, you don't want to say you're a Trump supporter if anybody asks. I mean,

00:24:17.620 we've been trained to do that, right? So that's what makes it extra super delicious, is that we would

00:24:24.500 just be giving people what they asked for. Demanded, I would say. They demand that you not show any

00:24:31.160 support for Trump. They demand it. Well, be careful what you ask for, because you might get exactly what

00:24:39.720 you're asking for. And I think that's coming down the line. Now, let me say this. Somebody will be

00:24:47.240 right and somebody will be wrong. Some buddies will be right and wrong after the election. You could be

00:24:53.760 surprised. I could be surprised. The Democrats could be surprised. Surprise is a thing, right? You can all

00:25:01.700 be surprised. Personally, my head isn't going to explode no matter what happens. And I hope that

00:25:09.380 you're all at least mentally prepared that anything could happen. I mean, just anything. Let me tell you

00:25:16.660 the coup two plan. Coup two is the second coup attempt, which I think is well underway. And of course,

00:25:25.320 I'm speaking somewhat figuratively, or am I? Or am I? Is it a literal coup? Or is it just sort of a lot

00:25:34.380 of people who know what to do? Was the Russia collusion plot, was that an actual, literally a coup

00:25:42.780 attempt? Or was it just a whole bunch of people who kind of knew what to do? You know what I mean?

00:25:48.520 Because the line between a conspiracy, an actual coup, and just a bunch of people doing what they think

00:25:56.740 they ought to do, it's kind of a fine line. You know, how many phone calls and meetings do you have

00:26:01.900 to have before your bunch of people knowing just what to do turns into an actual conspiracy to overthrow

00:26:09.640 the government of the United States? But here's what's shaping up. Number one, let me say,

00:26:16.980 the big picture is, I think Democrats have two ways to win the presidency. One way would be to get more

00:26:24.040 votes in the electoral college. So they could win it fair and square. That's one way. But there's a

00:26:30.340 second way the Democrats could win the presidency that is the opposite of fair and square. And they

00:26:35.900 have put all of those pieces into play. So the chessboard is set up right now for the Democrats for a

00:26:43.660 second way to win the presidency after losing the electoral college vote. And it goes like this.

00:26:51.380 Number one, make sure that your polls running up to the election are so fake that if the actual

00:26:58.840 results are different from the polls, you could say, well, obviously, this election was rigged by the

00:27:06.000 Republicans, or there was voter suppression, or there was something illegitimate. Because it's obvious,

00:27:12.440 look at what the polls said, and then look how the vote went. They're so different, it must be an

00:27:19.460 illegitimate election for Trump. So that's the first thing. Make the polls look fake so you'll have an

00:27:25.860 excuse later to say that the election was fake. The next thing you want to do is accuse Trump of

00:27:32.100 voter suppression and accuse Republicans of voter suppression. So you want to get that story out

00:27:37.300 there. You don't want the first time the public hears about it to be after election day. You want

00:27:43.520 the public to expect Republicans to cheat, so that if they've got anything that looks like it happened,

00:27:50.980 they're already primed. It's like, oh, I was expecting that to happen, and there's my evidence.

00:27:56.440 So the burden of evidence can go way, way, way down if you've primed people to expect it to happen,

00:28:03.460 because then confirmation bias is as good as evidence, as long as people are primed,

00:28:09.260 and they have primed people for that. So let's say that Trump wins according to the vote as it's

00:28:18.380 counted. They can claim it was rigged, and then let's say it goes to the Supreme Court. You'd expect

00:28:24.220 that to happen, right? So it goes to the Supreme Court, and let's say that the Supreme Court,

00:28:29.700 wanting to protect its own credibility, doesn't want Biden to get elected, because Biden will

00:28:39.160 pack the court and make it basically a non-credible institution that was in the pocket of the

00:28:47.060 presidency and the Senate, because they can just add people to get any result they want.

00:28:52.260 So will the Supreme Court vote to make themselves irrelevant? Because that's what backing a Biden

00:28:58.820 presidency would do. It would make the Supreme Court irrelevant, or it would risk it. We don't 0.99

00:29:04.640 know exactly what Biden will do. He says he's going to do a commission. But what if Kamala Harris is the

00:29:10.840 president? That could happen pretty quickly after a Biden win. So you would expect the Supreme Court,

00:29:18.220 not only because they're a conservative majority, but also because they don't want to make themselves

00:29:24.380 obsolete, that they would back President Trump. So whatever the question is, you know, does this vote

00:29:31.360 count, or can these votes be counted, or is the election done, or do we have to wait? Whatever the

00:29:37.140 questions are that go to the Supreme Court, let's say they go for Trump, which seems reasonable.

00:29:43.660 So now the Democrats would have set the table by the fake polls. They would tell people that

00:29:51.900 Trump's going to cheat. They would tell people that the Supreme Court is not legitimate, because it's

00:29:58.040 packed with conservatives. And now, what would they do? Well, that's not enough, right? You need a little

00:30:06.700 extra. That wouldn't be enough to pull off a coup. Because people would still say, well, you know,

00:30:11.820 the Supreme Court said it, so I don't like it, but I'm going to live with it. All right? Here's the

00:30:18.660 other part. If President Trump travels outside the White House, or he gets, let's say there's too much

00:30:28.380 of a threat, and he has to leave. Let's say 10,000 Antifa supporters surround the White House.

00:30:37.340 Could happen, right? Could you imagine 10,000, 20,000 angry protesters surrounding the White House?

00:30:46.160 Two scenarios. One scenario is that the president or the first family are in the White House.

00:30:53.880 The other scenario is that he's on the road, and he's traveling. If the angry crowd reaches the

00:31:00.960 defenses and starts, you know, taking a move on the White House to actually occupy it, if the president

00:31:08.440 or the first family are in the White House, you would expect that the security, which would be quite 0.92

00:31:14.360 extreme, I would imagine, could shoot to kill. Am I right? Now, test all of these assumptions, 0.93

00:31:22.540 because I may be wrong in my assumptions. I'd need somebody like a, you know, like a Dan Bongino,

00:31:27.620 somebody who actually knows what they're talking about, to tell me if my next assumption is correct.

00:31:32.240 And it goes like this. If the crowd of protesters outnumbers the security forces,

00:31:37.820 it doesn't matter how much the security forces, you know, fight them with batons. If they're

00:31:44.620 outnumbered, they're outnumbered. So if you get enough protesters without deadly weapons,

00:31:52.040 they can just sort of overwhelm the defense of the White House. Now, if the president is in the White

00:31:58.640 House, the security can start shooting. Am I wrong about that? Because that would be an actual risk

00:32:05.560 against the president. And I think that would be a real risk. They wouldn't have to shoot everybody,

00:32:11.100 but they'd probably shoot a few people. And that would probably be enough to stop the attack.

00:32:20.860 So am I right so far that if the president's there, they would use deadly force to keep the crowd away

00:32:26.720 from the president. Now, suppose the security says, we have to get you out of here, Mr. President,

00:32:36.660 and putting you in the underground bunker isn't good enough, because you don't want to be in the

00:32:41.700 bunker below the White House if the White House is occupied. That'd be the worst place to be. So we're

00:32:48.180 going to have to get you out of here. Get on this helicopter before the helicopter goes. Or let's say

00:32:53.180 the president was just on the road for business. If the White House is unoccupied by the first family,

00:33:00.800 and let's say the people who work there know enough to get out of there. So it's basically an empty

00:33:06.400 White House. Would the security forces protecting it be allowed to use deadly force to protect an empty

00:33:14.960 building? You see where I'm going here? I feel as though, if the building is ever empty during whatever,

00:33:25.660 you know, problems we have after the election, if it ever becomes empty of the first family,

00:33:32.540 that the crowd, if it's big enough, and it might take, you know, 10,000, 20,000 people or whatever,

00:33:39.020 if it's big enough, could they occupy the White House? Because I don't see American security services

00:33:46.440 slaying a bunch of people for property. Am I right? We don't see them killing people to protect

00:33:55.120 property. And as valuable as the White House is, if there's nobody in it, it's property.

00:34:03.260 So does Antifa know what I just said? Yeah, they do. Of course they do. They've been planning for a

00:34:10.700 while. Do you think that they're going to try to surround the White House if Trump wins? 100%.

00:34:16.040 100% they're going to do that. If the president's not there, let's say they occupy the White House.

00:34:23.160 Right? Now you can imagine that, can't you? All it would take is a big enough crowd and the first

00:34:30.120 family not being there. That's all it would take. Because I don't think we could ever put enough

00:34:35.140 security there to stop 10,000 or 20,000 people coming over the wall without shooting, without

00:34:43.220 deadly force. So what happens, and here's the punchline, what happens if the crowd gets control

00:34:51.560 of the White House? The Democrats get the Senate, they hold the House, and the trust of the Supreme

00:35:02.120 Court is diminished. What can they do then? All they have to do from that point on is get the mainstream

00:35:11.600 media to say Biden is the president. That's it. That's it. And it could be enough. Because

00:35:22.020 the mainstream media, we've seen that they can brainwash the public into any damn thing. 0.91

00:35:28.360 They would believe anything. So if Antifa got control of the White House, the media declared that

00:35:35.580 Biden was the president, and he goes back in because Antifa controls the White House, 0.93

00:35:41.000 it could get really ugly. It could. So I would look for where is the president going to spend

00:35:49.140 election night? And I believe he said he might move it to the White House. And I would think it might be

00:35:55.880 because of that. Somebody's saying, Scott, nobody's smart. Listen to you, all in capital. Nobody's

00:36:05.700 smart listening to you. Somebody's commenting in all capital letters. Nobody's smart. Yeah, and if

00:36:15.140 anybody shoots a protester, that's a bad look, as you're saying. Somebody's saying tear gas? I don't

00:36:21.640 think so. I think that the tear gas wouldn't slow him down. Somebody says dogs? Again, not enough of

00:36:29.460 them. And dogs would be violent. Somebody says, we've been telling you about the mainstream media

00:36:40.660 for years. Well, I think we all knew what was going on there. Militia? No, I don't think there'll be any

00:36:46.800 militias around the White House. Anyway, let's talk about some other things. So, and then the last

00:36:52.760 part of that is the 25th Amendment. So you could imagine that the Senate and the House, if they were

00:37:01.320 all Democrats, if they had Democrat control, they pushed the 25th Amendment, control the White House,

00:37:08.680 do something to get rid of Pence, I suppose, and just pretend that Biden won. It could happen.

00:37:15.160 I don't think it's going to happen. I think Trump will win. I think there will be a legal battle,

00:37:21.040 and then Trump will just be president, and there'll be a lot of complaining.

00:37:27.140 Trump said he plans to claim victory. Actually, he didn't say this publicly, but there are reports

00:37:34.500 that he's telling confidants that he'll declare victory on Tuesday night if it looks like he's ahead.

00:37:39.960 Do you think that's a good idea? Do you think Trump should declare victory on Tuesday,

00:37:46.740 knowing that there are lots of votes to come in by mail? Do you think he should declare victory if

00:37:52.340 he's ahead? Now, of course, the criticism is that that would be a destabilizing thing,

00:37:59.840 and it would be like a dictator trying to take control when he knows that there are more votes

00:38:04.340 coming in, and it could change. Well, I'm going to have to back Trump on this one. Strategically,

00:38:11.120 he should claim that he won. If it changes, he can make a second decision. So you can always make

00:38:19.140 the second decision. I claimed I won. More votes came in. They look like they're credible. Darn it,

00:38:26.180 I guess I didn't win. So I, you know, I concede. So he could always change his mind. There's nothing 0.99

00:38:32.440 that stops that. But going first really matters. So if he claims victory, and the votes temporarily

00:38:41.780 indicate that, whoever goes first in claiming victory has like a little bit of an advantage.

00:38:47.040 Because it's harder to say no, you didn't, than it is to say I won. So if Trump goes first and says I

00:38:56.480 won, if the numbers support that temporarily, it wouldn't be the final number. I think it's just a

00:39:03.000 good strategy, psychologically, to sort of make, to be first and make the claim and let people argue

00:39:10.700 against it. The FBI is investigating the Texas incident where Biden's little bus, his Biden bus

00:39:22.800 was surrounded by Trump pickup trucks with flags. And in at least one case, one of the trucks made

00:39:30.220 contact with a car that might have been a Biden car or something. So we don't know whose fault that was.

00:39:35.540 I saw the video of it. It looked like the truck's fault, but you don't know the whole story.

00:39:39.620 The video can be misleading. So they're investigating that. But if you're a Trump supporter,

00:39:47.000 how much do you laugh or enjoy the fact that Texas pickup trucks ran Biden's bus out of Texas?

00:39:55.320 He had to cancel the rest of his stops in Texas. How much do you like the fact that it happened,

00:40:01.000 even though maybe you don't condone it? Right? So I would say I don't condone

00:40:06.580 any kind of dangerous vehicular activity if there was anything dangerous.

00:40:13.960 But I enjoy it. I kind of enjoy the fact that somebody did it. I just think it's funny that

00:40:19.380 they chased him out of Texas.

00:40:20.440 I tweeted a new analysis of mask effectiveness. What do you think he said? So there was a new

00:40:30.520 meta-analysis, which means they looked at a number of existing studies. And what they did was they

00:40:36.680 said, we have this criteria for which studies we will look at. So they're not looking at anything

00:40:41.760 from 2020. They're looking at mask research and studies from before 2020. And they picked

00:40:48.900 only ones that they had decided there was a criteria that they had decided would be a good

00:40:55.760 enough study. Now, the reason you do a meta-analysis is that you don't trust any individual study.

00:41:01.660 So you're not going to trust any one study. You're going to look at a bunch of them and see if they,

00:41:06.340 if the bunch of them lean in the same direction or not. So that's what the meta-study does.

00:41:12.220 And they did a meta-study, which means it did not include controlled, randomized studies. It was

00:41:21.160 a number of different things they looked at, different types of studies. And they came to this

00:41:25.300 conclusion that the use of masks by health care workers and non-health care workers can reduce the

00:41:33.200 risk of respiratory virus infection by 80%. 80%. So when they looked at the studies, they say masks work

00:41:43.900 and that not only do they work, they work a lot. 80%. It doesn't matter if you're a health care worker

00:41:50.300 or a non-health care worker, it works a lot. So that's what the studies say. Now, do you believe

00:41:57.020 that somebody else could do another meta-analysis of masks and that their meta-analysis would show

00:42:04.000 exactly the opposite, that masks do not work? Of course. I haven't seen one. But can we say with

00:42:14.060 complete confidence that probably there exists, doesn't mean it's right, but probably it exists,

00:42:21.460 somebody who did a meta-analysis and found out that if they look at all the good studies,

00:42:27.540 it shows they don't work. Don't you know that exists? Now, I'm on the pro-mask side of things in

00:42:35.440 terms of saying that they work. Whether you should wear them is a freedom question, which is different,

00:42:40.880 but in terms of whether they would work if you wore them, my common sense, my judgment says

00:42:48.400 almost certainly yes. Nothing's 100%, but it feels like certainly yes.

00:42:57.640 So we have one other experiment that gives you a little more information. South Carolina,

00:43:05.000 without trying to do an A-B test, did an A-B test. And I've been calling for this before. I kept saying,

00:43:11.640 where is my city that's just like another city, where one wears masks and one doesn't,

00:43:18.820 and they were in the same place with the virus at the same time, and everything looks demographically

00:43:24.000 similar. And then you can see, do the mask people get a good result and the non-masks don't? But you

00:43:30.520 got to, you could have to be careful about picking, you know, an apple and an apple. So that's always the

00:43:36.080 problem getting an apple and an apple. But South Carolina has sort of a natural version of this,

00:43:41.660 certainly far short of scientific standard, because you can't really control your comparisons that

00:43:48.280 well. But so South Carolina, there were some places where they had mask mandates, and some places they

00:43:55.600 did not. And here was their result so far, that the places without a mask mandate, so when they didn't

00:44:05.320 wear masks in South Carolina, in some parts, there was a over a 30% increase in the coronavirus

00:44:12.720 infections. So 30% more infections when, where they didn't wear masks, but where they did wear masks,

00:44:19.900 they saw an overall cases dropped 15%. Is that convincing? That's a pretty big effect, right?

00:44:28.400 Difference between 30% increase versus a 15% decrease. That's pretty big. So, but again,

00:44:38.620 is that a scientific comparison? No, you would need a lot more of these to be confident that you were

00:44:45.800 seeing something. All right, so I would say that while we cannot get to mask certainty, I would say that

00:44:54.280 the weight of evidence seems to be in favor of them working somewhat. All right, let's talk about

00:45:04.360 some hoaxes. There's a hoax picture, Richard Grinnell tweeted this, looks like a hoax of Biden wearing a

00:45:12.500 mask in public, but then he's on an airplane talking to somebody not wearing a mask. The hoax debunkers

00:45:18.540 tell us that the mask list picture is from 2019. So that's probably a hoax if you see the mask list

00:45:27.460 and then the mask to Biden. There's another hoax where Biden, there's a video of Biden forgetting

00:45:33.580 what state he's in, which he's really done a number of times, but this one was edited. So there's a new

00:45:40.100 one where it looks like he forgot the state, but he didn't. So those are two things. All right.

00:45:52.560 And here's the last thing I want to talk about. So somebody challenged me in comments because I had

00:46:00.920 said, you know, where's a James Comey to talk about the Biden allegations of Hunter Biden and China and

00:46:09.000 Ukraine and all that. And I had stated that if there had been, if the FBI or the news had been

00:46:15.460 more forthcoming instead of disappearing that story, that it might've changed the result. But

00:46:21.460 somebody pointed out, and this was a perfectly good question, that I'm also on the record as saying

00:46:27.460 that when Comey did his press conference in 2016 about Hillary's email, that I've said that didn't

00:46:34.520 change any votes. So how can I be consistent in saying that Comey talking about Hillary's emails

00:46:40.980 didn't change any votes, but I do think that if there had been a Comey talking about Hunter Biden

00:46:47.400 and Joe Biden's connection, that that might've changed the vote. And here's the difference.

00:46:53.020 Nobody cares about a technical infraction of email servers. That's sort of just something that people

00:47:00.500 talk about in the right wing. I've never met any Democrat who cared about Hillary's email server,

00:47:07.000 because even if it were true, I guess it's true that she had an email server that violated some

00:47:13.520 regulations or rules or laws or something. It just never rose to the point of being terribly important.

00:47:21.580 I mean, in my mind, it was very similar to software packaging, taking off the thing and agreeing to all

00:47:32.040 the software restrictions, but you didn't really. It's sort of a technical thing. I don't think it

00:47:38.360 would have moved anybody. And none of that turned into anything. In other words, there was nothing on

00:47:43.040 the emails that later turned into something of substance. So even at the time, you know, even

00:47:49.540 when the story first came out, I said, that's not going to change anything. People don't care. But a

00:47:56.200 story about somebody being influenced by China, I feel like that would change votes. Whereas an email

00:48:03.360 technical problem, you know, even though there's a real thing to worry about, we never discovered the

00:48:10.860 thing to worry about. All right, somebody's telling me masks get filled with fungus and bacteria and

00:48:22.140 all that. Yeah, you know, I'm not discounting the fact that there are some downsides to masks and

00:48:27.920 downsides to shutdowns and downsides to all that. I'm just saying that by and large, if you want to get

00:48:37.900 rid of the pandemic, masks are probably a big part of it. Let me tell you what I think is the

00:48:43.260 school of the future and what it looks like. Now that we're doing these terrible Zoom classrooms, 1.00

00:48:50.880 you can get a much better idea of what school should look like. Because once everything breaks,

00:48:58.120 you can start thinking about from scratch. Here is what school of the future would look like.

00:49:03.480 Number one, instead of having your teacher, the same one that you would have walked to school and 0.66

00:49:09.080 had in a classroom, teaching you over Zoom, you would have the best teacher in the world

00:49:15.200 teaching everybody. So there would be one best teacher for geometry, and everybody would have

00:49:22.980 that teacher. Now, it could be one or it could be any best-selling teachers who have created content

00:49:29.960 that might be recorded. So it doesn't have to be a live teacher. It could be the best

00:49:34.720 recorded lesson of a geometry lesson of all time. And maybe you still need some teacher's assistance

00:49:41.160 to answer questions and stuff. But imagine it's the best of the best teacher. How different is that

00:49:48.400 from your average teacher? And more importantly, how different is that from the bad teacher that they

00:49:54.980 get in the inner city because they don't have a good tax base, can't pay people as much? It's a big

00:50:00.660 difference. We are on the cusp of an enormous improvement in education. But right now, we're

00:50:11.640 captive to the teacher's unions. So as things stand right now, after the pandemic, we'll go back to the

00:50:18.340 same bad system that has been failing for years of kids being bored and going to class. So instead,

00:50:24.760 here's what I see as the future. You will have theaters instead of classrooms. So it'll be like

00:50:31.040 a little theater with a big screen that everybody watches the same screen instead of having their own

00:50:35.860 little laptops. They might have their laptops too, but they'd be watching the big screen at the same

00:50:40.980 time. And you would go there with kids your age who are taking the same class. So the number one big

00:50:47.400 problem with Zoom school is that the kid doesn't get to leave the house, doesn't get to see their

00:50:53.560 friends, doesn't get any social life. Now, we can't do that with the coronavirus, but as soon as that's

00:50:58.880 over, it would make more sense to get rid of regular schools, have a place that the fifth graders

00:51:05.920 can go to where there's some adult supervision, not necessarily teachers, and they can watch the best

00:51:11.920 education in the world, talk among themselves, form groups, do their homework, etc. And I think that

00:51:19.700 something like Amazon will be the source for that. I think Amazon will be selling the world's best,

00:51:26.020 you know, best-selling lessons for $3. So for $3, the entire class can get the best lesson

00:51:35.280 ever created on this topic. It's going to be a big deal. And then the last part of this is I think

00:51:43.740 we have to get rid of the antiquated degree situation, where you can get a degree in Russian

00:51:52.080 literature, a degree in this or that. I think that needs to be replaced with something like a talent stack

00:51:58.620 model, where you might not have something that would technically be a degree, but you've, you've

00:52:06.020 accumulated a bunch of learnings that fit really well together. And so you've created like a superpower

00:52:12.700 with your talent stack. So there's got to be some way to, to get credit for having developed a talent

00:52:20.620 stack, whether or not there's a degree that's associated with that. All right. Somebody said that's

00:52:27.140 called a resume. Not really, because your resume is a little wordy. And if you say, I have this

00:52:33.940 skill, but on top of it, I have this skill, you still have to work a little bit to understand that

00:52:39.380 they work together. But if you said, here's my talent stack. Here are the things that I think work

00:52:46.260 well together. That would be a pretty strong package. All right. So that's where I think we're going

00:52:52.640 with this unless the teachers unions screw us again. And, um, I'm going to try to join you tonight.

00:53:00.800 I don't know for sure, but I'll try to join you tonight. I understand that some of you can't sleep

00:53:05.920 unless you hear my calming words on these, uh, these dangerous times. Um, I do have, by the way, one

00:53:13.780 a threat against my house, uh, for election day. So there's some, uh, online indication that there

00:53:23.620 might be some trouble at my house. Um, I would like to suggest that if anybody was planning to

00:53:30.860 create any trouble at my house, that you should really rethink that because it would be a really

00:53:36.060 bad, bad idea. All right. That's all for now. And I will talk to you later.

00:53:43.780 Thank you.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - November 02, 2020

Episode 1173 Scott Adams： Democrats Cover Their Tracks and Prepare for Coup 2.0 While Texans Reject the Biden Bus and Hoaxes Fall Like Rain

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript