Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1360 Scott Adams： The Biden Speech and Senator Tim Scott's Rebuttal Seen Through the Persuasion Filter

00:00:00.000 Hey everybody, come on in. While we're waiting for everybody to come in, I'd like to do something

00:00:11.320 that I've seen other people do on video, and I know it's very popular. It's called an eating

00:00:16.820 video, in which you just watch me eat some of my favorite foods. I'm going to start doing that now.

00:00:23.880 Mmm, this is some good broccoli. I got this broccoli from Door Dashing from one of my local

00:00:35.860 restaurants. It's delicious. It's got a little lemon on it. It's just exactly the right crispness.

00:00:44.380 Oh, you don't see any food. Oh, oh, oh. Well, that's probably because you don't use Door Dashing.

00:00:55.600 If you use Door Dashing, you know that they don't always bring the food, but they'll definitely

00:01:01.580 charge you. Last night I was talking to Christina about my favorite dish, a broccoli, chilled broccoli

00:01:09.700 dish, and I ordered it from my favorite restaurant. Now, I usually order two, this is a true story,

00:01:19.080 I often order two entrees because the ratio of times that they forget to bring one of the orders

00:01:26.940 is so high that you have to order two dinners to get a pretty good chance they'll bring one of them.

00:01:34.400 And I'm just wondering, do you have that same experience? Are you having the experience where

00:01:39.780 your Door Dashing and one of the orders is just always missing? I'd say 75% of the time the order

00:01:47.960 is incomplete, but you've paid for it anyway. So I just wondered in the comments. But while we're

00:01:53.080 waiting for that, if you'd like to enjoy this, all you need is a cup of mug and glass,

00:01:58.180 a tank of chalice of time, a canteen jug of glass, a vessel of any kind, filled with your favorite

00:02:01.580 liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day

00:02:08.140 and the thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip. And it's going to

00:02:12.760 happen right now. Go.

00:02:13.520 Oh, yeah, that's good. So yes, that's one thing the food delivery business has to get right.

00:02:26.560 And I don't think that they quite understand the impact it has. Because the service is amazing.

00:02:33.980 If you've ever used the DoorDash app, it's like a miracle. It's like one of the best apps you'll

00:02:38.900 ever see in your life. So it's a great service. But when they don't bring the food you ordered,

00:02:44.680 and then they charge you for it, and there's no obvious way even to reverse the charge,

00:02:49.180 I looked. I looked. Is there a way to reverse the charge or complain? Not really. So I need to fix

00:02:57.580 that. All right. Rasmussen did a poll and asked people if they thought that Biden's first 100 days

00:03:04.740 were a success. Only 36% said yes. But of course, conservatives thought he was a big failure and

00:03:13.760 liberals thought he was great. But 36% of moderates say his first 100 days were a failure.

00:03:22.560 I'm not sure I would say that. I don't know what happened in his first 100 days that you would

00:03:29.700 define as failure, per se. There are certain things that he did that you don't like. But

00:03:35.080 failure is a pretty big word. Certainly screwed the pooch on immigration. Certainly he's looking

00:03:43.020 to spend a lot of money and introduce socialism that you don't like. But I don't know if that's

00:03:48.520 a failure, since that was what he was trying to do. Everything that looks like a failure

00:03:53.720 is pretty close to what he said he would do if he got elected, you know, including opening up the

00:03:59.600 border. So I don't know. I guess you have to ask yourself what failure means if somebody is doing

00:04:05.760 what they said they would do. You just don't like it. We'll talk, of course, more about Biden here.

00:04:12.420 First, some other fun stuff. Project Veritas, as you know, is suing the New York Times for

00:04:16.980 saying some things about their projects. And apparently the New York Times' legal defense

00:04:25.160 is that they're injecting unlabeled opinion into their news stories. That seems like quite an

00:04:34.800 admission, doesn't it? That the parts that are under complaint were opinion, but they seem to be

00:04:42.900 embedded at news. So I think Project Veritas just got a huge win in just getting the New York Times to

00:04:53.660 admit the degree to which they insert opinion into news. If all that comes of that is that the public

00:05:02.320 is more informed about how much opinion is injected into news, that's probably a good thing.

00:05:09.800 Okay. So again, I'll say that Project Veritas is one of the most constructive forces in the

00:05:16.760 country right now. Weird, isn't it? That they're one of the most constructive forces because they're

00:05:23.420 a pushback against the media propaganda. And you just need that. You need as much pushback as you

00:05:28.680 can get. Here's an alarming story. Apparently, Rudy Giuliani was the subject of federal investigators.

00:05:39.040 Executing a search warrant on his New York City apartment, and they seized his electronic devices.

00:05:47.400 And it was being reported that it's a sign that some criminal investigation is ramping up

00:05:51.960 about his dealings in Ukraine and including whether he violated the FARA stuff. To which I say,

00:06:01.160 that feels like speculation, doesn't it? I think that's speculation as to why they're looking at his

00:06:07.100 stuff. And do you believe that this is legitimate? Or do you believe that this is just political?

00:06:14.960 Here's my take on it. The default assumption has to be that this is illegitimate. Unfortunately,

00:06:22.580 because what we've, you know, what we've witnessed from, you know, the Russia collusion hoax all the way

00:06:30.020 through, what we noticed, and also we notice any Trump allies being picked off one by one in whatever

00:06:37.840 ways they can get them. So I have to assume this is illegitimate, subject to any evidence that shows

00:06:48.480 it is legitimate. But isn't your starting position that this is illegitimate? And I'm not sure I would

00:06:54.700 have said that, I don't know, two years ago. I think two years ago, if I heard that anybody had

00:07:00.580 been a subject of a search warrant by federal authorities, I would have said to myself, probably

00:07:07.380 there's a good reason. I mean, maybe not, innocent until proven guilty, but probably they had a good

00:07:13.900 reason. Do you believe that they probably had a good reason in this case? Because I don't. I don't

00:07:20.240 think we live in a country where that benefit of a doubt can be given to our federal investigators.

00:07:26.700 I don't think we can give them that benefit of a doubt anymore. And so as a country, I think we've

00:07:31.140 got to put pressure on them to say, if you're going to, if you're going to seize somebody's electronic

00:07:36.780 devices, which is one of the most serious things I can think of, short of actual physical rape

00:07:43.780 that would make you feel abused and victimized, right? So short of anything that's actually literally

00:07:50.480 physical, this is the biggest violation I could even imagine. Imagine having your home or your office

00:07:57.860 like essentially violated by people who are going to look through all of your electronic devices and

00:08:06.940 there's nothing you can do about it. How would you feel about that? It would feel like a physical

00:08:12.820 attack, wouldn't it? Like the way you would, the way you would process it would be almost like a

00:08:17.740 sexual assault. I mean, I shouldn't say that because obviously I can't understand what that would feel

00:08:23.620 like. So that's a little bit hyperbole. You can take it that way, but it's pretty, pretty damn bad.

00:08:30.740 And again, the government really needs to explain that. I guess also there's a search warrant for

00:08:41.240 Victoria Tenzing's assets. I don't know what they're looking for because she's worked with

00:08:47.740 Giuliani on some stuff. I have a Victoria Tenzing story. Have I told you ever that for weird reasons,

00:08:56.940 I end up in the middle of history in lots of ways? And I don't know why. It's just, it's one of these

00:09:03.300 weird coincidences. Well, here's just a weird little story. One day a TV host, doesn't matter who, so

00:09:11.240 just for privacy, I won't tell you, but I was doing a book tour, I don't know, a year and a half ago,

00:09:17.240 two years, whatever, and the TV host said, he had a note for me from Victoria Tenzing. Now, if you want to

00:09:25.200 be worried, let me tell you how to get worried. Have somebody hand you a note from a famous

00:09:32.040 lawyer. That's just scary shit. Because the first thing I thought was, oh my God, what kind of trouble

00:09:39.220 am I in? Who's suing me now? Like, what, you know, why does a famous, I'll call her a TV lawyer just because

00:09:46.720 you see her on TV a lot, but she's a lawyer. Turns out, you know, I called her to find out what

00:09:54.560 it was about, and it was just a mistaken identity. She thought, she literally thought I was someone

00:10:00.700 else. So she had some questions of a completely different person. So it had nothing to do with me,

00:10:07.120 but I can't tell you how many times I'm in the center of some kind of thing, or I've met some

00:10:13.700 person who's in the news through random weird ways. I don't, I just don't understand how this

00:10:19.880 keeps happening to me. It's the simulation. All right. Let's talk about Biden's joint address

00:10:26.740 to Congress. How many of you watched it? Did I meet her? No, I never met her. We just had one phone

00:10:32.960 call, and she immediately realized that she should have been talking to somebody else so that we didn't

00:10:39.060 have any actual business. It was just mistaken identity. So the Biden address happened. Kevin

00:10:48.100 McCarthy had, I think, the best tweet about it. He said, this could have just been done by email.

00:10:56.780 I'm going to give that an A plus for insulting tweets. It's not quite Trump level, but it's pretty darn

00:11:07.260 good. We could have just done this by email. It's like the ultimate insult. If your address could

00:11:13.800 have been done by email. All right, let's see how the reactions were. Even CNN said that for a first

00:11:22.880 speech to Congress that Biden got the lowest, very positive reaction. So here's how CNN described it.

00:11:31.900 Biden had 51 percent, but Trump was 57 percent. Obama was 68 percent, and Bush was 66. So Biden didn't do

00:11:42.360 too well on the positive reactions. But I also have to wonder, you know, how much of this is the ever

00:11:50.560 declining bipartisanship? You know, it could be that just that, you know, people during Obama were more

00:12:00.360 likely to be a little bit friendlier to the other side. And of course, Obama was a better orator.

00:12:06.920 But kind of interesting. Biden got such a low number. I'll give you my own opinion here in a

00:12:12.340 minute. But well, I'll give it to you now. I thought Biden's speech was capable. I'm going to

00:12:21.720 criticize a number of things. You probably know where I'm going with most of them. But I would say,

00:12:27.280 you know, the criticisms are mostly just the naked politicization. You know, so the naked

00:12:33.980 partisanship is all the problems. But they're also so obvious that I don't know I have the biggest

00:12:41.400 problem in the world with it. I don't mind a little naked partisanship if it's just obvious that's what's

00:12:46.960 going on. You know, as long as it's obvious. That feels like good labeling, at least.

00:12:54.460 So let's talk about some of the specific things he said. One of them is white supremacy is our biggest

00:13:00.020 threat in the United States. Is it? How do you measure a biggest threat? Now, he's talking biggest

00:13:09.880 threat in terms of, you know, violence and people killing people, not climate change or anything like

00:13:15.680 that. But in terms of people killing people, he says white supremacy is the biggest based on

00:13:20.400 intel, he says, intel agencies. And I would ask you this. Is that bigger than the brainwashing from

00:13:28.760 the media? Because it seems to me that nobody does anything in this country in any kind of a big

00:13:36.600 trend way, unless the media has brainwashed them to do it. So whenever you see somebody say,

00:13:44.080 you know, people are doing this, you got to go back one level and say, but why? Why are there lots

00:13:50.940 of mass shootings? Is it because of white supremacy? Some of them are. But why are there so many? Not just

00:14:01.020 white supremacists, but why are there so many shootings? It's the news. The news is the biggest

00:14:08.500 problem. If the news did not cover it the way they cover it, it wouldn't be happening. So if you say

00:14:16.080 white supremacy is the biggest threat in the United States, ask yourself this. Would it be if the news

00:14:23.120 were just the news? Because I don't think it would be. I feel as though the news is what has caused,

00:14:30.360 yeah, let me say something really provocative here. You ready? I believe that white supremacy is made

00:14:38.020 far worse by the way the news handles the news. And that the white supremacists would just be sitting

00:14:48.240 quietly thinking their white supremacist thoughts if the news didn't tell them they were at war and that

00:14:55.460 they were being threatened and white people are bad and critical race theory is the way. Imagine a

00:15:02.260 world with no critical race theory and no media pushing it and no wokeism and no all of that. Would

00:15:10.660 white supremacists be as dangerous as many people think they are? I don't think so. I think that white

00:15:21.560 supremacists, just like everybody else, responds to the news. So if the news is telling them they're

00:15:29.060 under threat, what the hell are they going to do? Right? So it seems to me that ignoring the media as

00:15:39.160 the biggest threat to democracy is really a giant blind spot. Biden said that he promised 100 million

00:15:47.800 COVID-19 shots in 100 days, but he will have reached over 220 million in 100 days. Unambiguously, good job.

00:15:59.160 And apparently we're doing better than most of our peers. You know, Israel did a great job. But in terms of

00:16:06.280 our more equivalent types of countries, we're doing great, apparently. But here's the thing.

00:16:14.000 Do you think that Trump would not have continued fine tuning the process and also gotten to the same level?

00:16:23.660 What evidence do we have that this wouldn't have been exactly the same under Trump? Because all this fine

00:16:31.420 tuning, you know, the things that they figured out and approved, the ways to make more vaccine, the ways to get

00:16:37.480 more people involved. That's all happening at the administration level, right? It's not like the

00:16:43.420 president said, get CVS involved, get Walgreens on the phone. Did he? I mean, did either of them? I feel as

00:16:52.020 if we would be in exactly the same place, because the president isn't doing any of this. The president's

00:16:58.740 watching and taking credit, you know, after you get things going. Unambiguously, Trump was responsible

00:17:04.800 for Project Warp Speed. Because it's well documented that he forced people to do things they didn't want

00:17:11.000 to do. That's actual leadership. But simply letting your bureaucracy perform exactly the way you'd expect

00:17:20.200 them to, I'm going to say that that probably would have been the same under Trump. I think it would have

00:17:25.380 been. Or at least we have no evidence that it should have been different in any way. But it is nonetheless a

00:17:32.220 great accomplishment. And I remember that I told you in the beginning that you could not predict how

00:17:38.680 well we would do with vaccinations in the final months by looking at anything that happened in the

00:17:44.940 beginning months. You know, I told you that that curve was going to go and in the final months, we'd be

00:17:52.560 just so good at it, getting vaccines to the right people, that it would look amazing. And what happened?

00:17:58.900 Several months into the vaccines, we got so good at it. It looks amazing. I mean, it doesn't even look

00:18:06.020 possible it's so good. I guess half of adults have got at least one shot. All right.

00:18:16.800 CNN says that Biden is casting vaccines as a way to get everyone back to normal. And there's a key

00:18:23.320 tech that Biden will employ to pressure people to get the shots. Now, and he did say some things

00:18:30.100 like that. He talked about parents seeing the smiles on their kids' faces because everybody's

00:18:34.380 vaccinated and grandparents hugging their children and grandchildren because they're vaccinated and

00:18:39.420 stuff. So he does do a little about that. But conservatives, some of conservatives' most

00:18:45.160 pointed criticism is that at least the CDC and Fauci and those people are not doing this.

00:18:53.240 So the criticism is that the government is not doing a good enough job saying if you get your

00:18:59.600 vaccination, at least you can go back to something normal. Rather, Biden is still talking about normal,

00:19:06.940 but the actual guidelines are not so normal, right? So I think the conservative criticism is accurate.

00:19:14.280 But CNN is saying that Biden is doing this. I don't think he is. I think he's doing it a little

00:19:20.980 bit, which is really different from saying, if you get your vaccination, do anything you want,

00:19:26.940 which I think is what mostly conservatives probably want.

00:19:35.400 Here's an interesting fact. Apparently Obamacare is getting stronger. During the 100 days,

00:19:42.400 800,000 Americans were enrolled, blah, blah, blah. And even CNN said, we've reached a place where a few

00:19:51.820 people are talking about repealing the Affordable Care Act. That's true, isn't it? I don't feel people

00:19:57.900 even talking about, you know, repealing Obamacare. And here's something that I told you early on,

00:20:06.080 in which I gave Obama incredible credit for. And I'm going to do it again. I know you don't like

00:20:12.240 this. But any, any nod toward any objective analysis just has to include this. You probably

00:20:20.720 didn't notice this. But when Obama was explaining why he was backing the original version of Obamacare,

00:20:28.500 he said in direct language. So this is not my interpretation. He said it in direct language.

00:20:36.020 I'm paraphrasing, but very directly. He said, our plan is to put out a bad plan. Again, I'm

00:20:42.440 paraphrasing. He didn't say that. Our plan is to put out a bad plan, get the public pregnant with it,

00:20:49.520 and then it'll be too hard to take it away. But it will be possible to fix it. So he intentionally,

00:20:57.140 and said it directly, I'm going to put out there a bad plan. Again, he didn't use the word bad.

00:21:03.120 You know, it was like imperfect or something. I'm going to put out a bad plan, and I'm going to make

00:21:08.100 people not be able to get rid of it. And I'm going to make them have to fix it. What happened?

00:21:13.660 He put out a bad plan. People couldn't get rid of it. They had to fix it. Now, I don't know how fixed

00:21:21.860 it is, but 800,000 people just signed up for it. And it is true. I don't hear many people talking

00:21:27.700 about killing it. Obama pulled off one of the most clever persuasion strategies you'll ever see.

00:21:37.740 And he told you right in front of your face, which is the fun part. He told you what he was doing,

00:21:43.080 and then he just did it, and it worked. Now, you can hate Obamacare. That's a separate

00:21:47.720 separate issue, whether it's good or bad. But technique-wise, 100%. A+.

00:21:54.060 China tariffs. Even CNN noted, and I'll read exactly what they say, it's notable that Biden

00:22:06.400 has not reversed Trump's tariffs on China. How about that? Didn't you kind of think that Biden

00:22:13.940 might reverse the tariffs on China and go a little easy on China? Doesn't look like it.

00:22:20.280 All right. Now, again, if we're going to be objective, got to give him credit. He did not

00:22:26.700 reverse the tariffs. And that's got to hurt China. But the way Biden talks about China is different

00:22:36.060 from Trump. Trump was more combative, more directly, you know, saying we've got to do

00:22:42.880 more stuff. Biden's plan, which I'm not sure is a bad one so far. I'm going to be open-minded about

00:22:52.300 this so far. But here's the situation. He said explicitly, and then he's modeled it, that he's

00:22:59.240 not going to be insulting China. He's just going to be competing with them. But if they cross the

00:23:06.160 line, he's going to be tough with them wherever we need to be tough. But mostly, he's not going to

00:23:11.020 be insulting their ways. He's going to be just competing with them. Now, Dan says, I'm out.

00:23:19.980 Fucking idiot.

00:23:20.740 You know, if there's anything that I said that makes you say, I'm out so far, you're probably just

00:23:31.700 an idiot. I can't even listen to this because he said something good about Biden. Is that what

00:23:38.900 just happened? All right. If you can't handle the fact that sometimes Trump can do good things

00:23:44.660 and sometimes Biden can do good things, you really don't belong on this live stream. You should just

00:23:50.220 go away. I'm out too. Bye, Craig says. Good. I don't really want anybody on here who can't handle

00:23:58.820 hearing that the other team did something right. If you can't handle that, you should go away

00:24:05.140 immediately. So if there are any more of you who would like to go away, I'd like to see you do it

00:24:10.820 right away. All right. So is Biden's plan better to talk nice to China and let them, I don't know,

00:24:20.380 I suppose, commit genocide on the Uyghurs and harvest organs and just sort of put a little

00:24:27.500 pressure on them about it but don't care too much? I don't know. It might be fine as long as he keeps

00:24:34.540 the economic pressure on them. And he's doing a lot of other things like pushing electric cars and

00:24:39.700 batteries and, you know, he's got the made in America thing going on. I would say that Biden

00:24:45.960 has, number one, accurately identified China as our biggest future problem. Do you have a problem

00:24:52.680 with that? Trump did the same thing, right? So both Trump and Biden have now accurately said

00:24:58.720 China is our biggest challenge. I can't argue with that. They're both right. And Biden has kept

00:25:06.420 the tariffs on, kept the pressure on. He's going to fund industries that will compete against them.

00:25:13.040 Now, did you also hear, I don't know if this is true, but I saw a story that said China's population

00:25:18.260 decreased for the first time ever. Did you hear that? Maybe not the first time ever. I don't know

00:25:24.340 about World War II. But is that true? China's population decreased? Because if that's true,

00:25:32.120 they probably have an old people bomb coming, like a lot of retired people, like a lot of retired

00:25:38.480 people, like a lot, a lot of retired people. And that's sort of in their future. I feel like

00:25:45.480 they're in a lot of trouble, like a lot of trouble. I don't know if they know it, but they are. I'm sure

00:25:51.220 they know it. So I'm not going to give Biden a hard time for not being hard enough on China.

00:25:58.480 He's got a strategy. Maybe it's okay. But it does seem to leave the Uyghurs out. It does seem to

00:26:05.660 leave any political people who are being oppressed out. It looks like, but maybe that there was

00:26:11.920 nothing we could do about it, right? Unless you're going to attack China, nothing was going to change.

00:26:15.820 All right. Apparently, Vice President Harris has been put in charge of the American Jobs Plan,

00:26:22.040 which is really the infrastructure plan with a different name. So now she's got the immigration,

00:26:27.140 at least in terms of the South American, you know, firming it up so the immigration is less.

00:26:32.600 And now this. Those are pretty big jobs for a Vice President. Pretty big jobs. So they're

00:26:39.680 clearly grooming her for the next rung. We don't know when. Joe Biden's persuasion on climate crisis.

00:26:49.260 I hate to say it. I'm going to give him another A plus. If anybody else wants to leave, this would

00:26:55.760 be the time. I'm going to give him an A plus in persuasion. All right. Remember, we're just limiting

00:27:02.160 this to his persuasion. The topic of climate change, you can have your own opinion on, but you're not

00:27:08.460 going to hear this at the moment. Right now, just the persuasion he used. And here's what he said.

00:27:13.420 He said it's not a climate crisis. We have failed to use the most important word when it comes to

00:27:20.080 meeting the climate crisis. Jobs. Jobs and jobs. He says, for me, when I think about climate change,

00:27:27.480 I think jobs. Really smart. Mark is out. Goodbye, Mark. Really smart. It is very smart.

00:27:38.460 For Biden to talk about climate change and whatever we're doing about it as a way to create jobs. Is it

00:27:46.880 true? Well, that's a different question. Would it actually create good jobs? It might. I don't know.

00:27:54.900 Who knows? Maybe it would take away as many good jobs as it creates. But in terms of persuasion,

00:28:00.560 where the truth is less important than the persuasion, this is pretty good. Because if you're

00:28:07.280 trying to sell climate change to conservatives, and they don't believe it has anything to do with

00:28:13.080 saving the planet, many of them don't, what are you going to do? Instead, you say to them,

00:28:19.120 we're going to increase jobs. He's saying the same thing about the American jobs plan, which is

00:28:24.520 basically infrastructure. He calls it a jobs plan. How smart is that? It's pretty smart. Do you know what

00:28:32.860 Republicans like more than anything except maybe God and the Constitution and guns? Jobs. Jobs. So if

00:28:42.740 you're trying to reach the other side, talking about climate crisis as jobs instead of arguing about

00:28:49.500 science is pretty solid. Especially if you put China in there and say, hey, China's going to have all the

00:28:56.240 electric cars. China's going to make all the batteries. That'll be the future of power.

00:29:00.660 China's doing all the nuclear energy. If you make it jobs, and you make China the enemy,

00:29:07.480 suddenly the conservatives say, I like jobs. I don't like China. I don't know if the science of

00:29:14.340 climate change is quite exactly right. But I like jobs. And I don't like China. So I'm on board a

00:29:22.060 little bit, right? Not bad. This is good stuff. I hate to tell you that although Biden is a horrible

00:29:30.620 orator, you know, orator, and he's got plenty of problems in his speech, but this part's good.

00:29:38.220 It's just good. And he also talked about opportunity for women, especially in the Paycheck Fairness Act.

00:29:48.800 And there's a real problem brewing that I don't know if everybody's seen yet. So the Me Too stuff,

00:29:58.380 as important as the topic is, had an unintended consequence that men don't like to hang out with

00:30:05.160 women or even hire attractive women if they have an option. Because if you hire an attractive woman

00:30:12.080 in the era of Me Too, even if you know you'll be fine, your co-worker might do something wrong,

00:30:19.780 right? So you're just introducing a danger into the workplace that's a pretty big one.

00:30:27.320 Now, will that cause men who are in a position to hire to hire fewer women?

00:30:33.280 I would assume so. Certainly people say it. I've talked to lots of people who will say it right

00:30:40.520 out loud. I'm not going to hire a woman because I'm just going to get sued or my staff will get

00:30:45.780 sued. Somebody's going to get sued. Now, add on top of that the Paycheck Fairness Act. I know,

00:30:53.180 I know. I've got a mostly conservative audience. I get it that you all believe there's no such thing

00:31:00.380 as a wage gap. I get it. And I agree. As far as I know, there is no such thing as a real gender

00:31:08.800 wage gap. But it is widely believed by, I don't know, two-thirds of the world. But as far as I

00:31:15.040 know, there's no evidence of it. There's just bad analyses. There's comparing the wrong things.

00:31:20.600 They're comparing people with less experience to more. They're not comparing how much people are

00:31:25.640 even trying to get the CEO job. How much do they want it? You know, none of that's in any of the

00:31:30.980 analysis. So certainly there's, in my opinion, and I've looked into it enough to have a pretty

00:31:36.820 informed opinion on this, and I have a degree in economics, I don't think there's any evidence

00:31:42.880 that there's a wage gap. My experience shows it's the opposite. Meaning that if you're a woman with

00:31:50.280 exactly the same qualifications as a man, you're going to get promoted over the man every time.

00:31:57.700 Like every time. Did I mention every time? Equal qualifications, woman and man in a corporate

00:32:05.820 world. Which one gets promoted every time? It's the woman. In 2021, because the corporations need to

00:32:14.220 have more diversity. And I'm not arguing against diversity. I kind of like it. I like diversity.

00:32:21.260 I do think it adds. But it has this impact that a woman in the workplace is like the most valuable

00:32:30.800 asset anybody ever had. So we're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Now imagine that you

00:32:37.560 are a woman in the workplace, and you look at your male co-worker, and the male co-worker is making

00:32:44.280 more money than you. What are you going to do? Are you going to say to yourself, oh, my male co-worker

00:32:50.920 took more classes, has more experience in this, has worked more years? Are you going to say that?

00:32:58.560 Not once. You'll never say that. If your male co-worker is making more than you, it doesn't matter

00:33:06.440 if there are reasons. You're going to sue your employer or put pressure on them to have an equal

00:33:12.720 pay. Is that because you're a woman and there's something wrong with women? No. You would do the same

00:33:20.180 thing as a man, right? If I were in a situation where I could get a raise by complaining about

00:33:29.180 women getting overpaid, I would do it. All is fair in negotiating for salary. Do you think your

00:33:39.120 employer wouldn't try to screw you by telling you some bullshit to keep your pay low? Of course they

00:33:46.060 do it. That's how it works. Your employer tries to keep your pay low. You try to say what you can

00:33:51.860 to get it up. If I could say that women were overpaid and you must make it fair by paying me

00:33:57.820 more, I wouldn't care if that was true. I wouldn't care if I had a good basis for my argument.

00:34:04.880 I'd just throw it in there. See if I get a raise. So I feel as if this Paycheck Fairness Act has the

00:34:11.360 same potential blowback as the sexual harassment stuff in making men less likely to want to work

00:34:18.660 with women. So let's watch for that. Biden says he wants to end cancer as we know it.

00:34:26.520 It's within our power. Again, I like it. I like it. I don't know if you're following any of the stuff

00:34:34.920 with mRNA vaccines, but apparently there's some reason to believe that we have some technologies

00:34:43.580 that have a pretty high possibility of taking a big bite out of cancer. I love the fact that Biden

00:34:50.960 says it's a top priority, sort of a moonshot thing. Good leadership, I'd say. I don't know what

00:34:56.140 he's doing about it exactly, but I like that it's up there as a priority because I think we can maybe

00:35:02.440 close it out in the next 10 years. It's possible. Let's see. CNN is calling Biden's lodestar. They

00:35:14.780 like put a good name on it. That we have to prove to the autocrats of the world that democracy still

00:35:21.120 works. So that's sort of a big theme of his presidency is showing that democracies are better

00:35:27.340 than, say, Chinese communist leadership or Russian or any autocracy. But is it true? Do you think

00:35:38.440 democracies are more effective in helping the country than autocracies? Because I'm not sure

00:35:49.160 that's true. I prefer freedom, right? If I have a choice, I'm going to take it democracy.

00:35:55.160 But why is the United States doing better than, let's say, China in innovation? Is it because

00:36:04.920 of the form of government? I don't think so. It feels like a cultural difference. That if you're

00:36:11.420 in a country that doesn't mind you failing as much as you want before you succeed, you probably get more

00:36:18.140 risk-taking than a country that says, oh, you shamed your family and failed. That company you started

00:36:23.580 and it didn't work. Blah, blah, blah. Could be because America has fewer nepotism problems,

00:36:29.940 less corruption, fewer people in the top, you know, with puppet strings. Could be a lot of things.

00:36:37.260 But I don't think it has anything to do with democracy versus autocracy. Does it? And even the

00:36:43.720 autocrats have capitalism. They have some form of capitalism, right? So it's an interesting

00:36:50.780 it's an interesting theme to prove that democracy still works, because I don't know that it does.

00:37:00.240 I don't know that we really can compete with a qualified autocrat. We can certainly compete with

00:37:07.160 bad autocrats, like just dictators that are destroying their own country. But China's got a really capable

00:37:14.460 leader. I feel like if you're lucky enough to have a really qualified, capable autocrat,

00:37:23.920 aren't you going to do better? I mean, certainly it ends up with, you know, genocide in part of the

00:37:29.260 country. Nobody wants that. But just trying to make the economy hum and compete with other countries

00:37:36.300 and build your military. I'm not so sure democracy is the best way to go. I'm not. But it would be it's

00:37:43.100 an interesting matchup. And I think I'm glad that Biden wants to push that matchup. But I don't know

00:37:49.420 if it's true. The dumbest thing Biden said was that the the so called insurrection on January 6 was an

00:37:58.360 existential crisis, a test of whether our democracy could survive. Was it? Was it was those people who

00:38:09.320 entered the Capitol? Was that an existential crisis for the country? Did democracy almost end that day?

00:38:18.120 Let me put it in context. Every night, there's a cleaning crew that goes into the Capitol building

00:38:28.900 carrying these large blunt objects. Sometimes they have mops at the end, sometimes brooms, but blunt

00:38:36.840 objects. And they go in and they occupy the Capitol. And then they clean it. And then they leave.

00:38:46.460 Now, I'm not going to say that the cleaning crew is identical to the protesters who took over the

00:38:54.300 Capitol building. I'm just saying they're almost identical. Neither of them seem to be interested in

00:39:02.980 using deadly weapons. Neither of them had the intention of staying forever. They went there for a

00:39:11.600 specific purpose. They did their specific purpose. And then they left. It's a lot like the cleaning

00:39:19.700 crew. So if you're going to say that the insurrection was an existential crisis. And I think you said it

00:39:28.300 was the worst thing since the Civil War. There are a few things you're leaving out between the Civil War

00:39:34.200 now. Was the occupation of the Capitol building for a few hours worse than Pearl Harbor? Was it worse than

00:39:46.880 9-11? Was it worse than Timothy McVeigh blowing up a federal building? Was it worse than Russiagate or

00:39:55.840 the shooting of Steve Scalise? I'm pretty sure it wasn't worse than any of those things? Yeah. And not

00:40:05.840 only was it not worse than any of those things, it was very similar in type to the cleaning crew.

00:40:13.660 So people who came in for a reason, didn't shoot any weapons, and left when they were done.

00:40:19.080 That's my best comparison. Honestly, if you think this was an insurrection that was an actual risk

00:40:29.840 to democracy, you're either brainwashed or stupid. Or you're a politician. You're just lying. So let me

00:40:36.840 say that clearly. If you think the January 6th thing was an actual risk, like an actual risk to the

00:40:45.160 country, you're either stupid or brainwashed. There's no other possibility. That's it. All right.

00:40:56.980 And let me remind you that if conservatives really planned an insurrection, it would be louder.

00:41:05.120 That's all I'm going to say, because I'm on YouTube, so I don't want to use any words that'll

00:41:09.940 get me kicked off. But wouldn't you agree, an actual insurrection that involved the most well-armed

00:41:17.680 citizens on the planet, you don't think it would be a little bit louder, if you know what I mean?

00:41:25.660 There'd be a little bit more noise. So look for that. If you're wondering if the conservatives

00:41:30.860 have decided to stage a revolution, it'll be a lot louder. A lot louder. All right.

00:41:39.020 All right. I had a fascinating and fun time looking at CNN's fact-checking of Biden's

00:41:46.320 speech. And so they did a good job of showing the text and then the fact-check for each of the things

00:41:54.520 he claimed. And as you might imagine, they were a little bit generous. But my favorite part was where

00:42:02.640 they just gave up on one of them. So here's what Biden said. And then I'm going to read you CNN's

00:42:09.380 fact-check. And see if it doesn't look like they just gave up. All right. So Biden says,

00:42:16.620 my fellow Americans, trickle-down economics has never worked. All right. So trickle-down economics

00:42:23.580 has never worked. Now CNN's going to fact-check that. So if you were going to fact-check the

00:42:30.220 statement, trickle-down economics has never worked, what would that look like? Would it look like, well,

00:42:37.760 here's some studies that say it works, or here's some studies that say it doesn't work? That's what

00:42:44.380 you're expecting, right? If you're going to fact-check trickle-down economics doesn't, or has never

00:42:49.600 worked. What would it sound like? Well, here's what CNN wrote. You hear that, Reagan Republicans?

00:42:59.080 Question mark. Trickle-down economics, the idea that letting the wealthy and corporations have low taxes

00:43:05.100 and few regulations will unleash so much growth that everyone will benefit, may be on the ropes

00:43:11.300 as inequality grows. Wait, what? Where's my fact-check? The fact-check is mocking Reagan Republicans.

00:43:24.700 The fact-check didn't even address the fact. It actually ignored the fact and just insulted people

00:43:32.060 who believed the fact. This is their fact-check. Now, why is that? Why is it that the CNN doesn't

00:43:42.400 simply say, yeah, this trickle-down economics has never worked. All the economists agree. Do you know

00:43:50.780 why they can't fact-check that? I assume because it works. Now, I don't know that to be true, because

00:43:58.980 it's sort of hard. It's really hard to really know if it worked, in my opinion. But it feels like

00:44:05.640 CNN just didn't want to even address the question. So instead, they just mocked people who believed it.

00:44:12.360 That's new.

00:44:16.820 So Biden talked about changing the gun laws, and he said, talk to the most responsible gun owners,

00:44:21.880 most hunters. They'll tell you there's no possible justification for having 100 rounds.

00:44:28.980 Do you think there's no possible justification for having 100 rounds? Does anybody think that?

00:44:39.280 Let me suggest a possible rationalization, or reason, really, to have 100 rounds. Here's my reason.

00:44:49.100 Biden, on changing gun laws, talk to most responsible gun owners, most hunters, they'll tell you there's

00:44:54.420 no possible justification for having 100 rounds. That's the justification. That's the justification.

00:45:03.980 The fact that he would say that out loud, as President of the United States, tells me I need

00:45:10.400 more bullets. Because the government is looking to take away one of your basic rights. If the government

00:45:18.400 is acting to take away one of your basic rights, and this basic right goes right to the heart

00:45:24.220 of freedom, which is not letting the government run roughshod over you, being armed enough that it

00:45:31.380 just wouldn't ever work. I feel like Biden just gave you all the reason you'd ever need to have all

00:45:37.560 the rounds that you could ever buy. He is the justification. I'm watching the comments,

00:45:44.460 you all agree with this. By the way, did you think it as soon as you heard it? The moment I heard this,

00:45:49.600 I thought, well, maybe they didn't have justification before, but you certainly just gave it to them.

00:45:57.080 Immediately after seeing Biden say, I have no reason to have 100 rounds, immediately, I thought to

00:46:03.640 myself, how can I get more ammo? Did anybody think that? How many of you thought to yourself, my God,

00:46:10.120 how can I get more guns and more weapons? Because he's talking this way. I'll bet a lot of you did.

00:46:17.460 You haven't seen the yeses in the comments. So Biden's also going to raise my taxes and other rich

00:46:27.480 people, he says. He says, it's time for corporate America and the wealthiest 1% Americans to pay their

00:46:33.640 fair share. What do you think about that? Do you think that wealthy Americans should pay their fair share?

00:46:40.120 Why not? Right? I think wealthy Americans should pay their fair share.

00:46:45.840 Who would disagree with that statement? Nobody, right? So it's good persuasion. So you start with

00:46:52.180 the thing everybody agrees with. It's time for corporate America and the wealthiest 1% to pay their

00:46:57.140 fair share. Who argues against paying your fair share? Nobody. So it's good persuasion. He starts with

00:47:06.100 pacing. And then it gets weird. He said, a recent study shows that 55 of the nation's biggest corporations

00:47:15.860 paid zero in federal income tax last year. I need some permission to curse. Permission to curse.

00:47:24.480 There will be swearing. It's coming up. If you've got children, send them away. Cursing is coming up.

00:47:32.600 So, yes. So after saying that rich people should pay their fair share, he says 55 of the big

00:47:41.600 corporations paid zero income tax. Let me put a little context on this, Joe Biden. I'm not one of the 55

00:47:56.040 largest corporations. I'm not. And do you know why? So first of all, I work seven days a week

00:48:07.840 and I only get paid for the value that I produce. It's like a direct thing. I produce more value,

00:48:15.680 more people, you know, watch me on YouTube, more people buy my comic. That's it. I work seven days a

00:48:22.320 week, probably 60 hours a week on average. I'm not a big fucking corporation, Joe Biden. Fuck you

00:48:33.620 for trying to take my money. I'm paying my fair share, well over 50% for most of my career. Yeah,

00:48:41.860 most of it. And conflating me with amazon.com is just fuck you. It's really just fuck you. I worked

00:48:52.160 for my money. Don't compare me to fucking amazon.com. He's yours, right? He's yours. Amazon.com is yours.

00:49:02.300 That's your fucking problem, not mine. Solve your fucking problem. Your problem, Joe Biden.

00:49:10.040 I work for a living. I don't, you know, make billions of dollars because I started a company

00:49:18.380 successfully. And conflating me and all the people who are, let's say, doctors or lawyers,

00:49:26.940 consultants, entrepreneurs, we're not the assholes. We're not the assholes. We're the ones

00:49:35.260 who make this whole fucking country work. No, obviously you need everybody working. But you

00:49:41.000 couldn't take away this group of Americans, the ones who are individuals just excelling and inventing

00:49:47.640 stuff, you know, curing people of diseases, fixing legal problems. We're kind of important. The people

00:49:55.780 who just go to work, but do do enough value, they create enough value that we get into this amazon.com

00:50:04.480 conversation. Do you think I'm anywhere near amazon.com? I earned every fucking penny I have.

00:50:12.660 And I don't think you should take it away from me by changing the rules after I made my fucking

00:50:18.080 money. That's my problem. If this had always been the rules, if I had entered my career with a certain

00:50:26.080 set of rules, I would have said, oh, okay. You know, that's what I chose. But when you change the rules

00:50:31.600 after I make my money, and now you're going to take a third of it away or whatever it's going to be,

00:50:37.080 not cool. Let me suggest an improvement to make this at least somewhat equitable. And it would go

00:50:45.780 like this. I don't believe that anybody over 50 should ever have their taxes increased.

00:50:52.040 That's it. Now, how you treat corporations is separate. If you want to put a minimum tax on

00:51:00.500 corporations, you know, that's something to talk about. But I don't think an individual who's just

00:51:06.640 working for a living is not a corporation, just works for a living and is successful. If you're over

00:51:12.760 50, and you raise their fucking taxes, not cool. Just not cool. And anybody over 50 should just vote

00:51:20.920 out of office. Anybody who even thinks of raising their taxes. Because that group worked their whole

00:51:26.720 life to have what they have. And it isn't your fucking job to take it away and give it to somebody who

00:51:32.940 didn't do that. It's just not cool. So if Biden said, I'm going to tax the corporations a little more,

00:51:40.000 have some minimum tax. I'd be open to that conversation. I don't really know if the

00:51:45.440 economists have sorted out whether that's good or bad, or even if they can tell. But when you tax

00:51:50.620 people above a certain age and take the money that they've worked all their life to earn through

00:51:55.980 no crime, no crime, fuck you. So that's what I think of Joe Biden. All right. New York Times in a

00:52:07.940 tweet has referred to Biden's economic plans as Biden's latest ambitious economic package. Is ambitious

00:52:16.720 a good news word? Ambitious is a persuasion word. Right? Now, it is ambitious. I would say that it's an

00:52:29.120 accurate word. It's a very ambitious plan. But if you're only going to pick one word, is that the one you

00:52:36.040 pick? That's the one that sums it all up? It's ambitious. I would have said huge. Huge. Enormous.

00:52:44.780 If you said enormous, there would be no opinion in there. But as soon as you say ambitious,

00:52:54.620 that's an opinion. And the New York Times is already defending against Project Veritas

00:53:03.440 for their opinions that they're packaging as news. Here's another example. That's an opinion

00:53:10.620 packaged as news. All right. Here's some fake news that probably fooled you. Did you see that on

00:53:17.800 Twitter, the phrase Uncle Tim was trending? Obviously, an insulting play on the phrase Uncle Tom.

00:53:25.260 And it was because of Senator Tim Scott's rebuttal. How many of you saw that trending?

00:53:33.440 And then you said to yourself, my God, these liberals are so racist.

00:53:40.240 God, they're so racist. They're so racist that not only would somebody use this phrase, Uncle Tim,

00:53:47.320 very insulting. But so much it would be trending. How many of you fell for that? Do you know why it was

00:53:58.780 trending? Do you know why? Because one fucking guy said it in a tweet. And conservatives went crazy

00:54:09.260 and retweeted it saying, my God, look at this. The conservatives retweeted it so much, one fucking

00:54:15.740 guy. Just one guy. Then it trended. And then once it trended, the conservatives said, look at how bad

00:54:23.680 these liberals are. They made this thing trend. But of course, it was the conservatives. It was one

00:54:29.700 fucking guy. Look at all the tweets. They're all pointing to the same guy. One fucking idiot. And you

00:54:37.180 got fooled into thinking that the liberals are all saying Uncle Tom. It was one guy. If you don't see

00:54:43.800 how this happens, you're missing a pretty big part of the media.

00:54:51.920 My biggest problem with Tim Scott is that he's got a pretty good shot of being president,

00:54:57.740 I would say. But he shares my name. And I'm not cool with that. Because if we ever had a President

00:55:07.520 Scott, and of course, people refer to the president by just their last name, you know, Biden, Trump,

00:55:13.360 Scott, I would have to wake up every day, hearing what Scott did that people don't like. And I can't

00:55:21.600 have that. So while I think Senator Tim Scott is a very qualified guy, certainly has every

00:55:29.380 qualifications I would look for in a president. But I just can't have it. I just I just can't have

00:55:34.720 somebody with my name as president. That would be that would just be too annoying for 48 years.

00:55:42.780 So a lot of people on the right loved Tim Scott's rebuttal. I listened to it this morning. And

00:55:50.960 I didn't see it. Honestly, I was expecting the the Senator Scott's speech to be like a I heard a number of

00:56:02.420 people saying it's the best one they've ever seen, which I don't doubt, by the way, it might actually

00:56:07.320 be the best one anybody's ever seen for a rebuttal. Because the the bar for rebuttals is like super low,

00:56:14.580 right? You know that the rebuttal people are usually pathetic. In my experience, you get your Adam

00:56:22.360 shifts being the rebuttal guy. If you if you have Adam shift be your rebuttal guy, you don't even care

00:56:28.920 about the rebuttal. I mean, you wouldn't put that guy in there. But that happens, right? So to have

00:56:34.080 anybody do a solid job, looks like the best that's ever happened. So he did a solid job, I would say

00:56:41.200 that the senator is a very capable speaker, and he had lots of themes about coming together, etc. I don't

00:56:49.100 think any of it matters, because it just it just looks like conservatives talking to conservatives.

00:56:54.360 So I don't think that Senator Scott has language that is penetrating the other side.

00:57:02.920 And when he said America is not a racist country, everybody with good reading comprehension said

00:57:09.980 the following. Oh, he means that the country is not racist by design, because everybody can move up.

00:57:17.520 But, but obviously, obviously, he's not saying there are no racists in the country. Obviously.

00:57:24.840 Obviously, he's not saying that everybody's starting from the same place. Obviously. But

00:57:30.820 because he made this statement, which I think was just a pure mistake, in my opinion, that America is

00:57:37.360 not a racist country. There are lots of ways you could have said that, that would have avoided the

00:57:44.080 problem that he walked into, which is that will be taken out of context, easily out of context, it

00:57:50.560 already is. And it's being used as a sign that Republicans don't understand racism exists.

00:57:59.360 So I mean, he dug a hole, and he fell into his own hole. So it was a huge persuasion mistake,

00:58:06.340 in my opinion, to say the phrase, America is not a racist country, even if you believe it's true.

00:58:12.280 And even if you're pretty sure Republicans will agree with you. Because you're trying to, you're

00:58:18.520 trying to persuade the other side. Or what's the point? I mean, talking to your own side is not

00:58:25.920 really persuading anybody. So I would say that that was a mistake, because it opened up an easy

00:58:31.760 attack vector. And, you know, Van Jones waded in here, he said that the United States is still

00:58:41.100 struggling with racism in every institution. Did Tim Scott disagree with that? No, no, Tim Scott never

00:58:49.480 said anything that is the disagreement with that. But they can make it look like it is. And that's,

00:58:56.380 that was his mistake. And then Van Jones also said, to Tim Scott's credit, he said,

00:59:05.440 how different he sounds from all Republicans. Does he? Did you think that Tim Scott sounded

00:59:14.380 different from all Republicans? Because I didn't get that at all. I got that it was right down the

00:59:21.420 middle. It's the most Republican speech ever. Because he was saying, you know, the wokeness,

00:59:28.680 don't worry about it. Everybody's got a chance. You know, everybody can succeed in this country.

00:59:34.820 I didn't think it was even a little bit outside the mainstream. It was right down the middle. Now,

00:59:40.580 why would anybody think this does not sound like Republicans? Well, if you spent too much time

00:59:46.080 watching CNN content, you would think this was not mainstream. It's the most mainstream thing you've

00:59:52.620 ever heard. He went right down the middle. Tim Scott didn't even, he didn't even touch the edge

00:59:59.440 of mainstream Republican thought. He didn't even get close. But if you watch CNN, you think he did.

01:00:08.460 All right. So one of the things that I find interesting is that whoever gets to do the rebuttal,

01:00:17.720 it means that the party has decided that this is somebody who's going to get a little attention.

01:00:22.620 And as I watch the, you know, the 2024 race start to come together, I feel like we're going to see

01:00:29.740 another repeat of 2016 in one sense. Am I wrong that there are a lot of Republicans that are really

01:00:38.280 qualified to be president? Let me just list them. Ron DeSantis, could he be qualified to be president?

01:00:47.600 Could he win? I think he could. Tim Scott, is he qualified? Could he win the presidency?

01:00:56.740 Yes, I think he could. Ted Cruz, a little bit harder because he's a little more provocative,

01:01:03.920 right? The left has a little more problem with him. But could he get nominated? Yes.

01:01:09.040 Does he have all the qualifications for a president? Yes, he absolutely does. Name some other names.

01:01:18.660 Did I say Tom Cotton? Chris Christie, I think he's got a little more baggage, so to speak. But remember,

01:01:26.660 remember when Trump was running, the one of the biggest comments was, there are a lot of Republicans

01:01:32.340 that are looking pretty solid. Pompeo, right? Yeah, Mike Pompeo, solid. Nikki Haley gets a little more

01:01:41.480 controversial. Christie Holm, Noem, a little more controversial. But certainly, the Republicans have

01:01:49.080 a strong field, so I'd be a little bit worried. I see Trey Gowdy being mentioned, but I don't know

01:01:56.180 that he wants to run for the office. By the way, if Trey Gowdy ever ran for president, is there any

01:02:03.160 chance he would lose? Because there's nobody on the Republican side that I can think of who's even

01:02:10.600 close to his level of skill. I just don't know that he's interested in the job. Oh, Richard Grinnell,

01:02:16.920 another good, obvious candidate who has all the qualifications for president.

01:02:26.120 Imagine this, just for fun. Imagine that the Republicans just say, we just want to win.

01:02:36.080 And all they do, the Republicans, all they do is they just say, what is it going to take to win?

01:02:42.000 And we're just going to do that. Win, win, win, it's all we want.

01:02:46.060 Who would they run? Let me give you a proposal. So this is not my suggestion of who should be

01:02:53.820 president, just a mental exercise. Imagine a ticket of Tim Scott and Richard Grinnell.

01:03:04.480 Yeah? Does that ticket lose? How? How would they ever lose? Seriously. You put a

01:03:15.240 one of the most successful gay open politicians as vice president, which is probably right where

01:03:23.860 his experience level would put him. You take the most successful black Republican senator,

01:03:30.620 I think, fully qualified, put him at the top of the ticket. Did you watch any Republicans

01:03:37.640 last night say anything racist about Tim Scott? Nothing? Nothing. In this big old racist Republican

01:03:50.620 party, allegedly, got millions of racists. Not only that, but white supremacy is the biggest problem,

01:03:57.260 according to the intel agencies. It's the biggest problem. And who did the Republicans say,

01:04:03.720 let's put our champion up there? They pick a highly qualified black senator to be their champion.

01:04:11.800 How many, how many racists did you hear saying, I wish we hadn't picked the black guy?

01:04:18.440 Zero. How many Republicans are there? 80 million, I don't know, 70 million. What is the number of

01:04:27.180 Republicans? Not a freaking person? Not even one said, you know, he's black, maybe we shouldn't have

01:04:35.120 it. No, not one. Not even one. Right? So how would that ticket ever lose? You know, because again,

01:04:45.300 Tim Scott's right down the middle of Republican thinking. So every Republican is going to be on board.

01:04:50.220 Black voters are going to say, ah, I don't like Republicans, but he's pretty solid. And maybe,

01:05:00.240 maybe this time I'll, you know, I'll give a little extra effort to show up and vote.

01:05:07.320 I don't know. I think that ticket would be unbeatable. Let me give you another ticket that I think would be

01:05:12.100 unbeatable. Trey Gowdy at the top. And anybody at vice president. I don't think he could possibly

01:05:22.320 lose. And here's why. Have you ever seen him talk? There's nobody who has a better grasp of persuasion

01:05:30.500 and the facts. I don't think anybody's close right now. There are lots of people who have the facts and

01:05:39.240 really solid. Take a Tom Cotton, who I'm liking quite a bit lately, especially because of his

01:05:45.860 stand against China. But Tom Cotton is not quite as interesting. Am I right? He's not quotable.

01:05:55.400 Trey Gowdy is quotable as hell, which is unfortunately, you know, 70% of being president

01:06:01.360 is being really quotable. He's interesting to look at. He's never boring. Have you ever been bored

01:06:08.640 by Trey Gowdy? Nope. Not once. When he's on, if you're flipping through the channels and Trey

01:06:16.680 Gowdy is talking, you stop, don't you? How many other people would make you stop flipping through

01:06:24.000 the channels? Just immediately say, oh, I got to see what he says. Trump, right? But then the list is

01:06:31.300 really short of people that you wouldn't just switch the channel. Some people are saying Trump

01:06:38.540 will win a third. I don't know. He might be happier as a kingmaker and a power behind the power. He might

01:06:44.800 have some legal issues, etc. Somebody says, you act like rhinos aren't a thing. Ridiculous. How am I

01:06:53.220 acting like that? I don't know what that means. If you put any of the people that I mentioned

01:07:01.080 for a candidate for Republican for the presidency, Republicans are not going to vote for the Democrat

01:07:09.260 because they don't think that a Republican is perfect. That's not going to happen.

01:07:13.480 Somebody says, Gowdy is a rhino. That's why he would win. Sorry. That's why he would win.

01:07:26.120 The fact that he can't be painted as, you know, so right wing that he's crazy. That's why he would

01:07:34.720 win. Do you know why Obama won? Because you couldn't really paint him as left as you wanted to. He was

01:07:42.800 just a little too darn centrist. And he made him hard to attack. So while Republicans might say,

01:07:51.460 damn it, that rhino, that rhino is not doing what we want, and they might even be right.

01:07:57.020 But who the hell are they going to vote for? They're not going to not vote for him if the

01:08:02.380 other option is Kamala Harris, for example. So it just doesn't matter if he's a, if you call him a

01:08:07.760 rhino or if he agrees with you on everything. It does matter. He would still win easily.

01:08:12.800 In my opinion. Now, I think DeSantis has a solid shot, unless there's some, you know,

01:08:22.240 you always have to wait for the opposition research. You know, God knows what any of them

01:08:26.860 have in their past. But he's solid, but he's not interesting. So that, Ron DeSantis has the

01:08:34.680 not interesting problem. He's sort of more of a technician and a strategist and a wonk and a manager.

01:08:43.960 He's a leader, definitely a leader, which not all managers are. He's definitely a leader.

01:08:49.220 But it just doesn't have the sizzle that you might need to get people to show up.

01:08:55.680 So you're going to have to have somebody with a little edge just to get people to show up.

01:08:59.280 So I see Matt Gaetz being mentioned a number of times. Every day that goes by, Matt Gaetz gets

01:09:06.520 stronger. Because if you're not hearing him getting taken down, and we haven't even heard

01:09:12.900 that there's a real person who's an accuser of anything, right? So he just went through this giant

01:09:18.800 scandal situation. And weeks later, weeks later, not even the name of an accuser or even proof that

01:09:28.360 there is one. It's not even that we don't know the name. We don't really know there is one.

01:09:35.280 So if it turns out that this was always a biased hit job, the way it looks, he could become

01:09:43.720 Teflon if this doesn't take him out. So you know the whole, don't go after the king unless you can

01:09:50.000 finish him off. Like you don't want a wounded king who knows who you are. That's really bad for you.

01:09:56.120 60 minutes. Rewind. It's been two and a half months. That was weird. My phone just started up

01:10:02.980 on its own. So if Matt Gaetz does not get completely taken out by this scandal, he will be the politician

01:10:10.560 that lived through this scandal and it didn't take him out. That covers you with Teflon because the next

01:10:17.480 time somebody wants to take him out, they're going to say, well, it's going to have to be better than that

01:10:21.460 one because that didn't even put a dent in him. So if he recovers, he's dangerous, but we'll see if he

01:10:27.760 does. The Arizona audit, we're not hearing anything about that yet, are we? Is there any evidence

01:10:35.260 coming out of that that's reliable? But I can't wait for the, I can't wait for that. Now the Arizona

01:10:43.040 audit is fascinating because I don't know exactly what they're testing or checking or auditing. So I

01:10:49.600 don't know if they're really going to see the whole picture or not. But let's say that they're

01:10:53.600 going to see a lot of the picture and they're going to see a lot of the things that at least

01:10:58.320 Republicans claim there should be some problems there, they suspect. What happens if the audit comes

01:11:06.500 out clean? Do any of you expect that to happen? Because I think that could easily happen,

01:11:13.720 that the audit looks at everything and it's kind of okay. Do you think that's possible?

01:11:21.220 That's totally possible, you know. I'm seeing some people say, no chance. No way. Yes. No,

01:11:27.800 it's totally possible because they're not looking everywhere, right? So even if you believe that

01:11:33.940 there's some bad stuff hiding somewhere in the system, I doubt that the audit is seeing enough

01:11:40.440 of the system that you could know for sure if you found anything that was there. I don't know that

01:11:46.900 we'll ever know. But what happens if they don't find anything? What happens if all the ballots

01:11:53.320 are at least accurate or enough of them are that it obviously looks just like errors, nothing to worry

01:12:00.740 about? I heard that Mike Lindell had a tough appearance on Jimmy Kimmel, but I haven't seen that yet.

01:12:10.440 That will be interesting. I might look for that on replay to see what that's about.

01:12:14.660 But you shouldn't be watching Jimmy Kimmel. You know why, right? Because that's when Gutfeld's on.

01:12:20.820 You should be watching Gutfeld. There is no Jimmy Kimmel anymore on the East Coast. You can watch

01:12:26.520 him on the West Coast because you can watch Gutfeld at eight. But on the East Coast, there's no reason to

01:12:32.160 watch Jimmy Kimmel anymore. All right. That's all for now. And I will talk to you tomorrow.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - April 29, 2021

Episode 1360 Scott Adams： The Biden Speech and Senator Tim Scott's Rebuttal Seen Through the Persuasion Filter

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Summary

Transcript