Real Coffee with Scott Adams - August 10, 2021


Episode 1464 Scott Adams： Get Ready For the Funniest Coffee With Scott Adams of All Time


Episode Stats

Length

56 minutes

Words per Minute

150.19084

Word Count

8,460

Sentence Count

663

Misogynist Sentences

10

Hate Speech Sentences

28


Summary


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody.
00:00:05.520 Today, well, today is going to be one of the best coffees with Scott Adams of all time, really.
00:00:13.120 Now, I don't want to oversell it, but I really don't think I could.
00:00:17.320 I mean, it's going to be that good.
00:00:19.360 A lot of you have been saying to me, Scott, you seem angry lately.
00:00:24.960 You seem to be sort of a bummer.
00:00:28.380 Not anymore.
00:00:30.000 Not anymore.
00:00:30.940 This is all going to be fun today.
00:00:33.080 And how do you make it even better?
00:00:35.280 Oh, wow.
00:00:36.980 The simultaneous sip.
00:00:38.180 That's right.
00:00:39.020 That's right.
00:00:39.900 Right.
00:00:40.500 And all you need is a cup or a mug, a glass of tank or chalice, a stein, a canteen, a jug of glass, a vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid.
00:00:46.820 I like coffee.
00:00:48.640 Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.
00:00:51.620 The dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
00:00:53.720 It's called the simultaneous sip.
00:00:55.800 And watch it boost your immune response to the COVID.
00:01:01.220 Yeah, it's true.
00:01:02.400 Go.
00:01:02.620 I feel invulnerable, in a way.
00:01:12.680 Well, you know, sometimes the news is uninteresting.
00:01:17.040 But sometimes, sometimes it's not.
00:01:20.980 Today is one of those days when the news is serving up, oh, a bountiful harvest.
00:01:26.520 I would like to begin with a story that I don't know if it's true, but can we all just act like it is?
00:01:36.080 Just for our entertainment purposes.
00:01:39.520 Might not be a true story.
00:01:42.480 But act like it's true now, okay?
00:01:45.440 So Twitter user Christopher Hill alerted me to this headline.
00:01:49.340 China, man faces execution after rubbing his penis on Mao Zedong's corpse.
00:01:58.720 And Christopher said, it is no to me.
00:02:01.080 I felt like I needed to make sure you know of this legendary hero.
00:02:05.720 Well, here's my take on him.
00:02:08.580 Number one, let's not judge him.
00:02:11.740 Let's not judge him.
00:02:13.200 We should be a little bit open-minded about people's sexual preferences.
00:02:17.540 Here's a man.
00:02:20.040 He's not part of a large organized group.
00:02:24.240 And so, you know, there are people who have sexual preferences.
00:02:27.860 And if there are enough of them, they can organize to, you know, get respect in society.
00:02:33.900 But if you're born with a sexual preference for rubbing your penis on the face of a deceased dictator,
00:02:41.880 you don't have enough people in your cohort to, you know, organize properly.
00:02:48.500 And I don't think that's fair.
00:02:49.700 And I don't think we should judge him.
00:02:51.420 But I do have questions.
00:02:52.840 I have questions.
00:02:54.860 Number one, there's no word on whether he was interrupted before he finished.
00:02:59.780 I'm assuming that he was hoping for some kind of a conclusion, if you know what I mean.
00:03:07.420 You know what I mean?
00:03:08.920 And we don't know if the guards let him finish.
00:03:12.000 Because that would probably go to how much they liked Mao themselves.
00:03:16.900 But I can imagine if I were a guard, I'd be like, hey, hey, get off that.
00:03:21.960 All right, I'll give you a couple more minutes.
00:03:23.720 But 15 minutes from now, you have to get off of that thing.
00:03:28.960 That's how I would have handled it.
00:03:30.200 Because, you know, not a fan of Mao.
00:03:34.840 Other questions we have about this story.
00:03:38.920 The mugshot is a little suspicious.
00:03:41.860 If you've ever seen mugshots, unless somebody's drunk, they usually look unhappy to be arrested.
00:03:50.180 But this gentleman had a, let's say, a satisfied look on his face.
00:03:56.620 A satisfied look.
00:03:58.080 And I can't quite describe the look.
00:04:01.240 You almost have to follow the path to it.
00:04:04.700 And I'll try to describe it this way.
00:04:07.580 The look in his mugshot, after rubbing his penis on Chairman Mao's dead face, was sort of satisfied.
00:04:14.860 And it was very similar to what I imagine my face looks like when my wife, Christina, says,
00:04:21.580 well, I don't have time to make love, but I might have time to satisfy you.
00:04:27.980 And when she says the first part, you know, I probably don't have time to make love,
00:04:32.660 my face first goes, oh.
00:04:35.420 Sort of like that.
00:04:36.160 It droops like, oh.
00:04:37.000 But then when she does the second part, but I might have time to do you, I go, oh.
00:04:44.080 And somewhere in between the, oh, and the, oh, you get this weird thing that this Chinese guy had
00:04:51.240 after he had been arrested for rubbing his penis on Chairman Mao's dead face.
00:04:57.820 And I don't know.
00:04:58.720 I don't know if it's exactly the same, because I've never looked at myself in the mirror in this situation.
00:05:02.880 But I feel like it's the same.
00:05:04.080 It feels like it's very similar.
00:05:05.720 Another question I have is, did he climb on top of the casket and straddle the leader's face?
00:05:16.220 Or did he stand sort of on the side on his tiptoes and sort of lean over?
00:05:22.660 I don't know how you get there exactly.
00:05:24.260 There must have been some kind of a, you imagine there's some kind of a rope.
00:05:28.000 I also wonder, there's no report on whether he was turgid or just really trying to teabag the leader's face.
00:05:36.440 I think we need to know that.
00:05:38.180 And if there's one thing that I can tell you about the deceased, what do they complain about the most?
00:05:47.740 Dead people?
00:05:48.360 Dead people are always complaining about not enough foreplay.
00:05:54.580 Not enough foreplay.
00:05:55.920 But in this one case, I guess he got enough.
00:05:59.860 And then the funniest part about this, apparently this guy has been executed or is going to be executed.
00:06:05.940 But one imagines that prior to the execution, he was probably in jail and probably had a cellmate.
00:06:14.580 If you were this gentleman's cellmate, wouldn't you sleep with a bucket over your head?
00:06:20.960 I mean, I would.
00:06:22.500 I'd just request a bucket.
00:06:24.160 And whenever I went to sleep, I'd just be like, put the bucket over my head.
00:06:28.380 But just to be extra careful.
00:06:33.220 All right, well, that's not the only good story today.
00:06:35.540 There's a survey.
00:06:37.980 And I think Rasmussen can learn something from this.
00:06:43.720 So this is not a Rasmussen poll.
00:06:46.620 But Dr. Anarchy on Twitter sent this to me.
00:06:50.500 There's a poll that said Americans are more confident than Britons that they could beat any animal in a fight.
00:06:58.380 Now, there was a list of the animals that people were asked about individually.
00:07:04.620 They were asked, you know, do you think you could beat a...
00:07:08.260 And this is barehanded, not with weapons.
00:07:10.520 Do you think you could beat a bear, a wolf, a kangaroo, a crocodile, and a large dog?
00:07:16.540 Those were some of the choices.
00:07:17.600 And Americans were largely more confident that they could take on a bear, a wolf, a kangaroo, a crocodile, or a large dog.
00:07:27.540 Now, I can relate to this.
00:07:30.380 I can relate to this.
00:07:31.720 Because I imagine myself against any one of these.
00:07:35.460 Let's take the kangaroo because they're funnier.
00:07:38.640 Me versus a kangaroo versus a British guy and that same kangaroo.
00:07:46.600 I don't know.
00:07:47.440 I like my odds.
00:07:49.020 I feel like I could take the kangaroo.
00:07:51.660 I know they've got a lot of leaping and, like, leg action.
00:07:55.160 You know, they're pretty good at the MMA stuff.
00:07:57.940 But at the top, they don't have much reach.
00:08:00.160 Little arms.
00:08:01.440 Now, my arms aren't that long, but, you know, better than a kangaroo.
00:08:06.160 And part of my kangaroo fighting strategy would involve misdirection.
00:08:11.360 I'd say, hey, there's something in your pocket.
00:08:14.040 And the kangaroo would look down, bam, and then I would punch it.
00:08:18.060 But I don't think the British, they don't know how to fight dirty.
00:08:22.900 Not like Americans.
00:08:24.700 I mean, you put me in a fight with a kangaroo, am I going to, you know, do the follow all the rules?
00:08:31.760 No.
00:08:32.300 I'm going to kick the kangaroo in his kangaroo balls.
00:08:36.020 I'm not going to fight fair.
00:08:38.040 But, you know, I think the British are like, all right, all right.
00:08:41.020 You know, let's do this.
00:08:43.000 Let's do this the proper way.
00:08:44.560 And then the kangaroo kicks their ass.
00:08:46.200 So I can understand the survey.
00:08:48.220 But here's the funniest part about the survey.
00:08:49.860 It wasn't all about big animals.
00:08:52.920 Some of the animals that people were asked if they thought they could beat it in a fair fight
00:08:57.280 included a medium-sized dog, a goose, a house cat, and a rat.
00:09:05.520 And surprisingly, as Dr. Anderke points out, 25% of people in America don't think they could beat up a rat.
00:09:12.660 Now, as somebody pointed out, this might have more to do with how seriously people took the poll.
00:09:21.460 I think 25% of the people would be jokesters and say to themselves,
00:09:25.240 I think it'd be funny if I answered this poll saying I can't beat up a rat.
00:09:29.300 But I could also imagine 25% of the country saying I'm not going to get near a rat.
00:09:34.720 How many women would fight a rat hand-to-hand?
00:09:37.680 I don't even know one.
00:09:40.540 In fact, I don't even know any men who would fight a rat.
00:09:43.480 So maybe this answer is pretty smart.
00:09:45.900 Because if I saw a rat, imagine you go into your basement and there's a rat there.
00:09:53.180 But unlike a regular rat, this is a fighting rat.
00:09:56.120 And you see the rat get up on its back legs and gets into a fighting stance like this.
00:10:01.820 What do you do?
00:10:04.100 Do you say to yourself, I'm an American, damn it.
00:10:07.940 You're not fighting any British guy now.
00:10:10.680 And I would just probably go in and fight that rat.
00:10:14.620 And probably, I don't know, two to one chance I'd win.
00:10:19.500 But I could imagine a lot of people would go into that basement.
00:10:22.400 They'd see the rat up on its back legs with its little front paws up in fighting position.
00:10:26.460 And they'd say to themselves, I'm out of here.
00:10:29.980 That rat looks crazy.
00:10:31.020 And they'd just run away.
00:10:32.680 So I think maybe this is an accurate survey.
00:10:35.640 I'd also like to think that I could be a medium-sized dog in a fair fight.
00:10:41.320 But, you know, Americans.
00:10:43.440 Americans, we think we can do everything.
00:10:46.160 Well, Hunter Biden's artwork, as you know, is going to go out for sale pretty soon.
00:10:50.820 And there are questions about the ethics of it.
00:10:54.580 One of the people asking questions about the ethics is Walter Schaub,
00:10:59.080 who headed the Office of Government Ethics under Obama and shortly under Trump.
00:11:07.220 He lasted a little while.
00:11:08.340 And he says, shame on POTUS, meaning Biden, if he doesn't ask Hunter to stop.
00:11:14.340 If that fails, he should ask that the names of buyers be released and pledged to notify us if any buyer ever meets with admin officials.
00:11:23.160 To me, this seems like a quite reasonable ethical stand.
00:11:27.040 But what it really tells to me, what it really tells me, to use actual words,
00:11:34.100 what it really tells me is that Don Jr. needs to get into the art business.
00:11:39.500 May I make some, just a brief pause to give some advice, some financial advice to Don Jr.
00:11:47.320 Don, if you're watching this, I know you get a lot of advice from a lot of people,
00:11:53.140 but this is some solid economic advice mixed with art.
00:11:58.680 If I were you, I would get busy making some art, and I would do stick figures,
00:12:05.820 and I would have those stick figures acting out Hunter Biden sorting coke off a stripper.
00:12:13.380 That's right, I would do a stick figure drawing of Hunter Biden snorting coke off a stripper,
00:12:20.120 and then I would put it up for sale for $1 million, signed Don Jr.
00:12:27.380 Now, somebody might buy that thing.
00:12:34.600 If there were only one, and if you knew that Don Jr. actually painted it,
00:12:40.100 and it was literally stick figures, and you could tell that his own hand had painted it,
00:12:45.120 and he signed it, somebody might pay a million dollars for it.
00:12:50.520 But I think it would be funny just to do it.
00:12:54.460 So if nobody pays anything for it, it's still funny.
00:12:56.800 Now, if, let's say Don Jr. made this painting,
00:13:00.940 and then turned it into digital art, and sold it as an NFT.
00:13:06.020 Now, if you don't follow the crypto world, that doesn't mean anything to you.
00:13:11.260 But you can sell a digital version of something that's sort of certified by the blockchain to be the original,
00:13:16.980 and you could probably get a million dollars for it.
00:13:19.440 And that's real.
00:13:21.220 You could probably actually legitimately get a million dollars for the NFT.
00:13:25.020 Now, it could also sell for $5,000.
00:13:27.440 It would be embarrassing, so I'm not sure you'd do it.
00:13:29.120 But all right, here's some more reports from fake news.
00:13:40.280 So the first report of fake news is the Florida Sun Sentinel reported that Florida,
00:13:48.080 I guess this was yesterday,
00:13:50.120 they said the state hit yet another record number of new daily cases on Sunday.
00:13:56.320 But is that real?
00:13:57.140 Did they really hit a record number of daily cases in Florida,
00:14:01.240 which would make Governor DeSantis look like a bad governor?
00:14:05.040 Well, no.
00:14:07.000 It's fake news.
00:14:08.760 Apparently, the CDC released,
00:14:11.840 they combined multiple days into one,
00:14:14.440 so that that one day inadvertently looked like a record.
00:14:19.980 So that's fake news.
00:14:22.020 Now, that's not to say that the COVID situation in Florida is good.
00:14:26.240 Because it doesn't look that great anywhere at the moment.
00:14:30.180 It looks like everybody's having some Delta variant problems.
00:14:33.980 But at least that news was fake.
00:14:36.320 Here's another one.
00:14:38.380 This is implied fake news.
00:14:41.660 So I couldn't really call this fake news,
00:14:44.440 but it's sort of implied fake news,
00:14:48.000 which I call implied fake news.
00:14:51.240 I don't really call it that, but let's call it that.
00:14:55.300 So in a CNN opinion piece,
00:14:57.160 so this is not the news, this is an opinion piece,
00:14:59.520 Stephan Collinson.
00:15:00.740 You might know him as a Trump attack dog,
00:15:04.300 but he writes about other stuff too.
00:15:05.680 And he says, he just puts this in a story about COVID.
00:15:13.160 He says,
00:15:13.940 this at a moment when pediatric units in his state
00:15:18.420 are filling with young COVID patients.
00:15:20.560 I think he's talking about Florida.
00:15:22.520 So do you think this is true?
00:15:23.840 It's in an opinion piece.
00:15:25.540 But it says pediatric units in his state
00:15:28.340 are filling with young COVID patients.
00:15:31.460 What's that mean?
00:15:32.740 What's it mean to be filling?
00:15:34.560 Question number one.
00:15:38.080 How much capacity do pediatric units have in the first place?
00:15:43.400 Because kids don't die that often, right?
00:15:46.360 Wouldn't you imagine that a pediatric unit
00:15:48.800 would be small by its nature?
00:15:52.160 So that's the first thing.
00:15:53.700 Are we filling up something that was small by its nature,
00:15:56.720 like a phone booth, which would be no big deal,
00:15:59.880 at least in terms of numbers, it wouldn't be a big deal.
00:16:02.020 It would be a big deal to anybody who lost a kid, obviously.
00:16:06.420 But you kind of need that, right?
00:16:09.080 Don't you kind of need that?
00:16:11.520 Secondly, what does it mean to be filling up?
00:16:15.680 Define filling up.
00:16:17.220 If you had a pediatric unit,
00:16:21.460 don't you think that you would operate it
00:16:23.740 at 60% to 80% capacity every day anyway?
00:16:26.980 So don't these things run at 60% to 80% capacity?
00:16:32.500 So what does it mean to fill it up?
00:16:34.280 Because he didn't say it's filled up.
00:16:36.440 He said filling up.
00:16:38.220 Right.
00:16:38.740 So I think 60% to 80% is normal.
00:16:42.160 Suppose they went from 60% to 80%.
00:16:44.880 It's a human tragedy for anybody involved in the actual illness.
00:16:48.760 But would it be fair to say that the units are filling up?
00:16:54.600 Well, sort of technically.
00:16:56.460 They would be in the direction of filling.
00:16:59.800 But are they in trouble?
00:17:02.020 Are they going to overflow?
00:17:03.980 Are there any that are beyond capacity?
00:17:06.340 And if they're beyond capacity,
00:17:08.020 can you use other facilities easily?
00:17:10.580 In other words,
00:17:11.440 is there anything special about a pediatric unit
00:17:14.280 that you couldn't just use general hospital facilities
00:17:16.760 if you need it to overflow?
00:17:19.540 So this is the sort of statement
00:17:21.760 that is probably technically accurate,
00:17:24.500 that the pediatric units are getting more patients than normal,
00:17:28.940 so i.e. filling up.
00:17:31.300 But will they fill up?
00:17:33.180 And will it become a problem?
00:17:34.420 I don't think we know that.
00:17:35.760 So that's sort of an indication of fake news.
00:17:39.480 Remember I told you, was it last year,
00:17:42.640 I told you that Republicans will be hunted
00:17:44.720 if Biden is elected.
00:17:46.760 And people laughed.
00:17:48.380 They laughed.
00:17:49.220 Ha, ha, ha, ha.
00:17:50.600 They laughed.
00:17:53.400 And then, of course,
00:17:54.420 we see what's happening with the January 6th people.
00:17:57.400 Many of them are bad actors
00:17:58.920 and need to be dealt with with the justice system.
00:18:02.140 Nobody's doubting that.
00:18:03.760 But there does seem to be an interest
00:18:07.700 in hunting down people who might have just been there.
00:18:11.780 And that doesn't look cool.
00:18:13.260 And now we're seeing another example.
00:18:16.140 I'm not going to give you the name of it,
00:18:17.880 but I just saw news.
00:18:19.440 There's a new documentary
00:18:20.360 on what happened to the MAGA supporting personalities.
00:18:25.420 So they're basically bayonetting the remaining...
00:18:29.760 Anybody who was associated with Trump
00:18:32.020 during the presidency and before,
00:18:35.180 they're trying to put them on a list
00:18:37.700 in this documentary,
00:18:39.380 whose name I won't give you,
00:18:41.100 to destroy whatever's left of their reputations.
00:18:45.580 Now, I happen to be on the list.
00:18:47.580 So apparently I'm in this documentary
00:18:49.300 as one of the Trump supporters
00:18:51.440 who was, I guess the context is,
00:18:54.060 we're all grifters.
00:18:55.700 So they have targeted me
00:18:57.700 as one of the people for destruction.
00:19:01.340 In this case, reputation and economic destruction.
00:19:05.200 Tim Pool, isn't it?
00:19:07.920 Now, interestingly,
00:19:11.100 at the time that I first said
00:19:12.640 that MAGA supporters would be hunted down,
00:19:15.260 Tim Pool was one of the people
00:19:16.440 who publicly said that that was crazy,
00:19:19.520 that that was going way too far.
00:19:22.860 And now Tim Pool is in a documentary
00:19:25.240 in which basically he and I
00:19:28.440 and other people associated with supporting Trump
00:19:31.700 are being rounded up for destruction.
00:19:36.000 Now, the way we're being hunted
00:19:37.440 is not using the typical weapons,
00:19:41.380 but it's using the weapons of 2021.
00:19:43.900 A weapon of 2021 is a documentary.
00:19:47.200 That's a weapon.
00:19:47.760 You can destroy somebody's life.
00:19:50.820 Social media would be a weapon.
00:19:52.820 So here is Tim Pool,
00:19:54.520 who, by the way, revised his opinion
00:19:56.780 as other events unfold.
00:20:00.440 So he and I were on the same opinion of this.
00:20:05.840 But here he is.
00:20:06.560 He's being targeted
00:20:07.380 specifically because he had said good things about Trump
00:20:11.500 in the context of being an independent journalist.
00:20:15.040 And me too.
00:20:18.500 Now, I don't know if I'll ever watch the documentary.
00:20:25.040 Like, I literally didn't even take note of the name of it
00:20:27.620 because it looks pretty weak and biased.
00:20:30.880 But there it is.
00:20:32.600 I know.
00:20:33.220 I feel like I can conclude that my prediction was correct
00:20:38.000 if you allow that a documentary is a weapon.
00:20:41.360 If you allow me that flexibility,
00:20:43.820 then I would say that this is further proof.
00:20:46.680 All right.
00:20:47.140 Here's good news for you.
00:20:49.100 Economists finally have a purpose.
00:20:52.980 You probably didn't see that coming.
00:20:55.520 You know, when I got my degree in economics many years ago,
00:20:59.420 it was a little bit like learning math.
00:21:02.100 As somebody once joked,
00:21:04.960 the only reason to learn higher-level math,
00:21:07.500 you know, the kind you never use in daily life,
00:21:09.500 the only reason to learn it
00:21:10.720 is that you'll become a math teacher someday
00:21:12.840 to teach more people something they don't need
00:21:15.700 unless they're going to become math teachers.
00:21:17.460 Now, of course, that's an exaggeration
00:21:19.940 because we need our scientists and our engineers
00:21:21.980 and our insurance people
00:21:25.100 and everybody else who deals with real higher-level math.
00:21:27.840 But I always wondered about the real value of economists,
00:21:33.880 even as I became one,
00:21:35.860 because when economists are talking about the economy,
00:21:40.160 they're all over the board and they don't agree,
00:21:42.980 as Andres Beckhaus, an economist himself,
00:21:46.640 said today on Twitter
00:21:47.940 that if you ask a bunch of economists
00:21:49.800 to tell you about the national debt,
00:21:52.720 they're just going to be all over the board.
00:21:54.100 So economists not only just seem like
00:21:57.820 often not very applied,
00:22:01.060 meaning not useful in the real world,
00:22:04.520 it especially seemed not useful in their own domain,
00:22:07.880 you know, economics,
00:22:09.640 but something's changed.
00:22:13.260 One of the things that economists are really good at
00:22:16.260 is figuring out how to analyze things
00:22:19.020 to know if cause and effect has been properly teased out of the data,
00:22:26.300 to know if the data is accurate,
00:22:28.260 to know if you've even compared the right things.
00:22:30.740 So the study of economics is about economics,
00:22:35.000 but in order to study economics,
00:22:36.880 you learn a set of tools
00:22:38.320 that just make you more rational
00:22:40.400 about understanding long-term versus short-term,
00:22:43.760 friction, sunk costs,
00:22:45.500 and a whole bunch of things
00:22:47.060 that are useful for just analyzing any situation.
00:22:51.600 And so I noted today,
00:22:54.800 because I saw another example of it,
00:22:56.420 whenever an economist,
00:22:57.780 somebody actually has economists in their profile,
00:23:01.860 whenever an economist enters a conversation,
00:23:07.360 I'm seeing a funny drawing on the locals channel
00:23:10.320 of a stick figure
00:23:11.240 snorting blow off a stripper.
00:23:15.500 I guess that's Hunter Biden.
00:23:18.880 So my point was that
00:23:20.300 when you take the skill set of an economist,
00:23:23.000 but you take it out of the realm of economics
00:23:24.920 and you apply it to Twitter,
00:23:26.580 where people are trying to figure out
00:23:28.180 what are my odds of dying from a vaccination
00:23:31.280 versus, you know, not getting a vaccination,
00:23:34.500 economists would just end conversations on Twitter.
00:23:38.740 I don't know if you've watched it,
00:23:40.160 but I've seen,
00:23:40.920 I can't tell you how many times I've watched it.
00:23:42.920 But there'll be this raging conversation,
00:23:46.640 and then one economist will come in,
00:23:48.940 make one comment,
00:23:50.420 and just shuts down the whole thing
00:23:51.900 because they actually know how to look at the data
00:23:54.620 and they tell you how to look at it correctly.
00:23:57.520 And the first time you hear how to do something correctly,
00:24:00.300 even if you were not an expert,
00:24:01.680 you say to yourself,
00:24:02.520 oh, crap, that's right.
00:24:04.700 Right?
00:24:04.860 But you have to hear it, usually.
00:24:06.740 It's the economist who says,
00:24:07.960 remember, you know, this is a sunk cost.
00:24:10.820 You shouldn't count that,
00:24:12.120 or whatever the topic is.
00:24:14.400 As soon as you hear it,
00:24:15.860 you say, oh, yeah, that is a sunk cost.
00:24:18.440 It doesn't matter because it's already spent.
00:24:20.660 But lots of the economic stuff,
00:24:23.340 you know, you need to hear it
00:24:24.420 before it sinks in that it matters to your current topic.
00:24:27.200 So I would say that here's my idea.
00:24:32.120 My idea is that we should look to economists
00:24:34.500 to help us on the logic
00:24:36.200 because economists have a weird combination
00:24:39.660 of math and statistical and psychological skills
00:24:44.660 because economics is partly the math
00:24:47.720 and partly what humans do.
00:24:49.960 You know, how do humans behave?
00:24:51.300 What is their psychology?
00:24:52.840 So if you take those two things,
00:24:54.740 understanding how math and logic
00:24:56.360 and comparing things work,
00:24:58.260 and you bash it against the psychology
00:24:59.980 of how a human behaves,
00:25:01.940 you're in really good shape
00:25:04.100 for figuring out how to analyze anything
00:25:07.140 in politics.
00:25:09.320 So I would say we should look to our economists
00:25:11.340 as our argument clarifiers.
00:25:15.000 You don't have to agree with them.
00:25:16.700 You could get a different conclusion than they get,
00:25:19.440 but let them clarify how to look at it,
00:25:22.040 just, you know, how to tease it out.
00:25:24.000 So this is my insight for today,
00:25:27.300 that economists as a class
00:25:30.340 went from largely useless,
00:25:35.220 you know, not completely useless, right?
00:25:36.900 The ones working in important fields,
00:25:39.240 doing important things.
00:25:40.240 Yeah, they're useful.
00:25:42.020 But 95% of people with an economics degree
00:25:45.400 are not going to do any economics.
00:25:47.320 You know, they're going to do some other related thing.
00:25:49.060 But now they might be the biggest asset
00:25:51.740 we have in the world
00:25:52.760 because economists are uniquely suited
00:25:55.900 for fixing arguments.
00:25:58.780 All right, here's an update on the election.
00:26:01.900 Big lie.
00:26:03.080 The big lie.
00:26:03.960 I use the big lie to refer to the idea
00:26:08.160 that we know for sure
00:26:09.360 that the election was either fair or unfair.
00:26:13.260 We don't know for sure.
00:26:15.500 We don't have any evidence
00:26:16.960 that there was widespread fraud.
00:26:18.760 Well, let me say,
00:26:19.560 we don't have court-validated proof
00:26:23.740 of any fraud.
00:26:26.640 But, so it would be a lie to say
00:26:28.540 it didn't happen because we don't know.
00:26:30.380 Nobody could audit it
00:26:33.340 at the level that would give you certainty.
00:26:36.500 But the new news is that
00:26:38.140 Dominion Voting Systems
00:26:40.200 is suing Newsmax
00:26:41.600 and OAN,
00:26:44.060 One American News Network,
00:26:45.580 and former Overstock CEO
00:26:47.100 Patrick Byrne for defamation.
00:26:49.940 Apparently all of those entities
00:26:51.560 and Patrick Byrne
00:26:53.440 have said things that
00:26:54.540 now Dominion
00:26:56.040 probably feels that their business
00:26:58.820 has been so damaged
00:26:59.960 that they need
00:27:01.080 $1.6 billion
00:27:02.160 in compensation.
00:27:04.640 Now,
00:27:05.540 here's my question,
00:27:07.460 and can somebody
00:27:08.960 who knows something
00:27:09.660 about the law
00:27:10.580 sort it out for me?
00:27:13.140 And the question is this.
00:27:15.140 Does this open
00:27:15.960 Dominion to Discovery?
00:27:19.600 Excuse me,
00:27:20.500 got to reboot
00:27:21.520 the locals platform.
00:27:23.540 It's got a 28-minute timer
00:27:25.040 because it's in beta.
00:27:26.060 so for some reason
00:27:28.620 every 28 minutes
00:27:29.940 of the time zone
00:27:30.620 we'll get that fixed.
00:27:35.520 All right.
00:27:36.680 Where are we?
00:27:37.460 One moment, please.
00:27:39.180 Bear with me.
00:27:40.840 We'll be right back on this.
00:27:45.540 All right.
00:27:46.620 We're good to go.
00:27:47.560 I think in a moment.
00:27:48.680 Allow my camera.
00:27:53.760 Boom.
00:27:54.460 Here we are.
00:27:55.480 Sorry about that.
00:27:56.180 That was a 28-minute problem.
00:27:58.280 All right.
00:27:59.640 So that's the question.
00:28:01.060 If anybody's a lawyer,
00:28:02.860 can you tell me
00:28:03.580 if Dominion gets into
00:28:05.140 a lawsuit
00:28:05.880 with Trick Byrne
00:28:07.800 and OAN
00:28:09.060 and Newsmax,
00:28:10.040 can those entities
00:28:11.180 make them prove
00:28:14.220 that they're wrong?
00:28:15.300 And does that give them
00:28:16.720 access to their software?
00:28:19.380 Hmm.
00:28:20.600 Because this is
00:28:21.620 an interesting thing
00:28:22.500 because I feel as if
00:28:24.580 this was always the play,
00:28:26.060 wasn't it?
00:28:27.120 Did Dominion walk
00:28:28.240 into a trap?
00:28:29.780 Because it feels like
00:28:30.760 the trap
00:28:31.340 was to get them
00:28:32.400 to sue.
00:28:35.060 Yeah.
00:28:35.620 Let's see what
00:28:36.440 Viva and Barnes
00:28:38.160 say about this
00:28:38.940 on their live stream.
00:28:39.980 They'll probably talk
00:28:40.820 about this.
00:28:41.320 I'm guessing this will be
00:28:42.120 on the topics.
00:28:43.500 So that would be
00:28:44.740 the best source
00:28:45.280 I would go to
00:28:45.820 to get an opinion
00:28:46.440 on that.
00:28:47.100 But this could be
00:28:47.720 a big deal.
00:28:50.480 If it's true
00:28:51.380 that this gives
00:28:52.280 the skeptics
00:28:54.520 some discovery
00:28:55.360 and some access
00:28:56.180 to the code
00:28:57.000 and access
00:28:58.180 to the servers,
00:28:59.020 or if it just proves
00:28:59.960 that you don't have access,
00:29:01.600 suppose the only
00:29:02.560 takeaway is that
00:29:03.540 there's no way
00:29:04.040 to audit the system.
00:29:06.260 That's kind of
00:29:06.740 a big takeaway, too.
00:29:09.440 All right.
00:29:09.940 How many of you
00:29:10.420 saw the viral video
00:29:11.620 of a doctor
00:29:13.200 whose name
00:29:13.840 I didn't get
00:29:14.560 talking to some group
00:29:17.820 and he seemed
00:29:19.880 to be some kind
00:29:20.440 of expert
00:29:20.880 on infectious diseases
00:29:22.160 and he was talking
00:29:24.620 about all the problems
00:29:26.800 with the vaccine
00:29:27.660 and that the vaccine
00:29:28.800 basically makes things
00:29:31.640 worse?
00:29:33.100 How many of you
00:29:33.640 saw that?
00:29:34.260 It's going all
00:29:34.820 over the place?
00:29:36.400 All right.
00:29:36.840 I was going to play it
00:29:38.340 and then see if we
00:29:41.160 could pull it apart.
00:29:42.520 But I'm just going
00:29:43.140 to give you a couple
00:29:43.680 of things to look at
00:29:45.140 and maybe give you
00:29:46.600 a different way
00:29:47.020 to look at it.
00:29:47.540 Remember I told you
00:29:48.540 there was a CIA expert
00:29:50.260 who had a list
00:29:52.280 of things to look
00:29:52.980 for to detect lies?
00:29:55.320 Now, I didn't see
00:29:57.420 anything in what
00:29:58.260 this gentleman did
00:29:59.100 that I would call
00:30:02.640 a lie, per se.
00:30:04.920 But I did see
00:30:05.820 a few things
00:30:06.600 that make me think
00:30:07.980 you shouldn't
00:30:09.480 treat him as credible.
00:30:11.840 Now, I think
00:30:12.520 he said a few things
00:30:13.620 that are true.
00:30:14.260 One of them is
00:30:15.120 that animals
00:30:17.800 could be a reservoir
00:30:18.740 for the coronavirus
00:30:20.480 and therefore,
00:30:21.800 no matter what
00:30:22.440 you do to humans,
00:30:23.840 since the vaccines
00:30:25.200 don't kill it,
00:30:26.260 it just helps
00:30:27.400 your symptoms.
00:30:28.780 So his thought
00:30:29.660 is that as long
00:30:30.680 as animals can get it,
00:30:32.060 animals can give it back.
00:30:33.440 It'll always have
00:30:34.120 a place to hide.
00:30:35.440 There's no way
00:30:36.020 to eradicate it.
00:30:37.220 You could eradicate
00:30:38.100 something like smallpox
00:30:39.460 because smallpox
00:30:40.760 won't hide in animals.
00:30:42.480 So if you get
00:30:42.960 all the humans
00:30:43.600 vaccinated,
00:30:44.220 well, you're done.
00:30:46.100 But you could get
00:30:47.100 every human vaccinated
00:30:48.360 for coronavirus
00:30:49.040 and if a frickin' squirrel
00:30:51.440 gives it to another human
00:30:52.940 someday,
00:30:53.840 it's back.
00:30:55.240 So I thought
00:30:56.020 that point
00:30:56.880 probably makes sense.
00:30:58.720 I'm no expert,
00:30:59.700 so don't take
00:31:00.160 my word for it.
00:31:05.060 Anyway,
00:31:05.560 he had a number
00:31:06.060 of other complaints,
00:31:07.940 but here's where
00:31:08.700 his credibility
00:31:09.560 fell apart.
00:31:10.560 He talked about
00:31:12.400 he's had 15 patients
00:31:14.480 he's treated
00:31:15.040 for COVID
00:31:15.540 and he gave them
00:31:17.020 zinc,
00:31:18.980 vitamin D,
00:31:20.160 and hydroxychloroquine
00:31:21.580 and all 15 of them
00:31:23.820 avoided hospitalization.
00:31:26.540 And therefore,
00:31:27.780 he says,
00:31:28.440 you've got these treatments
00:31:29.460 that are great
00:31:30.620 and they're an alternative
00:31:32.100 to vaccinations
00:31:33.060 and he treated
00:31:35.440 15 patients,
00:31:37.040 so he's confident
00:31:38.140 that it worked.
00:31:38.880 What do you think
00:31:40.720 of that?
00:31:42.580 Well,
00:31:43.080 in my opinion,
00:31:43.780 that eliminates
00:31:44.920 his credibility
00:31:45.640 because if he said,
00:31:48.000 look at these studies,
00:31:50.500 I would have said,
00:31:51.840 oh,
00:31:52.200 he's got data,
00:31:52.940 he's got studies,
00:31:53.780 we can look at them
00:31:54.360 either right or wrong,
00:31:55.580 but at least
00:31:56.060 it's scientific.
00:31:57.060 He's telling us
00:31:57.560 to look at studies.
00:31:58.760 But he's telling us
00:31:59.600 to look at his 15-patient
00:32:01.100 anecdotal experience.
00:32:03.980 If anybody
00:32:04.840 who is a person
00:32:06.360 of science
00:32:07.040 stands in front of you
00:32:08.960 and tries to tell you
00:32:10.500 that they have
00:32:11.240 the scientific thinking
00:32:13.600 and everybody else
00:32:14.540 is a jerk,
00:32:15.600 which is sort of
00:32:16.640 what this guy is saying.
00:32:17.640 He's like,
00:32:17.900 everybody else is dumb
00:32:19.000 and I'm a genius
00:32:20.360 and let me tell you
00:32:21.440 why I got everything right
00:32:22.960 and the whole scientific world
00:32:24.540 is wrong.
00:32:25.700 And then he tells us
00:32:26.600 that we should
00:32:27.220 draw some conclusion
00:32:28.660 from his experience
00:32:30.240 with 15 patients.
00:32:31.680 That sounds like somebody
00:32:34.040 who doesn't know
00:32:34.580 the first thing
00:32:35.140 about science.
00:32:36.500 It's way too small
00:32:37.660 a group,
00:32:39.000 he didn't have
00:32:39.480 any control,
00:32:40.640 I mean,
00:32:41.560 just everything
00:32:42.100 is wrong with that,
00:32:42.940 right?
00:32:43.200 It's purely observational,
00:32:44.520 has no value at all.
00:32:46.660 And what are the odds
00:32:47.820 all 50 of them
00:32:48.700 would have avoided
00:32:49.640 the hospital anyway?
00:32:51.540 Really high.
00:32:53.960 Pick 15 people
00:32:55.420 with COVID,
00:32:56.720 any 15.
00:32:58.800 What are the odds
00:32:59.640 that even one of them
00:33:00.400 is going to go
00:33:00.840 to the hospital?
00:33:01.480 It's low,
00:33:02.640 right?
00:33:03.060 So this actually
00:33:04.020 didn't prove anything.
00:33:06.360 All right.
00:33:10.420 So that was just
00:33:11.420 one of the things
00:33:12.060 that stood out.
00:33:13.800 He also,
00:33:14.560 I don't think
00:33:15.400 he mentioned
00:33:15.940 long COVID
00:33:16.820 as one of the variables.
00:33:19.120 So look for the dog
00:33:20.280 that's not barking.
00:33:21.780 Don't look just
00:33:22.700 for the things
00:33:23.280 he says that are true
00:33:24.360 because there are
00:33:24.920 a bunch of them
00:33:25.460 in there
00:33:25.780 that look to me
00:33:26.760 to be true
00:33:27.380 or they sound true
00:33:28.640 or they sound convincing.
00:33:29.520 But he doesn't mention
00:33:31.880 the benefit
00:33:33.020 of vaccinations
00:33:33.840 for protecting
00:33:35.140 against long COVID,
00:33:36.840 which would be
00:33:37.620 a gigantic part
00:33:38.780 of the whole decision.
00:33:40.400 If you leave that out
00:33:41.940 when you're talking
00:33:43.380 about that topic,
00:33:45.420 I feel like
00:33:45.960 your credibility
00:33:46.660 has to take
00:33:47.340 a big hit there.
00:33:48.700 So those are the things
00:33:49.740 I look at.
00:33:50.460 Does somebody look
00:33:51.080 at anecdotal stuff
00:33:52.260 and try to sell it
00:33:53.340 as persuasive?
00:33:54.540 That's no good.
00:33:56.720 And do they leave out
00:33:57.920 maybe the biggest variable?
00:33:59.980 Long COVID
00:34:00.460 could be the biggest variable
00:34:01.920 in the long run.
00:34:04.120 So here's what I would say.
00:34:06.060 The animal reserve argument
00:34:07.600 sounds pretty strong.
00:34:08.840 He's got some other arguments
00:34:09.900 that sound pretty strong.
00:34:11.740 I have a feeling
00:34:12.580 there's something
00:34:13.820 to what he's saying.
00:34:15.640 You know,
00:34:15.800 he's not a complete grifter.
00:34:17.380 It doesn't look like that
00:34:18.180 to me.
00:34:18.820 There's something there,
00:34:20.140 but I wouldn't trust it.
00:34:22.280 Honestly.
00:34:22.720 So my take is that
00:34:24.600 don't put too much credibility
00:34:26.100 in that.
00:34:26.700 There are at least two tells
00:34:28.600 for something wrong.
00:34:31.540 So I'll just put that out there.
00:34:33.800 Meanwhile,
00:34:34.380 in related news,
00:34:35.520 wild U.S. deer
00:34:36.640 have been found
00:34:37.460 with coronavirus antibodies.
00:34:40.120 So a study found
00:34:42.080 that 40% of deer
00:34:43.900 that were tested
00:34:44.660 had coronavirus antibodies.
00:34:48.360 Deer.
00:34:49.340 40% of them
00:34:50.400 had the antibodies.
00:34:52.720 But they said
00:34:54.680 the risk of animals
00:34:55.620 spreading the COVID
00:34:57.380 to people
00:34:58.480 is considered low,
00:34:59.660 the USDA told
00:35:00.580 National Geographic.
00:35:01.900 Well,
00:35:02.380 I think the risk
00:35:03.420 is low for most of us.
00:35:06.260 But I don't know
00:35:08.120 who needs to hear this.
00:35:10.720 But if you see
00:35:11.440 a dead deer,
00:35:14.340 let's say on the street,
00:35:16.960 maybe it's roadkill.
00:35:17.900 If you see a dead deer,
00:35:19.640 do not rub your penis
00:35:20.980 on his face
00:35:21.740 because you're just
00:35:23.000 asking for trouble.
00:35:24.800 Now,
00:35:25.000 if you were to stay away
00:35:25.780 from the deer,
00:35:26.300 I think you'd be pretty safe.
00:35:27.940 But if you're a Chinese guy
00:35:30.900 who likes rubbing
00:35:32.380 your penis on stuff,
00:35:33.440 it's just stay away
00:35:34.040 from the deer
00:35:34.540 because 40% of them
00:35:36.400 have been exposed
00:35:37.320 to coronavirus.
00:35:40.380 All right.
00:35:40.980 I was in a few retail stores
00:35:45.180 in the last few days,
00:35:46.880 clothing stores,
00:35:48.340 and I was amused
00:35:50.780 by the fact
00:35:51.380 that wokeness
00:35:52.240 has destroyed advertising
00:35:53.560 as we know it.
00:35:55.240 What is the point
00:35:56.000 of advertising?
00:35:57.620 Isn't the point
00:35:58.340 of advertising
00:35:59.060 to make you want
00:36:00.640 somebody's product more?
00:36:02.760 Right?
00:36:03.560 That's the basic idea.
00:36:05.620 But wokeness
00:36:06.640 has caused
00:36:07.580 these retail establishments
00:36:09.220 to change out
00:36:10.520 their highly attractive models.
00:36:13.060 And usually this is
00:36:14.120 in the context
00:36:14.780 of female clothing.
00:36:16.820 So they've gotten rid
00:36:18.280 of their models
00:36:21.000 that look like
00:36:21.560 they have eating disorders,
00:36:22.820 but people like it anyway.
00:36:25.380 People like looking at it
00:36:26.540 even if they don't think
00:36:27.340 they're healthy.
00:36:29.380 And that probably sells clothes
00:36:31.080 because people look at models
00:36:32.840 wearing the clothes
00:36:33.720 and they say,
00:36:34.360 my goodness,
00:36:35.000 those clothes look good.
00:36:36.540 But it's because
00:36:37.140 the model, right?
00:36:38.560 The models make
00:36:39.200 the clothes look good.
00:36:40.560 So what happens
00:36:41.400 when you get woke
00:36:42.380 as these stores
00:36:43.320 I was in did
00:36:44.500 and they've changed
00:36:45.180 their advertisement
00:36:45.880 to feature
00:36:47.580 what I'll call
00:36:48.320 more ordinary
00:36:49.920 or normal people.
00:36:51.960 Now when I say
00:36:52.720 normal and ordinary people,
00:36:54.240 I mean fat.
00:36:55.460 All right.
00:36:55.820 Now I don't do fat shaming.
00:36:58.200 Don't laugh at that.
00:37:00.080 We don't do fat shaming here
00:37:01.380 because I don't believe
00:37:02.360 in free will
00:37:03.100 and I don't think
00:37:03.720 anybody chooses
00:37:04.460 to be overweight.
00:37:06.480 I mean some people do.
00:37:07.560 I mean there's always somebody.
00:37:08.880 But generally speaking,
00:37:10.500 people are fighting
00:37:11.980 their weight problems
00:37:13.120 and it's hard
00:37:13.680 because the modern American diet
00:37:15.920 doesn't give you
00:37:16.560 much of a chance.
00:37:18.220 But forget about
00:37:21.140 the fat shaming.
00:37:24.100 I'm just making a point
00:37:25.220 that if you look at
00:37:26.500 a poster
00:37:27.100 and you're in the store
00:37:28.600 to buy these clothes
00:37:29.480 and you see a,
00:37:31.980 let's say,
00:37:32.780 not a model,
00:37:34.340 can we be kind?
00:37:35.740 If you see
00:37:36.300 not a thin model
00:37:37.760 wearing them,
00:37:38.880 do you say to yourself
00:37:39.680 I've got to get
00:37:40.260 some of those clothes?
00:37:42.160 Because I don't think so.
00:37:43.920 I think the whole point
00:37:45.040 of modeling
00:37:45.460 is you're associating
00:37:46.540 something that people
00:37:48.260 respond to reflexively.
00:37:50.260 An attractive woman
00:37:51.420 in the mating years,
00:37:54.200 you know,
00:37:54.380 the most universally
00:37:55.280 attractive thing
00:37:56.080 in all of humankind,
00:37:57.800 a young,
00:37:58.580 attractive woman
00:37:59.280 in her mating years.
00:38:01.820 And you replace that
00:38:02.800 with, you know,
00:38:04.180 older people
00:38:04.860 and, you know,
00:38:05.980 a variety of,
00:38:07.280 let's say,
00:38:07.580 humankind
00:38:08.000 that is not
00:38:09.480 visually attractive.
00:38:11.220 Have you not
00:38:12.080 been forced
00:38:13.280 to make people
00:38:14.740 dislike your product
00:38:16.320 to be woke?
00:38:18.800 Because I guess
00:38:20.080 they still have
00:38:20.580 a marketing budget,
00:38:22.080 so they still
00:38:22.760 produce marketing,
00:38:24.000 it's just they're not
00:38:24.760 allowed to do it
00:38:25.400 in a way that works.
00:38:26.980 Pairing the clothing
00:38:27.780 with something attractive.
00:38:29.500 So now they're
00:38:30.080 pairing their clothing
00:38:30.860 with something,
00:38:32.500 I hate to say it,
00:38:33.480 but unattractive.
00:38:35.820 Unattractive.
00:38:37.000 Intentionally.
00:38:38.100 And by the way,
00:38:38.640 when I say unattractive,
00:38:39.660 I mean they chose
00:38:40.420 them to be unattractive,
00:38:42.260 you know,
00:38:42.580 knowing that this
00:38:43.500 would not be the standard
00:38:44.500 that the public
00:38:45.500 at large would find
00:38:46.460 attractive.
00:38:47.120 It's intentional.
00:38:48.000 It's not my opinion.
00:38:49.800 So,
00:38:51.120 that's one example
00:38:52.240 where wokeness
00:38:53.040 actually destroyed
00:38:53.960 the entire marketing,
00:38:55.360 the entire marketing
00:38:57.360 profession
00:38:58.300 that's been decimated.
00:39:00.420 I'm sorry.
00:39:01.740 Pause.
00:39:03.040 Hold on for a moment.
00:39:04.040 Pause.
00:39:04.900 The pedantic people
00:39:05.980 are going nuts right now.
00:39:07.280 Let me,
00:39:08.440 let me pause
00:39:09.880 and say yes.
00:39:11.600 I do know
00:39:12.160 that decimated
00:39:12.860 means a 10% reduction.
00:39:16.140 I do know that.
00:39:17.400 I did use the word
00:39:18.800 in its more
00:39:19.420 casual form,
00:39:21.060 which people use
00:39:21.940 to mean,
00:39:22.440 you know,
00:39:22.740 totally destroyed,
00:39:23.740 which is the opposite
00:39:24.400 of its meaning,
00:39:25.100 really.
00:39:26.360 Can you deal with that?
00:39:28.840 Can I get on?
00:39:29.860 Can I go?
00:39:31.000 Are we good?
00:39:32.280 All right.
00:39:33.220 Thank you.
00:39:34.820 So,
00:39:35.480 they,
00:39:36.560 here's another example.
00:39:37.820 I can't watch
00:39:38.440 car insurance commercials
00:39:40.120 because they're so
00:39:41.300 anti-male.
00:39:42.020 Can you?
00:39:44.800 When I watch
00:39:45.460 those car insurance
00:39:46.340 companies where
00:39:47.000 they make all men
00:39:47.940 look like morons,
00:39:49.160 but women are geniuses,
00:39:51.060 I just say to myself,
00:39:52.880 make a mental note
00:39:53.580 of that company
00:39:54.180 because they're assholes.
00:39:55.460 I don't want to
00:39:55.900 buy their product.
00:39:57.260 Now,
00:39:58.500 do you think
00:39:58.940 that's what they intended?
00:40:00.500 Do you think
00:40:00.940 that the insurance company
00:40:01.980 who made those commercials
00:40:03.020 and paid people
00:40:04.300 to do marketing
00:40:05.080 and advertising
00:40:05.840 and all that,
00:40:06.680 do you think
00:40:07.080 that what they paid for
00:40:08.260 was for me
00:40:10.000 to hate their product
00:40:11.020 and their company
00:40:11.720 by making commercials
00:40:13.240 that target me
00:40:14.000 as a moron?
00:40:15.680 I feel like
00:40:16.460 the whole marketing industry
00:40:17.860 has just fallen apart.
00:40:19.640 It's all fallen apart.
00:40:21.060 Here's my favorite one.
00:40:24.140 Did you hear
00:40:24.780 what was Subway?
00:40:26.580 The Subway sandwich people?
00:40:29.460 So,
00:40:30.120 apparently,
00:40:30.920 there's some pushback
00:40:32.140 about having
00:40:33.080 Megan Rapinoe
00:40:34.160 as part of
00:40:35.120 their advertising campaign
00:40:36.240 because some people
00:40:38.000 are calling her
00:40:38.640 un-American
00:40:39.360 for protesting
00:40:40.560 the flag.
00:40:43.040 Now,
00:40:44.440 poor Subway
00:40:45.500 has had some
00:40:47.040 bad experience
00:40:48.140 with advertising.
00:40:48.980 Do you know
00:40:50.220 what I mean?
00:40:50.660 Do you know
00:40:50.900 what I mean?
00:40:51.980 Yeah,
00:40:52.480 they had Jared
00:40:53.360 as their symbol.
00:40:56.220 Now,
00:40:56.580 I don't want to
00:40:57.420 get in trouble
00:40:59.600 for saying something
00:41:00.480 about Jared.
00:41:03.760 Is Jared in prison?
00:41:05.440 Somebody says
00:41:06.060 he's in prison.
00:41:07.180 Let's just say
00:41:07.840 he was accused
00:41:09.080 of being a pedophile.
00:41:09.940 So that was
00:41:11.140 their first
00:41:11.780 take at marketing
00:41:13.820 was to
00:41:15.400 associate with
00:41:16.940 a pedophile.
00:41:18.220 And they thought,
00:41:19.120 well,
00:41:19.860 we can't make
00:41:21.100 that kind of mistake
00:41:21.880 twice.
00:41:24.380 We're never going
00:41:25.240 to make that mistake
00:41:25.960 twice.
00:41:26.960 So they decided
00:41:28.120 to go with
00:41:29.120 a good
00:41:29.800 American,
00:41:31.220 you know,
00:41:31.460 all-American
00:41:32.200 Olympic
00:41:32.980 athlete
00:41:34.060 who is now
00:41:34.900 being branded
00:41:35.560 as anti-American.
00:41:38.480 Now,
00:41:40.040 if you asked her,
00:41:40.980 she would not
00:41:41.440 say she's
00:41:41.940 anti-American.
00:41:43.180 So,
00:41:43.560 you know,
00:41:43.960 I think
00:41:44.480 only Megan Rapinoe
00:41:46.180 gets to say
00:41:46.940 what she is
00:41:47.840 in her mind.
00:41:49.180 But certainly
00:41:50.140 the way people
00:41:50.940 are perceiving
00:41:51.840 her as
00:41:52.400 anti-American,
00:41:53.560 we're not going
00:41:54.260 to argue with that,
00:41:55.520 some significant
00:41:56.560 portion of the
00:41:57.280 public.
00:41:57.600 And so,
00:41:59.680 how did
00:42:00.880 wokeness
00:42:01.600 work out
00:42:02.320 for
00:42:03.160 Subway?
00:42:05.660 So Subway
00:42:06.600 gets bitten
00:42:07.600 by an accused
00:42:08.640 pedophile
00:42:09.220 and goes to
00:42:10.440 the wokeness
00:42:11.440 cesspool
00:42:14.260 and just like
00:42:15.340 gets killed
00:42:16.300 twice.
00:42:17.780 So marketing
00:42:18.560 is not so
00:42:19.820 useful in
00:42:20.740 these days.
00:42:21.800 Now,
00:42:22.120 let's talk about
00:42:22.640 the Rasmussen
00:42:23.380 poll.
00:42:24.400 They did a poll
00:42:25.280 on do you agree
00:42:26.280 or disagree
00:42:27.100 on this
00:42:27.900 statement.
00:42:29.040 Defund the
00:42:29.540 police has
00:42:30.000 to happen.
00:42:30.940 We need to
00:42:31.460 defund the
00:42:31.960 police and
00:42:32.400 put that
00:42:32.780 money into
00:42:33.340 social safety
00:42:34.360 nets.
00:42:35.220 So that was
00:42:35.540 the question,
00:42:36.020 how many
00:42:36.280 people agreed
00:42:36.860 or not.
00:42:37.820 Strongly
00:42:38.340 agreed,
00:42:38.900 12%.
00:42:39.740 Somewhat
00:42:41.220 agree,
00:42:42.340 19%.
00:42:43.420 So we
00:42:45.260 got 31%
00:42:46.860 that agree
00:42:47.640 in some
00:42:48.160 fashion with
00:42:49.360 defunding
00:42:49.880 the police.
00:42:51.520 But somewhat
00:42:52.340 disagree,
00:42:52.840 12%.
00:42:53.420 Strongly
00:42:53.980 disagree,
00:42:54.480 51%.
00:42:55.360 So the
00:42:55.660 big majority
00:42:56.180 disagree.
00:42:57.100 With defunding
00:42:57.900 police.
00:42:58.460 And then
00:42:58.860 not sure,
00:42:59.460 6%.
00:43:00.100 Remember I
00:43:01.240 always tell
00:43:01.600 you that
00:43:02.000 25%
00:43:03.260 of every
00:43:04.820 rule are
00:43:05.220 more funds.
00:43:06.620 Where's the
00:43:07.100 25% in
00:43:08.080 this one?
00:43:09.540 Start kidding
00:43:10.140 a little bit.
00:43:10.900 I'll speculate.
00:43:13.260 First of all,
00:43:14.100 the people who
00:43:14.740 somewhat agree
00:43:15.920 that on
00:43:17.740 defunding the
00:43:18.420 police,
00:43:19.020 that may not
00:43:19.760 be what you
00:43:20.280 think.
00:43:21.300 Because I'm
00:43:22.420 in that category.
00:43:23.720 I somewhat
00:43:25.460 agree.
00:43:26.720 And here's
00:43:27.280 what I
00:43:27.560 mean.
00:43:27.840 If you
00:43:28.040 asked me
00:43:28.380 this question,
00:43:29.000 do you
00:43:29.300 somewhat
00:43:29.880 agree to
00:43:31.440 move some
00:43:31.960 money from
00:43:32.400 the police
00:43:32.940 budgets to
00:43:33.700 social safety
00:43:34.800 nets, I
00:43:35.660 would answer
00:43:36.160 as someone
00:43:36.860 who was a
00:43:37.900 manager of
00:43:38.600 large budgets
00:43:39.360 for a large
00:43:40.380 corporation.
00:43:41.720 Hold on,
00:43:42.460 hold on,
00:43:44.300 hold on.
00:43:45.700 This is going
00:43:46.280 to be better
00:43:46.720 than you think.
00:43:48.220 Don't get
00:43:48.680 ahead of me and
00:43:49.400 think that I
00:43:50.020 went all
00:43:50.500 Bernie Sanders.
00:43:51.960 You'll like
00:43:52.600 it.
00:43:53.340 Just hold
00:43:53.760 on.
00:43:55.680 Here's my
00:43:56.480 argument.
00:43:56.940 If you have
00:43:57.400 managed large
00:43:58.320 budgets, you
00:43:59.040 know the
00:43:59.380 following is
00:43:59.920 true.
00:44:00.860 You can
00:44:01.220 always make
00:44:01.660 them better.
00:44:03.100 So there's a
00:44:03.820 large budget
00:44:04.480 for police.
00:44:05.920 There's a
00:44:06.420 large budget
00:44:07.200 for social
00:44:07.800 services.
00:44:09.360 Anybody who's
00:44:10.100 ever worked
00:44:10.600 on budgets
00:44:11.200 will tell you
00:44:12.460 what I'm going
00:44:12.880 to tell you
00:44:13.200 right now.
00:44:14.300 You could do
00:44:14.840 a better job
00:44:15.380 with those
00:44:15.660 budgets.
00:44:16.640 Because you
00:44:16.940 always can.
00:44:17.760 There's no
00:44:18.380 situation where
00:44:19.340 you cannot say,
00:44:20.140 okay, but
00:44:20.500 what if,
00:44:21.180 we took
00:44:21.840 some of
00:44:22.320 the stuff
00:44:22.740 for the
00:44:23.060 police that
00:44:23.620 wasn't
00:44:23.900 helping,
00:44:25.320 and we
00:44:25.680 just try
00:44:26.280 moving that
00:44:27.020 over to
00:44:27.540 some place
00:44:28.180 that we
00:44:28.860 know helps
00:44:29.480 in social
00:44:30.060 safety nets,
00:44:31.480 but it's
00:44:31.920 underfunded.
00:44:33.780 You don't
00:44:34.300 think you
00:44:35.180 could move
00:44:35.600 $1 from
00:44:37.400 a police
00:44:37.860 budget where
00:44:38.520 it's being
00:44:38.900 wasted in
00:44:39.820 some fashion.
00:44:41.200 Police work
00:44:41.920 is not
00:44:42.260 wasted, but
00:44:43.180 some part of
00:44:43.940 every big
00:44:44.400 budget is
00:44:44.900 wasted.
00:44:45.700 There's no
00:44:46.020 exception to
00:44:46.620 that.
00:44:47.420 You don't
00:44:47.840 think you
00:44:48.160 could move
00:44:48.440 a little
00:44:48.720 bit, do a
00:44:50.240 little bit
00:44:50.560 of tuning?
00:44:51.500 Of course
00:44:51.800 you could.
00:44:52.600 So if you
00:44:53.020 asked me this
00:44:53.580 question, I
00:44:54.160 would answer
00:44:54.560 like a
00:44:55.060 little bit
00:44:58.000 too informed
00:45:00.580 budget person,
00:45:01.700 and I'd say,
00:45:02.120 of course you
00:45:02.540 can.
00:45:03.400 You can
00:45:03.920 improve any
00:45:04.400 budget.
00:45:05.280 That's just
00:45:05.740 always true.
00:45:06.440 But as soon
00:45:08.080 as you put it
00:45:08.500 into this
00:45:08.840 political context,
00:45:09.960 people are going
00:45:10.380 to run away
00:45:10.820 from it.
00:45:11.540 So I think
00:45:11.940 that the people
00:45:12.460 who said
00:45:12.800 somewhat agree
00:45:13.520 might actually
00:45:14.200 be the
00:45:14.640 sophisticated
00:45:15.180 people answering
00:45:16.380 along with
00:45:17.860 a few
00:45:18.160 morons mixed
00:45:19.100 in there.
00:45:20.320 But what
00:45:20.780 about the
00:45:21.140 people who
00:45:21.660 somewhat
00:45:22.960 disagree?
00:45:25.240 Well, I
00:45:26.540 don't think
00:45:26.960 those people
00:45:27.520 understand that
00:45:28.980 budgets are
00:45:29.900 as flexible
00:45:30.680 as I just
00:45:32.080 explained.
00:45:33.080 And I think
00:45:33.460 the people who
00:45:33.960 disagree with
00:45:34.660 it somewhat
00:45:35.320 are probably
00:45:36.740 missing a
00:45:37.660 nuance.
00:45:38.900 The people
00:45:39.620 who strongly
00:45:40.340 disagree would
00:45:41.760 also be missing
00:45:42.640 the nuance,
00:45:43.240 but I don't
00:45:44.200 think they're
00:45:44.580 dumb.
00:45:45.900 Because in a
00:45:46.520 political context,
00:45:47.740 taking the
00:45:48.440 simple, easy
00:45:49.560 approach, the
00:45:53.180 simplicity of it
00:45:54.080 might be more
00:45:55.520 important than
00:45:56.060 the nuance.
00:45:57.040 So I think
00:45:57.560 people are just
00:45:58.140 saying, no,
00:45:58.880 what you really
00:45:59.460 mean to do is
00:46:00.160 take police off
00:46:01.040 the streets.
00:46:01.980 No way.
00:46:02.780 There's no way
00:46:03.220 that works.
00:46:03.820 They strongly
00:46:04.360 disagree.
00:46:05.080 So they're
00:46:05.320 probably smart,
00:46:06.400 even though they
00:46:07.420 give up some
00:46:07.920 nuance.
00:46:09.040 And they're not
00:46:09.800 sure, 6%.
00:46:10.800 So I think
00:46:12.100 there are some
00:46:12.580 dumb people
00:46:13.080 spread across
00:46:14.240 both groups
00:46:15.180 here.
00:46:15.820 And people
00:46:16.400 answer this
00:46:17.480 kind of
00:46:17.780 question
00:46:18.080 politically.
00:46:19.220 They don't
00:46:19.660 answer it
00:46:20.240 technically in
00:46:21.560 the way they
00:46:21.980 think is
00:46:22.380 exactly correct.
00:46:23.760 They're going
00:46:24.100 to answer it
00:46:24.560 the way they
00:46:24.940 want you to
00:46:25.460 see the
00:46:25.820 poll.
00:46:27.000 So I think
00:46:28.020 there's some
00:46:28.420 combination of
00:46:29.120 25% in the
00:46:30.340 strongly agree
00:46:31.160 and the
00:46:31.580 somewhat disagree.
00:46:33.160 So I think
00:46:33.600 the dumb
00:46:33.960 people are on
00:46:34.920 both sides in
00:46:35.560 this case,
00:46:36.280 somewhat hidden.
00:46:39.160 One of the
00:46:39.820 other questions
00:46:40.340 on it was,
00:46:41.040 are most police
00:46:41.840 officers racist?
00:46:43.080 18% said
00:46:45.440 yes.
00:46:47.100 68% said
00:46:48.260 no.
00:46:49.200 Now this is
00:46:49.880 another one where
00:46:50.600 the interpretation
00:46:51.300 of the question
00:46:52.040 matters.
00:46:54.480 If you ask me,
00:46:56.100 are most police
00:46:57.080 racist, if I knew
00:46:58.480 it was a political
00:46:59.200 question, I'd say
00:47:00.000 no.
00:47:01.180 No.
00:47:01.960 Because I'd say
00:47:02.660 they don't act
00:47:03.300 that way.
00:47:03.900 In general,
00:47:05.500 they don't act
00:47:06.060 that way.
00:47:06.940 Statistically.
00:47:07.460 But, if you
00:47:09.960 ask me, not in
00:47:10.940 terms of a
00:47:11.920 survey, you
00:47:12.640 just ask me
00:47:13.240 personally, are
00:47:15.080 most police
00:47:16.720 officers racist?
00:47:17.660 I'd say, people
00:47:19.400 are racist.
00:47:21.260 How could they
00:47:21.940 not be?
00:47:22.640 Because they're
00:47:23.120 people.
00:47:23.920 If you take
00:47:24.380 the set of
00:47:26.700 human beings,
00:47:28.640 my opinion is
00:47:29.580 that 100% of
00:47:30.640 us are racist
00:47:31.360 by reflex.
00:47:33.340 By reflex.
00:47:34.820 We're racist
00:47:35.660 by reflex.
00:47:36.720 We're born
00:47:37.060 that way.
00:47:37.620 We're designed
00:47:38.060 that way.
00:47:38.780 We evolve
00:47:39.220 that way.
00:47:40.820 We evolve
00:47:41.860 to prefer
00:47:42.380 things that
00:47:42.880 look like
00:47:43.240 us.
00:47:44.080 Our own
00:47:44.520 kids, our
00:47:45.100 people in
00:47:45.500 the tribe.
00:47:46.120 It's just
00:47:46.420 normal.
00:47:47.360 But, do
00:47:48.500 you have the
00:47:49.140 higher level
00:47:50.300 thinking and
00:47:51.740 morality where
00:47:52.960 you can not
00:47:53.540 act that way?
00:47:55.880 So if you
00:47:56.340 ask me, I'd
00:47:56.860 say, yeah,
00:47:58.160 every person
00:47:59.500 in every
00:47:59.920 profession is
00:48:00.540 a racist.
00:48:01.520 No exceptions.
00:48:02.660 Not you,
00:48:03.340 not me,
00:48:03.840 nobody.
00:48:04.620 There's no
00:48:04.900 exceptions.
00:48:06.260 Because you're
00:48:06.680 human.
00:48:07.540 You're all
00:48:08.280 racist, period.
00:48:10.080 But some
00:48:10.740 people act on
00:48:11.440 it.
00:48:11.760 Some people
00:48:12.180 don't, etc.
00:48:13.800 Here's where I
00:48:14.840 think it would
00:48:15.400 be a more
00:48:16.240 productive way to
00:48:17.220 go with that
00:48:18.240 question.
00:48:19.500 I think we
00:48:20.060 should admit
00:48:21.380 it and mock
00:48:22.040 it.
00:48:23.760 I think the
00:48:24.380 way you get
00:48:24.840 rid of racism
00:48:25.600 is to admit
00:48:27.640 it and then
00:48:29.100 mock it.
00:48:30.020 In yourself
00:48:30.900 as well as
00:48:31.900 others.
00:48:32.180 Let me give
00:48:32.500 you an example.
00:48:32.920 I think you
00:48:35.200 would all
00:48:35.460 agree that
00:48:36.760 it's true
00:48:37.240 that all
00:48:38.160 Italians,
00:48:39.280 two things we
00:48:39.980 know about
00:48:40.420 all Italians,
00:48:41.600 they make
00:48:42.320 excellent spaghetti
00:48:43.320 sauce and
00:48:44.940 they're in the
00:48:45.360 mafia.
00:48:45.580 Now, you
00:48:47.920 recognize these
00:48:48.680 as stereotypes,
00:48:49.660 right?
00:48:50.600 Only half
00:48:51.380 true.
00:48:52.800 All Italian
00:48:53.540 people do
00:48:54.080 make excellent
00:48:54.740 spaghetti sauce,
00:48:55.480 you just have
00:48:55.920 to ask them.
00:48:57.360 But there are
00:48:58.140 not very many
00:48:59.020 of them in
00:48:59.540 the mafia.
00:49:00.480 Very few of
00:49:01.120 them in the
00:49:01.540 mafia.
00:49:02.900 Okay, you
00:49:03.380 see what I
00:49:03.640 did?
00:49:04.700 I took a
00:49:05.540 stereotype and
00:49:07.000 I just sort of
00:49:07.540 mocked it as
00:49:08.080 being stupid and
00:49:09.000 I laughed about
00:49:09.660 it, blah, blah,
00:49:10.880 blah.
00:49:11.240 Is that not
00:49:12.040 healthier?
00:49:13.880 Because in a
00:49:14.600 sense I'm
00:49:14.980 mocking myself
00:49:15.740 for thinking,
00:49:16.600 you know, even
00:49:17.020 saying that all
00:49:17.700 Italians make
00:49:18.360 good spaghetti
00:49:18.940 sauce, even
00:49:19.760 though it's
00:49:20.020 true.
00:49:20.800 Just ask
00:49:21.280 them.
00:49:22.340 All right.
00:49:23.160 Why can't we
00:49:23.700 laugh about that?
00:49:25.180 Why can't we
00:49:25.900 just have fun
00:49:26.480 with it?
00:49:27.340 When a black
00:49:29.000 woman told me
00:49:30.040 that one of the
00:49:30.560 stereotypes about
00:49:31.380 white people is
00:49:32.080 that we like
00:49:32.560 cheese, I
00:49:33.900 laughed for a
00:49:34.440 week.
00:49:35.460 Because it's
00:49:35.960 true.
00:49:37.420 White people
00:49:38.040 like cheese.
00:49:39.100 Or it seems
00:49:39.680 true.
00:49:40.320 It's funny,
00:49:41.180 either way.
00:49:42.540 So it seems
00:49:43.400 to me, now of
00:49:44.180 course I'm
00:49:45.200 picking the
00:49:45.580 harmless ones,
00:49:46.420 right?
00:49:46.620 Liking cheese
00:49:47.220 and stuff.
00:49:47.580 But I think the
00:49:49.540 rest of them are
00:49:50.060 equally mockable.
00:49:51.860 Because, you
00:49:52.900 know, if there's
00:49:53.360 anybody out there
00:49:54.080 who thinks,
00:49:54.940 what, if you're
00:49:56.260 an Elbonian you
00:49:57.260 can't work in
00:49:58.060 STEM or
00:49:58.600 something?
00:49:59.520 I mean, you
00:49:59.840 would just have
00:50:00.240 to be an
00:50:00.620 idiot to think
00:50:01.980 that everybody
00:50:03.420 in some group
00:50:04.420 can't do
00:50:05.120 something.
00:50:06.760 Like, there's
00:50:07.240 too much
00:50:07.560 evidence against
00:50:08.220 that.
00:50:09.300 So I think we
00:50:10.060 should treat
00:50:10.560 racism as just
00:50:12.380 a special branch
00:50:13.480 of stupidity and
00:50:15.100 have fun with it.
00:50:15.860 Just mock it.
00:50:16.700 And we can just
00:50:17.360 mock it out of
00:50:18.220 importance,
00:50:20.140 anyway.
00:50:20.380 Larry Elder,
00:50:23.160 as you know,
00:50:23.740 running for
00:50:24.240 governor of
00:50:25.700 California.
00:50:26.480 And it looks
00:50:26.760 like the
00:50:27.320 recall is going
00:50:28.020 to be successful
00:50:28.900 in terms of
00:50:29.860 the initial
00:50:30.960 vote to
00:50:31.380 recall.
00:50:31.960 But there's
00:50:32.260 a second
00:50:32.780 component of
00:50:33.540 that, which
00:50:34.680 is that the
00:50:36.320 governor,
00:50:37.140 Newsom, can
00:50:37.680 run for
00:50:38.120 re-election at
00:50:38.960 the same time
00:50:39.800 in the same
00:50:40.320 vote as he's
00:50:41.040 recalled, if I
00:50:42.320 understand that
00:50:42.920 right.
00:50:43.900 So Larry Elder
00:50:45.420 looks to be the
00:50:46.440 leading contender.
00:50:48.080 And I looked
00:50:49.600 at his web
00:50:49.980 page to see
00:50:50.620 what he's
00:50:51.260 doing persuasion
00:50:52.180 wise.
00:50:53.340 And here's his
00:50:54.120 vision statement.
00:50:55.620 So it literally
00:50:56.340 says vision.
00:50:58.040 And it is this.
00:50:59.280 I'm in it to
00:51:00.080 win it.
00:51:01.280 What do you
00:51:01.640 think of that?
00:51:02.640 We're just
00:51:03.220 going to look
00:51:03.560 at the
00:51:03.880 persuasion
00:51:04.720 power.
00:51:06.540 I'm in it to
00:51:07.320 win it.
00:51:07.820 Give me your
00:51:08.200 opinions in the
00:51:09.560 comments.
00:51:10.320 I would like to
00:51:10.900 know, before I
00:51:12.100 give you my
00:51:12.620 opinion, is it
00:51:14.340 strong or weak?
00:51:16.140 Okay, I'm
00:51:19.600 seeing mixed
00:51:20.240 opinions.
00:51:20.820 I'm seeing
00:51:21.080 mostly weak.
00:51:22.300 I have a
00:51:23.060 mixed opinion
00:51:23.660 on this one.
00:51:24.720 And here's
00:51:25.080 why.
00:51:26.880 Biden won
00:51:27.820 on basically
00:51:28.820 this slogan.
00:51:30.460 I think Joe
00:51:31.220 Biden won
00:51:31.960 based on
00:51:33.700 telling you he
00:51:34.260 could win.
00:51:35.600 Because they
00:51:36.280 wanted so much
00:51:37.160 for, at least
00:51:37.920 the people who
00:51:38.420 voted against
00:51:38.920 him, wanted so
00:51:39.900 much for Trump
00:51:40.460 to leave that
00:51:41.920 the only thing
00:51:42.460 they wanted to
00:51:42.960 hear is that he
00:51:43.580 could win.
00:51:44.740 They didn't
00:51:45.340 care about
00:51:45.720 anything.
00:51:46.920 Nothing else
00:51:47.620 mattered.
00:51:48.540 Just, can he
00:51:49.160 win?
00:51:49.960 And maybe
00:51:50.540 Newsom is in
00:51:51.260 that same
00:51:51.640 situation.
00:51:52.540 He's not too
00:51:53.700 popular at the
00:51:54.380 moment in
00:51:54.840 California.
00:51:55.720 And maybe the
00:51:56.540 only thing that
00:51:57.280 Californians care
00:51:58.120 about is not
00:51:58.720 even who
00:51:59.060 replaces him.
00:52:00.680 They might
00:52:01.180 just care if
00:52:02.860 he could win.
00:52:04.340 And so I
00:52:05.740 had mixed
00:52:06.220 feelings when I
00:52:06.800 said it.
00:52:07.360 I relate to
00:52:08.460 what you said.
00:52:09.180 It doesn't
00:52:09.920 have sizzle.
00:52:11.200 And it also
00:52:11.780 is about him.
00:52:13.440 I would never
00:52:14.280 do a,
00:52:14.920 I would never
00:52:16.540 do a slogan
00:52:17.200 with I in
00:52:18.140 it.
00:52:19.240 Because it's
00:52:19.860 talking about
00:52:20.300 him.
00:52:20.620 I'm in it
00:52:21.200 to win it.
00:52:22.100 It's about
00:52:22.440 him.
00:52:23.300 Right?
00:52:23.960 So Larry, if
00:52:24.640 you watch this,
00:52:26.020 it should be
00:52:27.020 more about the
00:52:27.620 state.
00:52:28.700 That would be
00:52:29.180 what would
00:52:29.740 appeal to me
00:52:30.420 best.
00:52:30.780 And I'll
00:52:32.240 tell you what
00:52:32.720 I'm hungriest
00:52:34.000 for as a
00:52:35.040 citizen of
00:52:35.560 California.
00:52:36.840 Competent and
00:52:37.500 ethical management.
00:52:40.100 Competent and
00:52:41.460 ethical, you've
00:52:42.260 got to throw
00:52:42.500 that in there,
00:52:43.540 management.
00:52:44.560 And because
00:52:44.980 it's a
00:52:45.460 Republican, you've
00:52:46.800 got to throw in
00:52:47.220 the ethical so
00:52:47.980 people will know
00:52:48.900 that you care
00:52:49.360 about that
00:52:49.740 stuff.
00:52:50.160 I'm sure Larry
00:52:50.780 Elder does.
00:52:52.320 So I don't
00:52:53.340 know how to
00:52:53.660 make that sexy,
00:52:55.160 but if you
00:52:55.640 told me, look,
00:52:56.460 I'm going to
00:52:56.920 run against
00:52:57.400 Newsom, you've
00:52:58.180 got problems
00:52:58.700 with the
00:52:59.020 pandemic, schools,
00:52:59.960 water, electricity,
00:53:01.240 forest management,
00:53:02.100 homeless, and
00:53:02.620 borders.
00:53:03.740 And none of
00:53:04.640 it is being
00:53:05.300 managed competently
00:53:07.020 and ethically.
00:53:09.240 So if you
00:53:10.000 gave me that
00:53:10.600 proposition, look,
00:53:11.860 you don't have
00:53:12.420 competence and
00:53:13.180 you don't have
00:53:13.560 ethical leadership,
00:53:14.860 I'll give you
00:53:15.300 that.
00:53:16.140 Boom.
00:53:16.960 I'm sold.
00:53:17.860 Because it's an
00:53:18.740 easy sale, because
00:53:20.340 people are unhappy
00:53:21.140 with what's
00:53:21.640 happening there
00:53:22.140 now.
00:53:22.560 They're looking
00:53:23.020 for a change.
00:53:24.080 But I'm in it
00:53:24.800 to win it?
00:53:26.260 Mixed feelings.
00:53:27.740 It could be that
00:53:28.460 you want somebody
00:53:29.820 besides Newsom so
00:53:32.060 badly that maybe
00:53:33.420 that's all you
00:53:33.860 care about.
00:53:34.660 And maybe it's
00:53:35.740 possible that he
00:53:37.100 hit the only
00:53:37.880 message that
00:53:38.480 matters.
00:53:39.440 I don't know.
00:53:40.520 This is one of
00:53:41.180 those things where
00:53:41.920 I think trained
00:53:43.560 persuaders could
00:53:44.640 have different
00:53:45.100 opinions.
00:53:46.020 And I think you'd
00:53:46.500 have to test it
00:53:47.360 somehow.
00:53:48.500 I mean, I think
00:53:48.880 you'd, maybe you
00:53:49.580 did.
00:53:50.000 Maybe he has
00:53:50.440 tested it.
00:53:51.020 I don't know.
00:53:51.360 But that's my
00:53:53.300 advice to Larry
00:53:54.920 Elder.
00:53:55.140 And I saw
00:53:58.120 you retweeted
00:53:58.840 me this morning.
00:54:00.400 We follow each
00:54:00.980 other.
00:54:01.520 So maybe he'll
00:54:02.640 get that message.
00:54:03.980 And maybe he
00:54:04.840 doesn't need it.
00:54:05.820 Because like I
00:54:06.900 said, I'm in it
00:54:08.240 to win it.
00:54:10.940 I'm not going to
00:54:11.700 say that's bad.
00:54:13.180 It might be
00:54:13.780 genius.
00:54:14.520 I don't know.
00:54:15.320 Could be right on.
00:54:16.180 But I'd test it.
00:54:17.440 That's what I'd do.
00:54:19.160 Somebody says it's
00:54:20.040 unoriginal.
00:54:20.580 I'll tell you what
00:54:21.020 else it has is it
00:54:21.840 rhymes.
00:54:22.260 You think that
00:54:24.020 doesn't make a
00:54:24.720 difference?
00:54:25.920 It does.
00:54:27.420 Things that rhyme
00:54:28.360 are actually
00:54:29.020 perceived as more
00:54:30.720 persuasive.
00:54:31.680 That's why OJ
00:54:32.800 and the glove,
00:54:34.060 if the glove
00:54:34.540 doesn't fit,
00:54:35.260 you must acquit.
00:54:36.200 It's not an
00:54:36.820 accident that it
00:54:37.580 rhymed.
00:54:38.560 That was to make
00:54:39.380 it more persuasive.
00:54:40.720 So I'm in it to
00:54:41.500 win it.
00:54:42.140 How's that going
00:54:42.680 for it?
00:54:43.720 So it makes me
00:54:44.480 wonder.
00:54:45.180 It makes me
00:54:45.560 wonder.
00:54:45.900 It could have
00:54:46.240 been professionally
00:54:46.880 designed.
00:54:47.700 Maybe he had some
00:54:48.340 advice on that.
00:54:49.740 But I'm very
00:54:50.400 curious if it's been
00:54:51.340 tested.
00:54:52.260 As opposed to
00:54:56.640 what?
00:54:57.260 In it to lose?
00:54:58.620 Well, in it to
00:55:00.020 provide competent
00:55:01.600 and ethical
00:55:02.480 management.
00:55:03.880 I don't think
00:55:04.500 Californians are
00:55:06.140 looking for a lot
00:55:06.880 of sizzle.
00:55:08.160 We like it.
00:55:09.680 It's the
00:55:10.520 entertainment state,
00:55:11.460 right?
00:55:12.160 We like our
00:55:12.960 Arnold Schwarzeneggers
00:55:13.780 and stuff.
00:55:14.720 But I feel like
00:55:16.100 we're just
00:55:16.500 desperate for
00:55:17.620 somebody who
00:55:18.540 can just
00:55:18.840 manage it.
00:55:19.720 I don't
00:55:20.640 know if
00:55:20.900 that's what
00:55:22.240 Larry Elder
00:55:22.840 will look
00:55:24.020 like to
00:55:24.640 voters,
00:55:25.420 but that's
00:55:25.960 what we
00:55:26.200 need.
00:55:31.600 Well, I
00:55:32.780 guess it's
00:55:33.060 been 28
00:55:33.600 minutes because
00:55:34.120 locals just
00:55:34.720 shut off.
00:55:35.720 And I'm
00:55:35.960 going to end
00:55:36.580 this stream
00:55:37.280 on YouTube
00:55:40.040 and I will
00:55:40.680 talk to you
00:55:41.240 tomorrow.
00:55:42.960 Oh, yeah,
00:55:43.380 to say we're
00:55:43.960 in it to win
00:55:44.500 it.
00:55:45.060 That would
00:55:45.580 be better.
00:55:46.040 You're right.
00:55:47.040 Bye for now.
00:55:49.720 Bye for now.