Real Coffee with Scott Adams - March 13, 2022


Episode 1681 Scott Adams： Facts Don't Matter. It Only Matters How Much We Hated You Before You Spoke


Episode Stats


Length

46 minutes

Words per minute

140.97395

Word count

6,527

Sentence count

507

Harmful content

Misogyny

6

sentences flagged

Hate speech

3

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Scott Adams talks about a new government plan to deal with wildfires in California, and the Pope's new stance on the Ukraine crisis, and why he thinks it's a good idea to have homeless people live in the forests.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.900 Good morning, everybody,
00:00:03.240 and welcome to the greatest thing that's ever happened.
00:00:06.800 It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.
00:00:08.240 Hasn't even happened yet.
00:00:09.240 It's already the greatest thing that's ever happened.
00:00:11.560 And would you like to participate
00:00:13.960 in one of the greatest things that's ever happened?
00:00:17.000 Of course you would.
00:00:18.320 And all you'd need would be a cup or a mug or a glasses,
00:00:21.840 a tank or a chalice, a dine, a canteen,
00:00:23.280 a jug or a glass, a vessel of any kind.
00:00:26.760 Uh-oh, are we having trouble with the sound done?
00:00:32.400 Yes, we are.
00:00:35.000 Let's fix this.
00:00:38.480 Boom.
00:00:39.480 Boom, I'll bet the sound is better now, isn't it?
00:00:43.360 I should plug things in every now and then.
00:00:46.600 All right, unplugged back in, so we should be good.
00:00:49.760 But if you'd, I'm going to have to do it again.
00:00:53.280 I'm going to have to do it again, thanks, Paul, by the way.
00:00:56.680 All you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice,
00:00:59.680 a canteen, a jug, a glass, a vessel of any kind,
00:01:01.680 fill it with your favorite liquid.
00:01:02.880 I like coffee.
00:01:04.560 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.
00:01:08.800 The dopamine hit of the day.
00:01:10.240 Sorry, I was distracted by a meme on locals.
00:01:13.840 It's called The Simultaneous Sip, and it happens now.
00:01:16.400 Go.
00:01:20.800 Ooh, yeah.
00:01:23.400 That's good stuff.
00:01:25.400 You know, every now and then, I use my iPad that I use for YouTube.
00:01:31.360 I use it to watch a show.
00:01:33.360 And I have to unplug the connection to do it.
00:01:37.160 And I tell myself when I do it, you know what?
00:01:39.840 I'll tell you one thing I'm not going to forget.
00:01:42.400 I'm not going to forget to plug in this cable because I'm going to see a cable sitting right
00:01:48.080 in front of me that's not attached to anything.
00:01:50.360 And how could you look at a cable right in front of you that's not attached to anything and say,
00:01:54.320 I better not do anything?
00:01:56.320 Well, that happened to me today.
00:01:58.120 All right, big news.
00:01:59.520 The federal government's starting some kind of wildfire mitigation commission.
00:02:05.280 And they're looking for experts to tell them what to do because they don't know how to mitigate wildfires.
00:02:10.740 This doesn't seem like a big thing to you.
00:02:13.320 But if you live in California, it's a pretty big thing.
00:02:16.960 We actually have what I call the smoke season.
00:02:21.940 You know, we used to have two seasons in California.
00:02:25.960 There used to be the rain season and then the not rain season.
00:02:29.940 And that was basically it.
00:02:31.560 You know, one was a little colder and a little rainy.
00:02:33.580 But otherwise, everything was about the same.
00:02:36.640 But now in the summer, for like a two or three month period, you can't go outside.
00:02:41.700 It's just so smoky from all the wildfires.
00:02:44.920 So it's a big deal.
00:02:47.200 I hope they get this right.
00:02:48.760 I always had the idea of sending all the homeless people to live in the forest.
00:02:54.460 You know, give them actual shelter and bathrooms and, you know, some things they need.
00:02:59.040 But let the homeless people clean up the forest.
00:03:02.560 You know, to remove the brush.
00:03:04.700 Just go out there every day, remove some brush.
00:03:07.940 Except, you know, I thought this would be a brilliant idea.
00:03:11.200 They need a place to stay.
00:03:12.440 Ideally, not in a, you know, apartment building where other people would be concerned about their drug use or whatever.
00:03:19.520 Let them live in the forest and do foresty things and just do something useful.
00:03:25.320 It actually sounds like an idyllic life, doesn't it?
00:03:30.040 Live in the forest, do drugs, and just clean up some brush once in a while.
00:03:34.420 Well, here's a surprising story, and I've been waiting to hear about this.
00:03:37.380 So we've got all this violence in Ukraine, you know, Russia's invasion.
00:03:42.620 And were you wondering the same thing I was wondering, which is, what does Pope Francis think about the violence?
00:03:50.220 Because just the other day I was thinking to myself, I wonder if, I wonder if the Pope is in favor of violence in this case.
00:04:02.280 You know, he's fairly consistent against violence, but I was wondering, I wonder if he'd make an exception and be in favor of violence for once.
00:04:11.280 But, no, it turns out he made a statement, and the Pope is opposed to violence in Ukraine, so you can stop wondering.
00:04:19.980 The Pope has made a firm statement, and I guess he's remaining consistent.
00:04:25.800 So he's, once again, he's against violence.
00:04:29.160 25 years ago, I did a joke about permanent news, probably 30 years ago, about permanent news.
00:04:37.640 And the joke was that the permanent news was that the Pope has announced he's opposed to the violence.
00:04:45.320 It's just, every time, every time, hey, the Pope, he's still opposed to violence.
00:04:51.420 Well, I think it's good that he reminds us that.
00:04:54.200 Speaking of fake news, there was a lot of concern yesterday that Iran had allegedly sent some cruise missiles
00:05:02.820 into some American consulate or some kind of American facility in Erbil in Iraq,
00:05:11.300 and that maybe it was payback for something, that somebody got killed or something.
00:05:18.060 And today, the State Department issued a statement that said,
00:05:23.680 there is no damage or casualties at any U.S. government facility in Erbil.
00:05:28.940 So, I guess it didn't happen.
00:05:33.580 So all those reports yesterday about some kind of American diplomatic consulate or something
00:05:40.840 being blown to crap by Iran never really happened, according to the State Department.
00:05:46.680 Never happened.
00:05:48.460 Wait a minute.
00:05:49.280 Let me see the specificity of this statement.
00:05:53.280 Let me read it again.
00:05:54.260 Again, no damage or casualties at any U.S. government facility.
00:05:59.020 U.S. government facility.
00:06:01.100 What would U.S. government facility mean in Iraq?
00:06:07.000 Would that mean that the U.S. government owned the real estate?
00:06:13.320 What if we rent?
00:06:16.000 Yeah, what if it's in Iraq and we lease it?
00:06:19.940 What if we're leasing land?
00:06:21.360 Would that be a case of a U.S. government facility?
00:06:24.860 Or would that be an Iraqi facility that is temporarily housing some Americans doing things?
00:06:31.800 Well, I don't know.
00:06:33.560 But as Mike Sudevich pointed out to this statement,
00:06:38.600 at this point, you just have to shake your head and laugh
00:06:41.600 because you can't believe anything.
00:06:45.500 Anything.
00:06:47.000 I don't know.
00:06:47.960 Did something get blown up?
00:06:49.300 Maybe.
00:06:49.620 Was it something we owned?
00:06:52.200 I don't know.
00:06:53.220 Was it something we leased?
00:06:54.660 Maybe.
00:06:55.940 Did any Americans actually get hurt?
00:07:00.140 Who knows?
00:07:01.600 Would we know?
00:07:03.140 Maybe.
00:07:04.040 Maybe we wouldn't.
00:07:05.960 So another situation of who knows what happened.
00:07:10.320 Well, have you noticed this?
00:07:11.980 That we have completely stopped caring about topics and we only care about people.
00:07:21.020 For example, Glenn Greenwald is trending, not because of his opinion.
00:07:29.320 It's because he has the opinion.
00:07:33.500 That's the news.
00:07:35.640 The news is not what his opinion is.
00:07:38.360 The news is, well, is he defending Russia?
00:07:42.000 No, let's not worry about him and his personality or what he has or has not done in the past.
00:07:49.840 Is his opinion valid?
00:07:52.380 Because if you're calling him an apologist or anybody else, you're probably experiencing cognitive dissonance.
00:08:00.100 And I think apologist is the new tell for cognitive dissonance.
00:08:04.880 Because when you're calling somebody an apologist, it allows you to completely ignore your argument or your point.
00:08:11.860 You just dismiss the person as well.
00:08:14.620 Why would we even listen to those arguments?
00:08:17.180 That person is an apologist.
00:08:19.020 An apologist.
00:08:20.680 An apologist for Putin.
00:08:22.160 So it's my view that anybody who uses the word apologist as a description for someone else is experiencing cognitive dissonance and that you should ignore them completely.
00:08:37.080 Here are some other examples of the personality being more important than the fact.
00:08:42.960 So we're arguing over Glenn Greenwald, not because of his opinion, but because of him.
00:08:48.900 Same thing with Jimmy Dore.
00:08:50.260 I'm seeing a bunch of criticism about Jimmy Dore on the Internet.
00:08:56.380 You can read a lot of criticism about Jimmy Dore, but you know what you won't see?
00:09:01.160 The reason.
00:09:02.760 The reason.
00:09:04.480 What part of his opinion did he get wrong?
00:09:07.960 No, he's just an apologist.
00:09:10.240 That's what the critics are saying.
00:09:12.060 No, he's just pro-Putin.
00:09:13.640 He's just an apologist.
00:09:14.900 To which I say, can you give me an example?
00:09:17.580 Would I have the same opinion?
00:09:20.700 If you told me what he said, would I say that's apologia or whatever you want to say?
00:09:26.920 Or is that just a fact?
00:09:29.600 If Jimmy Dore said, and I don't know if he did, but suppose he said that there are some neo-Nazis on the Ukraine side.
00:09:37.920 Would that be an apologist for Putin?
00:09:40.580 Or would that just be an accurate fact?
00:09:43.780 One of many.
00:09:44.920 Certainly not the fact that makes the decision, but one of many.
00:09:50.040 Here's some more.
00:09:52.180 When we talk about Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan, or Bill Gates, are we ever talking about their opinions?
00:09:59.760 Not exactly.
00:10:01.180 Right?
00:10:01.580 We're talking about them.
00:10:04.140 Your opinion about Bill Gates' opinions is only about Bill Gates.
00:10:09.920 It's not even about what he says.
00:10:12.080 I mean, we imagine it's about what he says, but it's not.
00:10:14.900 It's entirely about Bill Gates, how you feel about him.
00:10:19.360 By the way, Joe Rogan had some very funny insights about Bill Gates being a person to tell us how to handle our health.
00:10:28.640 When Bill Gates is maybe not the picture of health.
00:10:33.920 Now, Joe Rogan said it in a more humorous and cutting way.
00:10:38.980 So you should see his version.
00:10:40.560 It's funnier.
00:10:41.560 But that's not a bad point.
00:10:44.960 You've got to wonder why somebody who's lecturing you about health is in bad health.
00:10:51.440 You've got to wonder.
00:10:52.260 So am I wrong that we've completely left the field of arguing about the facts?
00:11:00.640 We don't even do it anymore.
00:11:02.480 I mean, I think even the trucker thing in Canada turned out to be about truckers and about Trudeau.
00:11:09.920 I'm not even sure anybody cared about the details after some point.
00:11:13.580 Now, I've exaggerated a little bit, but we have to watch out for the fact that only the personality is what we're talking about.
00:11:19.920 Because it feels like it.
00:11:22.020 Speaking of personalities, I don't understand this, but apparently there was some Wall Street Journal,
00:11:30.200 well, at least Wall Street Journal did a poll, and said that if Trump and Biden ran today, it would be a tie, 45% to 45%.
00:11:39.460 Do you believe that?
00:11:41.720 Because it seems to me that we also have reports that a generic Republican would just destroy a generic Democrat.
00:11:50.680 Is Trump the exception?
00:11:53.260 Is Trump the only Republican who can't destroy every Democrat in the next race?
00:11:59.060 Because he might be.
00:12:00.080 He might be the only exception.
00:12:01.660 Because he's the one person that people put so much, let's say, weight on his personality that they kind of can ignore his policies.
00:12:12.940 So he might be the only person who can't beat Biden, which would be weird.
00:12:19.180 I have a hard time believing Biden's really going to run, but maybe.
00:12:22.840 You never know.
00:12:23.960 So here's some things that are shifting lately.
00:12:26.500 We talked about Trevor Noah saying that if Trump had been president, Saudi Arabia would have taken his call.
00:12:33.760 Which most of us probably agree with that, don't you?
00:12:36.820 So Saudi Arabia just didn't take the call with Biden because they're mad at him for whatever.
00:12:42.440 But even Trevor Noah says, you know, they would have taken Trump's call.
00:12:47.220 Add to that Bill Maher.
00:12:52.460 He's got two opinions which seemed weird together.
00:12:54.720 So these are both opinions he expressed on Friday.
00:12:59.300 He asked, and this is reasonable, he said, why didn't Putin invade Ukraine when Trump was president?
00:13:05.940 Because wasn't Trump supposed to be all Putin-loving enabler?
00:13:13.140 So Bill Maher quite reasonably says, if Trump was such an enabler, why did the invasion happen under Biden and not Trump?
00:13:22.440 It's a good question, right?
00:13:23.420 Now, I give credit to Bill Maher for asking this question.
00:13:29.700 And Trevor Noah as well.
00:13:32.920 Just the fact that they can even float the question, I think it shows some kind of movement in a good direction.
00:13:40.800 But at the same time, Bill Maher mocked Trump for saying that the problem in Ukraine was all caused by a rigged election.
00:13:50.560 And he sort of mocked it because Trump always goes back to his talking point about the election.
00:13:54.740 Except if you've already accepted that there might be a reason that Putin didn't invade under Trump, Trump's answer that the election is the problem in Ukraine is exactly right under that assumption, if you believe that the election was rigged.
00:14:13.280 Right. So I'm not making that assumption.
00:14:15.520 I'm saying that's Trump's assumption.
00:14:17.520 So his answer is spot on.
00:14:19.300 And it agrees at least with Bill Maher's question, if not his opinion.
00:14:24.700 And the question is, why didn't Putin invade when Trump was president?
00:14:30.160 And Trump agrees.
00:14:31.540 If he'd been president, it wouldn't have happened.
00:14:33.240 So you're seeing Bill Maher and Trump actually completely agreeing, but they can't quite get there, so they have to act like they're disagreeing.
00:14:42.420 I think Bill Maher has to act like he's disagreeing with Trump, even when he's not exactly disagreeing.
00:14:49.860 So he played both sides there a little bit.
00:14:54.720 How about Beto O'Rourke said in public, I guess this week, that critical race theory should not be taught in schools.
00:15:01.640 Did you ever think you'd see that?
00:15:05.080 So I think the Democrats, maybe, just maybe, are starting to see that the polls are not going their way.
00:15:17.160 So do you think those three things are forming a pattern or no?
00:15:21.500 So here are the three things.
00:15:22.720 The three things would be Trevor Noah saying Trump would have done better on at least the phone call.
00:15:32.100 Bill Maher saying, you know, why didn't Putin invade under Trump?
00:15:36.300 And now Beto O'Rourke saying critical race theory should not be taught in schools.
00:15:41.420 Now, he might be word thinking there a little bit, and maybe he's saying that the high level, college level critical race theory should not be taught.
00:15:50.160 But I don't know that he's against the ideas of it.
00:15:55.380 So this might be a little bit of fake news.
00:15:57.880 What do you think?
00:15:59.260 Does this look like fake news?
00:16:00.720 Because it might be that the only thing he's disagreeing with is that a high level college philosophy course should not be taught in grade school.
00:16:10.460 But maybe the concepts, which are simpler, you know, don't discriminate, blah, blah.
00:16:16.080 Maybe they should.
00:16:16.940 So I'm not sure that this is a real story.
00:16:20.300 But somebody says yes, it's fake.
00:16:24.840 Yeah, I think it's a framing story a little bit.
00:16:29.000 But I do wonder if there's going to be any movement toward Trump was right.
00:16:36.840 All right.
00:16:38.320 Here's something quite interesting on CNN, an opinion piece by Richard Gallant.
00:16:42.940 And he points out that the Russian bombing of the civilians in Ukraine might not work out because we have some historical precedent.
00:16:51.600 You always have to be careful about looking to history for your patterns because nothing really is the same as it was then.
00:16:59.480 But it is useful context.
00:17:02.640 So in 2011, three American researchers, this is what Richard Gallant writes in CNN, three American researchers revealed an eye-opening finding about the U.S. bombing campaign in Vietnam War.
00:17:16.000 And they found that the more bombs that were dropped on South Vietnamese hamlets in 1969, the likelier the Viet Cong insurgents were to end up controlling the territory afterwards.
00:17:29.360 So it's almost as if the more you bomb the civilians, the more likely they're going to resist you stronger and it's not going to work the way you want.
00:17:42.520 Then two years later, this other historian, Richard Overy, what a last name, Overy, he did a study and he concluded that the targeted bombing of European cities in World War II was also a military failure.
00:17:58.320 So there are two examples in which bombing civilians in modern, I guess that would be modern times if you count World War II, worked the opposite of the way it was supposed to.
00:18:14.200 Now, I'm not sure that we should believe either of those studies.
00:18:18.240 Would you believe a study like this?
00:18:20.240 Because when I saw this first one about Vietnam and said, you know, they bombed these hamlets and they were more likely to become Viet Cong strongholds, isn't that the reason they were bombing them?
00:18:32.320 Don't they have cause and effect backwards?
00:18:34.880 Why would you bomb something that was irrelevant?
00:18:38.080 Aren't you only going to bomb something that you think the enemy has a stronghold in?
00:18:42.920 I'm not sure I believe any of this, but it's worth asking if there's any, because I asked the same question.
00:18:50.920 I said, is there military evidence to suggest that bombing civilians works?
00:18:57.760 We know it depopulates, but if you looked at the long run, is the history that it works?
00:19:04.540 I don't know.
00:19:08.960 It works to depopulate.
00:19:11.440 And if that's all you're trying to do to get an advantage, I suppose it works in that limited sense.
00:19:17.160 I don't know.
00:19:17.560 I don't think it works.
00:19:20.440 You bomb while you can't reach with troops.
00:19:22.600 That seems like the only thing that makes sense.
00:19:24.500 I don't think you bomb to break will.
00:19:27.720 So I don't trust anything that's coming out of Ukraine. 1.00
00:19:30.020 How many of you saw the viral photo of what was alleged, but probably not,
00:19:36.260 a Russian soldier chained to a pole and froze to death because they didn't want him to desert.
00:19:44.480 So they chained him to a pole and he froze to death.
00:19:47.640 It looks like that's pure Ukrainian propaganda. 0.80
00:19:50.860 And it might even be a dead Ukrainian soldier.
00:19:53.280 It doesn't even look like it's a Russian soldier.
00:19:55.280 Yeah, and if the soldier had a weapon, like a gun, didn't the soldier have a weapon?
00:20:04.560 You're telling me that the soldier wouldn't try to just shoot the chain?
00:20:08.600 Did they leave him there without a gun?
00:20:10.900 I don't know.
00:20:11.720 But I wouldn't believe anything coming out of Ukraine. 1.00
00:20:18.600 Well, there's now the number of COVID cases in China is up to 3,400 new cases,
00:20:26.520 the highest since February 2020.
00:20:28.800 And local transmission in provinces is starting to ramp up.
00:20:33.580 So what would be the outcome of a major outbreak of COVID at this point in China?
00:20:41.100 It would be a supply chain problem, wouldn't it?
00:20:44.400 This would be our fourth, if it happens, our fourth global supply chain challenge in like two years.
00:20:55.100 To which I say, that doesn't feel like a coincidence anymore, does it?
00:21:00.100 It just feels like we're a simulation and somebody is testing supply chain pressures.
00:21:07.160 It looks like we're testing the supply chain, that we're just a simulation.
00:21:12.260 We're running a bunch of simulations to say, okay, would this break the supply chain?
00:21:17.040 No?
00:21:17.560 Okay, how about this?
00:21:18.700 Would this break the supply chain?
00:21:20.980 So far, we're doing okay.
00:21:24.920 All right.
00:21:26.940 Rasmussen reported that election integrity is now the number three issue with voters.
00:21:32.140 So the top three issues per Rasmussen are inflation, violent crime, and election integrity.
00:21:43.660 Let me see.
00:21:45.040 Who would you expect to get elected if the top three issues were inflation, violent crime, and election integrity?
00:21:54.080 How would a Democrat ever be elected unless they ran against Trump and people just didn't like Trump for some reason?
00:22:04.620 Amazing.
00:22:05.680 It just doesn't seem to me like anybody would ever vote for a Democrat if these are the top three issues with voters.
00:22:12.020 These top three issues are so overwhelmingly positive for Republicans.
00:22:18.360 I just, you know, if the Democrats sweep, I'm going to have a real question about election integrity.
00:22:24.820 Are you?
00:22:26.820 All right.
00:22:29.100 I saw another article by Francis Fukuyama in a publication called American Purpose,
00:22:36.120 who is actually openly asking about, should we be thinking about Russia literally losing on the battlefield?
00:22:44.720 And I still think that's going to be a thing.
00:22:47.720 I think I did have the number of Russian tanks completely wrong.
00:22:53.060 I told you in December I saw a report that there were 1,200 Russian tanks,
00:22:58.080 but then I saw Andrzej Spekhaus correct that to maybe 12,000, 12,000 something.
00:23:04.220 So it would be 12,000 something tanks, 17,000 something anti-tank missiles in country.
00:23:12.100 And I think that number probably is low.
00:23:16.840 You thought they were out of fuel.
00:23:19.200 I still think they're running out of fuel.
00:23:23.120 So yelling my own opinion at me that I still hold in all caps did not get you as much as you hoped.
00:23:28.780 Oh, 12,000 including reserves.
00:23:36.300 12,000 from the whole nation of Russia?
00:23:41.980 Huh.
00:23:46.540 That was Russia's gas supply, yeah.
00:23:49.060 So here's what I think.
00:23:50.120 I think that the ground forces of Russia are being degraded to the point where they won't be an effective ground force in the north.
00:24:03.040 And if Putin loses in the north, it's not going to matter as much if he wins in the south, because it's going to look really bad.
00:24:10.960 Now, we're already seeing in the news experts saying, you know who you really have to worry about is,
00:24:19.240 or who Putin has to worry about is his own intelligence people turning on him.
00:24:23.720 Don't you think we're doing that intentionally?
00:24:26.180 To get Putin worried about his own inner, because apparently he's, reportedly he's arrested his head of intel for bad intel.
00:24:33.420 But I doubt it.
00:24:35.000 I think that's also propaganda.
00:24:36.980 Do you think that Putin has actually fired generals and put his own intelligence head under house arrest?
00:24:45.660 I think no.
00:24:47.640 I mean, the news is saying it, but I think no.
00:24:51.200 Yeah, that feels like propaganda to me.
00:24:56.520 Firing generals is how we won World War II, though.
00:25:00.040 Yeah, I see what you're saying.
00:25:00.940 All right, here's a source of Russian tanks.
00:25:06.940 Battle tanks, 2800 watts?
00:25:10.100 Okay, it's too confusing.
00:25:11.880 Give me the summary.
00:25:15.960 All right.
00:25:19.700 I think my take is going to remain the contrarian take.
00:25:24.180 Let me ask you this.
00:25:25.140 If you took the contrarian view of every single thing that's been in the news, how often would you be right?
00:25:32.840 Versus if you took the standard view, and then you waited long enough, who would be right more often?
00:25:41.840 The standard view, and let's say the last five years, would the standard view have been more right or more wrong than the generic view?
00:25:49.720 Now, sometimes we underestimate the generic view, you know, the classic view, because most of the world said Russia was going to invade Ukraine, right?
00:26:01.400 And then they did.
00:26:02.480 So I would say the classic view was correct.
00:26:05.220 The contrarian view, of which I don't know anybody but me, who had, was that he was bluffing.
00:26:13.080 Now, the contrarian view turned out to be completely wrong.
00:26:16.100 He invaded.
00:26:16.780 Now, the reason I thought he wouldn't is because it was obviously a suicide mission.
00:26:24.100 But apparently, the story is, and I don't think you can trust the story, that the only reason he made such a bad mistake is that his intelligence people gave him bad information.
00:26:34.380 But I wouldn't have made that mistake, and I didn't listen to any intelligence people.
00:26:39.920 I just said, it's 2022, and Ukraine is going to be armed with all the modern equipment NATO can give it.
00:26:48.520 And it's probably a bad idea to attack.
00:26:52.160 That was my opinion.
00:26:53.920 I didn't need any deep dive to come up with that.
00:26:57.220 And indeed, it's looking like a pretty bad idea.
00:27:01.320 Oh, Greenwald and Matt Tybee said he wouldn't?
00:27:03.860 They both said that?
00:27:05.180 I wonder if they were using the same logic, which is it's obviously a stupid idea.
00:27:11.220 But he did it.
00:27:13.840 Now, if he pulls it off, then I guess I suppose it looks brilliant in hindsight.
00:27:18.200 But at the moment, it's looking like a terrible thing.
00:27:24.500 The U.S. and NATO manipulated this whole thing.
00:27:28.620 Yeah, there's a lot we don't know about this Ukraine situation, if you know what I mean.
00:27:33.380 Number one, we don't know what Ukraine has been used for by people in the United States and the government.
00:27:43.280 I feel as if we've been using Ukraine for a number of illicit things, and maybe we'll never know what they were.
00:27:51.260 I also think that it's not crazy to think that Russia was lured into the attack intentionally.
00:28:01.140 That's not crazy.
00:28:03.380 Or at least that it was one possibility that we didn't hate.
00:28:08.400 In other words, we weren't trying to stop it from happening because we thought, well, if he does attack, it's going to be bad for Russia.
00:28:14.520 And maybe somebody thought that was a good idea.
00:28:19.380 Yeah, and the question is, why has the State Department always been so interested in Ukraine?
00:28:25.220 Why is Ukraine, this poor little country, so important to America?
00:28:30.580 It's not obvious, is it?
00:28:31.920 Like there's something going on there that we don't know about.
00:28:36.680 Yeah, it looks like somebody wanted a war.
00:28:38.880 It does look like that.
00:28:40.500 Is it just oil and gas?
00:28:41.860 I don't know.
00:28:44.880 All right, here's a question for you.
00:28:46.600 Let's say 30% of the world's wheat disappeared.
00:28:50.740 What would happen?
00:28:52.900 Would poor people starve because rich people pay more for the wheat so there's none available?
00:29:00.980 Or would the rich people stop eating bread?
00:29:05.160 Which would happen?
00:29:06.080 If you said to me, Scott, there's a worldwide shortage of wheat, would you mind cutting back on wheat because it's not that healthy for you anyway?
00:29:16.980 And you could go a few months without bread.
00:29:19.300 You could go a year without bread because you've got plenty of carbs.
00:29:22.840 Just eat less wheat.
00:29:24.300 Scott, would you do that to help starving people across the world?
00:29:29.540 To which I would say, sure.
00:29:31.600 Yeah, I could do that easily.
00:29:33.800 I could cut bread out.
00:29:35.400 I mean, I like bread, so I'd miss it.
00:29:38.440 But if it's a war thing, yeah, of course, I could cut out bread.
00:29:43.000 But would I?
00:29:45.420 And would anybody ever ask me to?
00:29:47.800 I don't think anybody would ask me because it's a free country.
00:29:52.300 And I don't know it would work if anybody asked.
00:29:55.920 Yeah, I don't think most of you would cut out bread.
00:29:58.020 I think you'd let people starve.
00:30:01.000 Switch to corn and rice.
00:30:04.580 So, yes, grow your own bread.
00:30:07.500 Damn it.
00:30:09.660 Donnie says you lost 50 pounds by cutting out wheat.
00:30:12.280 That's pretty much my weight loss technique.
00:30:14.720 I have two weight loss techniques.
00:30:23.380 Zelensky starred in a TV show about a school teacher
00:30:26.140 who becomes president of the Ukraine.
00:30:28.460 The owner of the TV network financed his real-life election campaign.
00:30:32.500 Yeah, Zelensky does look like a...
00:30:34.920 He looks like a creation, doesn't he?
00:30:38.400 Because he is.
00:30:38.980 So, you know, two presidents who were...
00:30:43.880 Both came out of reality TV.
00:30:46.160 Or this one, not reality TV.
00:30:53.660 He also won the Ukraine Dancing with the Stars show.
00:30:57.840 I don't know.
00:30:59.240 I don't trust anything about Zelensky.
00:31:01.780 Does anybody agree with me?
00:31:03.460 I don't trust Zelensky at all.
00:31:07.940 At all.
00:31:09.620 Because I don't know who's running him exactly.
00:31:11.920 Is he just a CIA guy?
00:31:14.080 I don't know.
00:31:15.660 Here's another comment for $5.
00:31:18.780 Yeah, Ukraine is a hotbed of corruption.
00:31:21.780 Money laundering, traffic.
00:31:23.800 Yeah.
00:31:25.940 All right.
00:31:27.120 I don't have much to say today.
00:31:29.640 So, unless you have any questions for me,
00:31:32.200 I'm going to keep it short,
00:31:33.720 since you're all tired from the time change.
00:31:36.820 Remember, move your clocks if you forgot to do it last night.
00:31:45.380 Oh, here's some information on...
00:31:49.060 Oh, here we go.
00:31:51.300 Russian stuff.
00:31:52.360 So, Russia has, in the active forces,
00:31:56.000 2,800 battle tanks,
00:31:58.040 but in the reserves, over 16,000.
00:32:02.140 Huh.
00:32:03.760 But then they have lots of infantry
00:32:05.120 and armored personnel carriers.
00:32:07.620 So, they've got 18,000 armored personnel carriers,
00:32:10.560 if you count the reserves.
00:32:12.640 So, if you've got 17,000 Stingers
00:32:15.580 and 18,000 troop carriers,
00:32:18.900 it seems like you could get rid of a lot of troops
00:32:22.700 per anti-tank weapon.
00:32:27.080 I assume they would work on a troop carrier.
00:32:37.040 When will Xi go full Putin?
00:32:39.440 I don't know.
00:32:40.380 I don't feel like China would make this mistake.
00:32:44.740 China's just more conservative in a good way,
00:32:46.960 in a good way that works for them.
00:32:48.900 People keep forgetting artillery.
00:32:54.340 The trouble is,
00:32:55.200 artillery isn't going to let you
00:32:56.640 conquer and keep something.
00:33:03.920 My next book, still working on it.
00:33:10.440 Yeah, I don't think China's going to sacrifice itself
00:33:13.180 for Russia, for sure.
00:33:14.980 That's not going to happen.
00:33:15.840 All right.
00:33:19.660 I believe I've said everything that's useful to say.
00:33:23.160 And now, I'm just riffing.
00:33:26.540 And although some of you are hoping
00:33:28.420 that I would last long enough
00:33:29.920 for you to complete your workout,
00:33:32.340 I say to you that you are strong enough
00:33:34.860 to complete this workout,
00:33:36.320 even without coffee with Scott Adams.
00:33:39.560 Even without.
00:33:40.280 And is there anything I forgot today?
00:33:46.600 Any topics I should have talked about?
00:33:51.600 Somebody wants a Daylight Savings Time sip,
00:33:53.740 and I think that that is called for.
00:33:56.820 Daylight Savings Time,
00:33:58.220 well, at least in the United States.
00:34:00.440 Daylight Savings Time sip.
00:34:02.600 Because I don't know about you,
00:34:04.760 but I'm a little underslept today.
00:34:07.820 Go.
00:34:13.120 Yeah.
00:34:16.280 That's good.
00:34:16.860 Well, I think you would agree
00:34:20.780 that this is the best thing
00:34:21.720 that's ever happened to you
00:34:22.760 in the history of your life.
00:34:24.940 And we don't serve peanuts on this flight.
00:34:29.940 Okay, I got it.
00:34:32.240 Bill Maher on Ben Shapiro's show,
00:34:34.040 is that going to happen?
00:34:35.120 Or are you just saying you wish it would happen?
00:34:36.580 Trump on Rogan?
00:34:40.480 That doesn't seem to be confirmed, does it?
00:34:43.080 I saw that Trump cleverly was praising Joe Rogan.
00:34:48.960 He said he shouldn't apologize,
00:34:50.640 but he thought Rogan would be better
00:34:52.120 to host a presidential debate
00:34:54.680 than Chris Wallace,
00:34:56.800 to which I say,
00:34:58.420 I would watch that.
00:35:01.440 Let me be serious.
00:35:02.660 I think that an independent podcaster
00:35:06.460 should host a debate.
00:35:10.540 Whether it's Joe Rogan,
00:35:12.040 that's a separate question.
00:35:13.560 But I think an independent podcaster
00:35:15.660 should host a presidential debate.
00:35:18.900 Or at the very least,
00:35:21.420 the presidential candidates
00:35:23.340 should make a real effort
00:35:25.020 to appear on the major podcasts.
00:35:28.780 I'll tell you something
00:35:29.580 that I learned promoting books.
00:35:32.240 If you go on ABC,
00:35:33.920 Good Morning America,
00:35:35.120 and promote your book,
00:35:36.460 Do you know how many you'll sell?
00:35:39.780 None.
00:35:40.880 None.
00:35:41.680 I would watch my Amazon rank
00:35:43.940 when I would do publicity hits.
00:35:46.480 And I'd go on like a major network TV,
00:35:48.820 big hit,
00:35:50.160 they mention the book,
00:35:51.780 nothing.
00:35:52.600 Literally nothing.
00:35:53.420 No change at all.
00:35:54.080 You go on Joe Rogan's show,
00:35:56.780 or you go on a Tim Ferriss,
00:35:59.920 James Altucher,
00:36:01.980 you go on a major podcast,
00:36:04.440 and boop, 1.00
00:36:05.300 as soon as it comes out,
00:36:06.140 you see your numbers start to spike.
00:36:09.460 So I would assume
00:36:11.160 that the politicians
00:36:13.480 have seen the same thing by now.
00:36:15.520 And if whoever runs for president
00:36:18.700 works the podcast network,
00:36:21.560 because it's so easy to do,
00:36:22.640 you don't even have to be there.
00:36:24.260 You could just, you know,
00:36:25.100 Zoom and knock out five of them 0.79
00:36:27.080 in one day.
00:36:28.360 And they would get massive traffic.
00:36:31.200 And the podcast format
00:36:34.740 does allow you to change minds.
00:36:38.500 Do you agree with that?
00:36:39.540 I would say that regular news,
00:36:42.080 the way it's formatted
00:36:42.940 with, you know,
00:36:43.520 30 seconds of pundits
00:36:44.960 yelling at each other,
00:36:46.080 never changes anybody's minds.
00:36:49.160 But I do believe
00:36:50.700 that a conversation
00:36:52.400 between a candidate
00:36:53.520 and a smart podcaster,
00:36:56.760 an independent,
00:36:57.880 would actually change minds.
00:37:00.060 I think some people
00:37:00.760 would watch the program
00:37:01.560 and say, you know,
00:37:02.100 I hadn't thought about it that way.
00:37:03.900 And it has something to do
00:37:04.960 with who listens to podcasts
00:37:06.340 versus who watches network TV, right?
00:37:08.580 The people who go
00:37:10.040 to an independent podcast,
00:37:11.680 they're actually looking
00:37:13.160 to have their opinion changed.
00:37:16.000 Do you think that's too far?
00:37:18.500 I would say the people
00:37:19.440 who watch network news
00:37:20.720 are looking for a confirmation
00:37:22.480 of their opinion.
00:37:24.460 People who listen to podcasters
00:37:25.940 also might be listening
00:37:27.160 for confirmation.
00:37:29.100 But far more,
00:37:30.600 it would attract people
00:37:31.560 who are willing to change
00:37:32.660 their mind and able,
00:37:34.340 both willing and able,
00:37:35.660 which is rare.
00:37:37.820 Yeah.
00:37:38.580 I think if you're looking
00:37:39.700 for alternative points of view,
00:37:41.100 you're spring-loaded
00:37:42.380 to have your mind changed
00:37:43.540 and you'd be okay with that.
00:37:45.620 So,
00:37:46.380 this could be the year
00:37:48.540 that the politicians
00:37:49.280 realize what every person
00:37:51.420 who sells books
00:37:52.200 already realizes,
00:37:53.540 that network news
00:37:54.840 is just a confirmation
00:37:56.420 bias engine.
00:37:58.420 And podcasting
00:37:59.220 is really the only tool
00:38:01.860 out there
00:38:02.280 for changing anybody's mind,
00:38:03.760 I think.
00:38:05.000 Would you agree?
00:38:05.840 It's the only tool
00:38:07.280 to change your mind
00:38:08.320 at the moment.
00:38:10.520 Is there anybody who's,
00:38:11.840 well, let's test it now.
00:38:13.580 Is there anybody watching this
00:38:15.340 on YouTube or Locals
00:38:16.680 who have had their mind
00:38:18.500 changed on anything,
00:38:19.960 on any topic,
00:38:21.140 by watching this podcast?
00:38:24.520 Now, watch the comments.
00:38:27.160 On Locals,
00:38:27.960 it's just a stream of yeses.
00:38:29.340 On YouTube,
00:38:33.000 also some yeses.
00:38:34.780 Talking about podcasts,
00:38:36.080 specifically.
00:38:36.800 And live streams,
00:38:37.640 same thing.
00:38:39.400 Right?
00:38:39.640 Look at all the yeses.
00:38:41.220 Now, I assume that people
00:38:42.560 who are not answering
00:38:43.340 are probably no's,
00:38:44.520 so I'm not saying
00:38:45.360 that it's a majority yes.
00:38:46.980 But how many people
00:38:48.240 would answer that yes
00:38:49.840 for watching CNN?
00:38:52.080 How many people
00:38:53.000 watch CNN and say,
00:38:54.080 yeah, you know,
00:38:55.300 CNN changed my mind.
00:38:56.560 I used to be
00:38:57.200 pro this,
00:38:58.320 but now I'm anti that?
00:38:59.460 I'll bet not.
00:39:00.740 I'll bet not.
00:39:02.240 Because they're really careful
00:39:03.700 about keeping their topics
00:39:05.100 what their audience
00:39:06.500 already thinks.
00:39:07.680 They're not trying
00:39:08.300 to change their minds.
00:39:10.080 So, have I made my case?
00:39:12.480 I think I have, right?
00:39:13.520 You saw in the comments
00:39:14.480 themselves
00:39:15.000 that podcasts
00:39:16.460 do change opinions.
00:39:18.260 And I don't think
00:39:19.220 it's some magic
00:39:20.080 that I bring to the podcast.
00:39:21.500 I think that,
00:39:22.880 you know,
00:39:23.180 I think if Tim Pool
00:39:24.100 asked his audience,
00:39:25.100 they would say
00:39:25.440 the same thing.
00:39:26.960 Do you think?
00:39:27.640 Joe Rogan?
00:39:29.380 I'll bet his audience
00:39:30.060 would say the same thing.
00:39:31.220 Now, I try harder
00:39:32.180 to change minds
00:39:33.080 than they do.
00:39:34.200 You know,
00:39:34.360 I don't think
00:39:34.740 they're trying
00:39:35.180 to change your mind.
00:39:36.060 I think they're
00:39:36.560 presenting entertainment.
00:39:37.920 I actually am trying
00:39:38.740 to change your mind
00:39:39.580 in a lot of cases.
00:39:40.940 Not every case.
00:39:42.300 In the case of vaccinations,
00:39:43.560 I didn't want
00:39:43.980 to change your mind.
00:39:45.660 I just wanted
00:39:46.140 to present it
00:39:46.860 in a way you could
00:39:47.680 make your own decision.
00:39:51.080 That's why the Dems 0.98
00:39:52.100 want Rogan gone.
00:39:53.640 You might be right.
00:39:54.340 Yeah,
00:39:59.940 and it has
00:40:00.240 something to do
00:40:00.780 with being able
00:40:01.320 to explain something
00:40:02.160 in detail
00:40:02.740 and have some
00:40:03.380 back and forth
00:40:04.060 that this model
00:40:05.620 allows for.
00:40:10.300 All right.
00:40:13.040 Now,
00:40:13.800 how many of you
00:40:15.140 would like to see me
00:40:16.320 moderate a presidential debate?
00:40:21.080 Serious question.
00:40:21.820 Because I could
00:40:24.040 probably do it.
00:40:26.360 I could probably
00:40:27.200 pull it off.
00:40:29.140 You know,
00:40:29.640 if it's on Zoom.
00:40:31.400 If it's just on Zoom,
00:40:32.600 I could probably do it.
00:40:37.360 Well,
00:40:37.860 I think people
00:40:38.740 are answering
00:40:39.600 from the
00:40:40.080 entertainment perspective.
00:40:42.700 I feel like
00:40:43.540 I could do
00:40:44.000 the best job.
00:40:47.380 All right,
00:40:47.860 let me back up
00:40:48.460 before I say this.
00:40:49.240 I pride myself.
00:40:54.360 No,
00:40:54.640 even that's wrong.
00:40:56.800 I try to
00:40:57.720 make it a point.
00:40:58.840 I won't say
00:40:59.340 I pride myself.
00:41:05.200 All right,
00:41:05.720 I'm not even
00:41:06.080 going to finish
00:41:06.460 that point.
00:41:08.920 All right,
00:41:10.600 well,
00:41:10.720 I will finish
00:41:11.380 the point.
00:41:12.040 In my opinion,
00:41:13.120 I would be
00:41:13.600 the best combination
00:41:14.660 of asking good
00:41:15.600 questions
00:41:16.060 and being entertaining.
00:41:17.120 Because you have
00:41:19.080 to be entertaining
00:41:19.700 to get the audience.
00:41:21.420 But you should
00:41:22.080 ask good questions
00:41:22.840 because it's also
00:41:23.480 a public service.
00:41:24.560 If you're talking
00:41:25.100 to presidential candidates,
00:41:27.420 your brain
00:41:28.360 should be in
00:41:28.940 public service mode,
00:41:30.100 not in entertainment mode.
00:41:32.340 Right?
00:41:33.400 If you're a good
00:41:34.280 person at all,
00:41:35.380 you should be in
00:41:36.340 purely public service mode
00:41:38.000 by the time
00:41:38.500 you're talking
00:41:38.940 to legitimate candidates
00:41:40.640 for the presidency.
00:41:41.960 But,
00:41:42.760 I'm pretty sure
00:41:44.120 I could do a good job
00:41:45.260 and also be entertaining.
00:41:46.220 just because
00:41:48.100 I'd ask
00:41:48.840 interesting questions.
00:41:51.480 I also think
00:41:52.820 that if I
00:41:55.160 interviewed
00:41:56.420 any candidate
00:41:57.240 for president
00:41:58.160 one-on-one,
00:41:59.840 that I could get
00:42:00.600 inside their head
00:42:01.920 faster than
00:42:03.260 almost anybody.
00:42:05.120 And when I say
00:42:05.640 inside their head,
00:42:06.360 I mean get them
00:42:07.260 to,
00:42:08.260 get them
00:42:09.760 out of
00:42:10.080 politician mode
00:42:10.980 and get them
00:42:12.220 into human mode.
00:42:13.220 I think I could
00:42:14.540 do that faster
00:42:15.260 than just about
00:42:15.880 anybody could do that.
00:42:17.520 And again,
00:42:17.940 it's just technique.
00:42:19.580 Right?
00:42:19.820 I'm not saying
00:42:20.300 I have magic powers
00:42:21.400 that I was born with.
00:42:22.320 I'm saying that
00:42:22.800 anybody who
00:42:23.420 studied certain
00:42:24.960 techniques
00:42:26.140 of persuasion,
00:42:27.380 communication,
00:42:28.680 et cetera,
00:42:29.100 would be good at it.
00:42:30.100 That's all.
00:42:33.900 Head trip.
00:42:34.760 Yeah.
00:42:34.860 No,
00:42:36.180 I actually think
00:42:36.840 I think if I
00:42:38.740 made it my
00:42:39.380 mission in life
00:42:41.260 to host
00:42:42.500 a presidential
00:42:43.120 debate,
00:42:44.600 I think I could
00:42:45.940 do it.
00:42:47.220 I think I could
00:42:47.820 pull it off.
00:42:48.580 Because I do think
00:42:49.320 there's enough
00:42:49.740 appetite for it.
00:42:51.060 There would be
00:42:51.480 enough of an
00:42:51.980 audience for it.
00:42:53.460 You know,
00:42:53.700 you wouldn't have
00:42:54.120 to worry about
00:42:54.860 enough people
00:42:55.360 watching.
00:42:56.660 There'd be
00:42:57.280 plenty of people
00:42:57.800 watching.
00:42:58.120 Jordan Peterson
00:43:05.500 too,
00:43:06.040 you say.
00:43:10.480 Good luck
00:43:11.140 convincing the
00:43:11.820 candidates.
00:43:12.460 Well,
00:43:13.120 do you think
00:43:13.620 I could convince
00:43:14.380 Trump?
00:43:16.160 Who thinks
00:43:16.880 I couldn't
00:43:17.460 convince Trump
00:43:18.380 to do a
00:43:19.300 podcast with me?
00:43:22.560 I could
00:43:22.940 convince Trump.
00:43:24.900 It'd be great
00:43:25.440 for him.
00:43:26.480 Because what
00:43:27.760 I would do
00:43:28.180 for both
00:43:28.640 candidates is
00:43:29.380 let them 0.55
00:43:29.960 show them
00:43:31.220 in their
00:43:31.480 best light.
00:43:33.060 I would be
00:43:33.760 challenging,
00:43:34.560 but I would
00:43:34.880 also let them
00:43:35.620 really show
00:43:36.660 themselves in
00:43:37.220 their best
00:43:37.520 light.
00:43:37.800 That's the
00:43:38.080 point of it,
00:43:38.480 really.
00:43:39.420 I'd be tough,
00:43:41.000 but I'm not
00:43:41.700 trying to
00:43:42.040 destroy anybody.
00:43:43.080 So do you
00:43:44.040 think Trump
00:43:44.520 could,
00:43:45.000 let's say,
00:43:47.480 thrive in
00:43:49.280 that environment?
00:43:49.940 Of course he
00:43:50.460 could.
00:43:51.320 Of course he
00:43:51.800 could.
00:43:52.460 And Trump
00:43:53.020 knows me
00:43:53.540 because he
00:43:53.880 met me,
00:43:54.380 so he would
00:43:54.980 know.
00:43:55.640 He'd have a
00:43:56.580 sense of me.
00:43:57.280 I don't think
00:43:57.660 he'd be
00:43:57.940 afraid of
00:43:58.400 anything bad
00:43:58.880 happening.
00:44:03.100 Now,
00:44:03.660 whether the
00:44:04.300 Democrat
00:44:04.920 candidate would
00:44:05.900 do it.
00:44:06.400 Who do you
00:44:06.720 think the
00:44:07.020 Democrat
00:44:07.380 candidate is
00:44:07.940 going to be,
00:44:08.280 by the way?
00:44:09.540 Give me your
00:44:10.240 best bet.
00:44:11.380 Democrat
00:44:11.900 candidate for
00:44:12.600 president.
00:44:13.540 I don't
00:44:13.960 think Hillary. 1.00
00:44:15.580 I don't
00:44:15.920 think Beto.
00:44:16.900 I don't
00:44:17.220 think Kamala.
00:44:21.740 Not Michelle.
00:44:23.700 Klobuchar,
00:44:24.480 Buttigieg.
00:44:25.200 I don't
00:44:27.140 know.
00:44:29.360 I don't
00:44:33.000 know if
00:44:33.600 any of
00:44:33.980 them are
00:44:34.280 really,
00:44:34.660 I really
00:44:36.260 have a
00:44:36.620 chance.
00:44:40.360 Smollett,
00:44:41.240 AOC,
00:44:43.280 Newsom.
00:44:44.360 All right,
00:44:44.740 well, let's
00:44:45.760 pick Governor
00:44:47.140 Newsom.
00:44:48.060 Would
00:44:48.340 Governor
00:44:48.760 Newsom agree
00:44:50.840 to a debate
00:44:51.660 that I
00:44:52.000 moderated?
00:44:52.480 I don't
00:44:54.280 know.
00:44:54.980 Good
00:44:55.380 question.
00:44:56.320 I'm a
00:44:56.900 Californian,
00:44:57.600 so maybe I'd
00:44:58.120 have a little
00:44:58.820 bit of edge.
00:45:04.100 So here's
00:45:04.860 the thing.
00:45:05.560 I would
00:45:06.000 not agree
00:45:06.640 to host a
00:45:08.000 presidential
00:45:08.460 debate unless
00:45:09.960 I was dead
00:45:10.740 serious about
00:45:11.780 giving them
00:45:12.360 both equal
00:45:13.540 treatment.
00:45:14.820 I'd have to
00:45:15.520 be dead
00:45:15.900 serious about
00:45:16.520 that.
00:45:18.200 But, of
00:45:18.960 course, people
00:45:19.420 would assume I
00:45:20.020 didn't after
00:45:20.560 they watched
00:45:21.020 it, because
00:45:21.600 that's the
00:45:21.880 way it
00:45:22.080 works.
00:45:22.480 But I'd
00:45:23.880 be serious
00:45:24.360 about it,
00:45:24.780 whether I
00:45:25.120 pulled it
00:45:25.460 off or
00:45:25.740 not.
00:45:28.120 All right.
00:45:32.220 Why do I
00:45:32.820 think Michelle
00:45:33.280 Obama is
00:45:33.940 now?
00:45:34.380 I don't
00:45:34.820 think anybody
00:45:35.540 is ready
00:45:36.420 to elect
00:45:38.840 somebody who
00:45:39.260 doesn't have
00:45:39.700 actual government
00:45:40.480 service.
00:45:41.320 Because remember
00:45:41.780 when people
00:45:42.240 were saying
00:45:42.580 the same
00:45:42.900 thing about
00:45:43.340 Hillary 0.96
00:45:43.760 Clinton?
00:45:44.740 They said
00:45:45.460 that before
00:45:46.220 she was a
00:45:46.900 senator or
00:45:47.460 before she
00:45:48.000 was Secretary
00:45:48.540 of State.
00:45:49.320 She had
00:45:49.700 to go
00:45:50.500 through the
00:45:51.020 work to
00:45:53.620 become a
00:45:54.020 presidential
00:45:54.400 candidate.
00:46:02.640 Why would I
00:46:03.320 want to?
00:46:03.940 Yeah, why
00:46:04.260 would she
00:46:04.520 want to?
00:46:05.200 That's a good
00:46:05.520 question.
00:46:06.280 I think it
00:46:06.840 would be all
00:46:07.280 bad for the
00:46:07.920 Obamas if
00:46:08.580 Michelle ran.
00:46:09.620 I can't see it
00:46:10.240 happening.
00:46:12.740 Biden again?
00:46:13.460 I don't know.
00:46:14.080 All right, that's
00:46:14.520 all for now,
00:46:15.480 YouTube, and I'll
00:46:16.260 talk to you
00:46:16.900 tomorrow.