Real Coffee with Scott Adams - November 05, 2022


Episode 1918 Scott Adams: Delicious News Today, Let's Take A Big Bite. The Midterms Are Upon Us


Episode Stats

Length

1 hour and 33 minutes

Words per Minute

141.51581

Word Count

13,183

Sentence Count

968

Misogynist Sentences

11

Hate Speech Sentences

29


Summary

In this episode, I talk about how to lose weight using a system called the "Systems Over Goals" technique. I also talk about coffee and why I don't wear pants when I drink it. And I give my entertainment recommendation of the day.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody. It's about time you got here. I've been sitting here waiting.
00:00:06.060 And may I say that you look smarter and better looking, nay, sexier, than I have ever seen you
00:00:13.400 before. So good job on that. And you know what the funny thing is? I always say that,
00:00:18.620 you know, that you look better and you look sexier. But I swear that this really happens
00:00:24.260 almost every day. A little technical problem. Almost every day, somebody contacts me personally,
00:00:33.640 usually on social media, to tell me how much weight they lost using systems over goals,
00:00:40.000 stuff that I teach you. Yesterday, somebody said they lost 58 pounds. I saw the before and after
00:00:46.880 picture. Oh, my God. You should see the difference when somebody loses 58 pounds, especially male.
00:00:56.560 Because, you know, he went from, I don't know who's going to date that guy, to, I think everybody
00:01:03.520 wants to date that guy. Somebody sent me, I won't name names, but somebody sent me a shirtless selfie.
00:01:10.040 And I looked at it and I was like, shit. Shit, you nailed that. Anyway, so almost every day I get
00:01:18.380 that. Women, men, somebody lost 25 pounds the day before I heard that. Yeah. And I'm very proud of you.
00:01:27.680 And I think this simultaneous SIP is for all of you who have lost weight. In fact, while we're doing
00:01:33.200 the simultaneous SIP, if you've lost weight because of using systems versus goals, stuff I teach in
00:01:40.000 this book over my shoulder, had I failed almost everything and still went big. If you did, just
00:01:44.540 put your number up. So while we're doing the simultaneous SIP, just brag. Just tell me your
00:01:50.740 number if you lost weight using, oh, my God. Somebody lost 100 pounds? Yeah. Oh, my God. All right.
00:02:02.940 Okay. Okay. I'm just transfixed by this. Is this real? Now, those of you who have not lost any weight
00:02:12.540 using this systems over goal technique, which largely teaches you to increase your knowledge,
00:02:19.480 and then if you do that, losing weight is easy. So that's the technique. That's the short version.
00:02:25.560 Look at these numbers. If you have not lost weight, are you not convinced that this works?
00:02:33.980 This meaning developing a system that works for you, right? Everybody using their own little
00:02:39.160 system. But I just teach you how to develop your own little system. Wow. Good job. Well, let's bring
00:02:47.320 it up a notch. And if you'd like to do that, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass or a tank or a
00:02:50.960 shell, a stein, a canteen, a jug or a glass, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite
00:02:54.660 liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit
00:02:59.280 of the day, the thing that makes everything better, including your weight, apparently.
00:03:03.760 It's called the simultaneous SIP. It happens now. Go.
00:03:08.740 You know, there's a report out of South Korea that there were nine, a bunch of South Korea
00:03:21.220 miners who were trapped underground for nine days. And they survived on coffee alone. To
00:03:31.180 which I say, is there anything that coffee can do? I asked that on Twitter. And somebody suggested
00:03:38.620 there is one thing coffee can't do. It can't not stain your fabric. It can't not stain your
00:03:45.180 fabric. To which I say, well, that's why I don't wear pants when I drink coffee.
00:03:52.220 I mean, if you're wearing pants while you drink coffee, you're just asking for a stain on your
00:03:55.980 pants. So it does cause problems at Starbucks. Starbucks hates it. Let me just put that out there.
00:04:04.460 Starbucks just hates it. But I have not stained my pants in Starbucks in a long time.
00:04:10.540 I have a entertainment content recommendation for you in a world in which a world in which
00:04:19.740 all movies are bad. Can we stipulate? All movies are bad. I don't know when that started happening,
00:04:29.780 but they're all bad. All right? Well, I found something that I watched that I enjoyed.
00:04:35.940 And some of you have already seen it, but it's called My Octopus Teacher. The worst name for
00:04:43.060 content I've ever seen. In fact, the name alone kept me from watching it for a long time.
00:04:48.900 Because I didn't know, what the hell is it about? I thought it was gonna be like The Shape of Water,
00:04:53.380 which I also didn't watch. Because I didn't want to see a human fall in love with an octopus.
00:05:01.380 Because I thought that's kind of what it was gonna be. I was like, oh God, is this gonna be like some
00:05:06.420 stupid fiction where a human falls in love with an octopus? Well, the first thing you need to know,
00:05:11.860 it's a documentary. So it's not a movie. It's a documentary movie, I guess. And
00:05:17.940 the man actually falls in love with the octopus.
00:05:25.220 The man falls in love with the octopus.
00:05:30.260 Now, if that's the only thing you knew about it, then I would say that doesn't quite recommend it,
00:05:36.580 does it? Because it's a little sort of close to bestiality. He doesn't actually have sex with the
00:05:41.540 octopus, but it did look like it was getting close. There was some heavy petting of the octopus.
00:05:48.420 So I wouldn't let the kids watch, because it was at least R-rated action with the octopus,
00:05:54.660 you know, if you know what I mean. I'm not sure where to touch an octopus
00:06:01.060 to be inappropriate, but it seems to me that almost anywhere would be a little sketchy.
00:06:07.700 Right? No, but here's why I recommend it. Here's why I recommend it. Whatever you thought you knew
00:06:15.060 about octopi, octopuses, whatever you thought you knew about them, oh my God, are you gonna be
00:06:21.380 surprised? Your mind will be blown about every five minutes. About every five minutes, you'll be sitting
00:06:28.180 there going, what? What? An octopus did that? Trust me. Just trust me that you cannot judge this by the
00:06:39.460 name or the general idea of it. You have to watch it for what an octopus can do. It's like, blows your
00:06:47.700 head away. All right. The other important story, we'll get to all the good news, but I like to work
00:06:54.660 up to it. There's a new product developed in Pittsburgh, at this Pittsburgh-based startup,
00:07:01.300 CNN's reporting, called Shift Robotics. They've got, I guess you could call them battery-powered shoes
00:07:09.620 that make you walk two and a half times faster. Now, they look visually like a multi-wheeled skates,
00:07:19.380 but they don't operate like skates. Basically, every step you take gives you a little glide,
00:07:25.780 but it's a controlled glide. It's not like skates where you'd have to stop. So it's basically like
00:07:31.220 you can walk slide, but really fast. Maybe that's a bad definition, because it's like walk roll. But it
00:07:39.060 showed some people doing it, and it looks like it doesn't take any talent, right? It's not like riding
00:07:45.860 a bike where you have to at least practice to do it. I think you could just put them on and start
00:07:49.140 walking. And I got to say, it looked really good. I can imagine this catching on. I can totally
00:07:58.820 imagine it. And I can also imagine that I would use it for exercise, even though it's making it easier
00:08:04.660 to walk, in the same way I use an e-bike. I still can exercise an e-bike. I just take it 20 miles instead
00:08:12.100 of five miles, right? And I still do hills, and I can turn down the boost as much as I want. So I
00:08:19.700 think that could be a big thing. All right, here's a persuasion question. I saw on Twitter that Democrats
00:08:29.060 are trying to stop calling gun control, gun control, and call it gun safety. What do you think
00:08:38.580 that? What do you think about that? Is that good persuasion? To change it from gun control
00:08:44.500 to gun safety? Yes, it is. That is unambiguously a good play, right? It might be too late. You know,
00:08:53.940 people have already decided on guns. So I'm not sure anybody can be persuaded about anything.
00:08:59.060 But if you wanted at least a chance of persuading, gun safety is really strong, right? That's very
00:09:07.060 strong. I'm going to tell you later about Democrats getting everything wrong with persuasion. But on
00:09:13.620 that one, I'd say that was the right play, if you're just trying to be persuasive.
00:09:17.620 There's some weird extra information about this Ye story with his, probably ex, personal trainer
00:09:29.940 now, who had threatened him in messages, and Ye printed the messages on Twitter. And the message
00:09:36.260 was that if Ye didn't talk to him, I think on the topic of apologizing for comments about the Jewish
00:09:43.620 community, that this guy, Harley Pasternak, would have Ye institutionalized again. And he used the word
00:09:55.940 again. I'll have you institutionalized again, and then you'll be drugged up so you'll be in
00:10:02.740 zombie land and visiting your kids will never be the same. He actually said that to another human being.
00:10:08.820 Now, my understanding is that they later met and talked for a few hours. Although, you know,
00:10:15.940 would you ever talk to somebody who said that to you? Would you have, would you sit down and have a
00:10:22.180 polite conversation with somebody who had just threatened to institutionalize you and remove
00:10:27.220 you from your kids forever? He's not even in your family? He's just a fucking guy that worked for you?
00:10:32.580 Really? Would you take that from a guy you hired to help you? You know, because the trainer does more
00:10:40.260 than just your body, right? It's sort of a little holistic situation. My God. Now, I might take the
00:10:47.540 meeting just to punch the fucking piss out of him. Although he's a personal trainer, so that probably is a
00:10:53.300 really bad idea. I suppose he looks like he could handle himself. But there's some additional conspiracy
00:11:03.220 theory reporting that I find interesting, but not convincing. Interesting, but not convincing.
00:11:11.060 So I'm only going to talk about this because it's a fun speculation. I would not put any credibility
00:11:16.900 behind it. But I'll give you the argument. So apparently, Pastor Nick has history with
00:11:25.460 training a number of other celebrities, some of whom did not meet a good end.
00:11:31.940 And people are trying to make some kind of a pattern here. I don't see much in that pattern,
00:11:37.060 because there's no incentive. You know, it doesn't make sense that one person would have, you know,
00:11:42.100 several bad outcomes with celebrities. It makes more sense to me that celebrities are all messed up.
00:11:49.700 And so if you're a personal trainer to celebrities, you're probably always working with people who are,
00:11:55.700 you know, on the edge of hurting themselves and stuff like that. So yeah. So I wouldn't make anything
00:12:01.860 from the fact that he's trained some people who came to bad ends, and I think some killed themselves
00:12:07.620 or died and drug addicts and stuff. But I don't think there's a causal argument there, just because
00:12:14.580 it's, you know, Hollywood people. But he's got some connection to some Canadian military
00:12:22.740 that people speculate that maybe he has some official role. Like that the powers who be
00:12:31.620 are using him to get close to people that they want to control.
00:12:40.180 What do you think of the general, let's say the general concept. Do you think it's a true thing
00:12:47.300 that in the context of politics that the powers who be, whoever you think they are, might not even be
00:12:53.460 the same people. Could be the powers that be on one side versus the other side, but just whoever the
00:12:58.100 powers are. Do you believe it's a thing that the powers who be would assign somebody to be
00:13:07.540 like a secret handler to somebody whose voice they want to control? Do you think it's a thing?
00:13:16.180 Now, are you saying you think it's a thing just because you suspect everything bad is true?
00:13:22.340 Or do you have some evidence that you've ever heard of it in a real way? Have you ever confirmed it in any way?
00:13:32.580 Like fang fang, that's a good example. Yeah, fang fang is the perfect example, right?
00:13:39.220 So I can give you a definitive answer to this question. Yes. Yes, it's absolutely a thing.
00:13:46.900 How do I know? Because it's happened to me at least three times. At least three times the powers that be
00:13:53.220 have sent somebody to be my friend. Okay? Now, I can't guarantee that any of the three
00:14:02.900 were really, you know, sent by shady organizations, but they're all associated with them.
00:14:08.660 And they all ran the same play, right? I'm not going to describe it to you. But if somebody tries
00:14:16.420 a little bit too hard to be your friend, they might be fang fang, right? Now, nothing's happened to me
00:14:24.900 that, you know, reached a level where I would have to get law enforcement involved or the FBI or something.
00:14:30.580 So nothing, nothing at that level. It's just that people trying to be your friend, you look at them,
00:14:36.500 you say, I don't think that's just you trying to be my friend. That looks like you connected to
00:14:42.260 people who would like to control my voice a little bit. And so it's a thing. It's a real thing.
00:14:49.780 I have no reason to believe that it is true in this case of Ye's trainer. I'd bet against it.
00:14:55.860 My bet is it's just an individual acting like an individual, the most obvious thing. But as the
00:15:05.700 account Restoring Order, I don't know who this is, just somebody on Twitter. So that's the name of
00:15:10.820 the account, Restoring Order. It has a long thread making the case that there's no way to know
00:15:18.500 if this speculation has any substance. But he closes, I think it's a he, by saying that if
00:15:29.860 somebody were sent to manage Ye, if that happened, that person would look exactly like this person.
00:15:37.460 And I do accept that. That I accept, which is completely different from saying that Pastor
00:15:46.340 Neck has any, you know, role beyond being an interested party. It's just that it would look
00:15:51.780 exactly like that, right? It would just look like that. So I don't think there's anything to it,
00:15:59.140 but it's an interesting exposure to a real thing. And the real thing is that people do try to be your
00:16:07.940 fake friend to influence you. That's a real thing. You all saw by now a hostess from The View,
00:16:16.740 Sonny Hostin. That's right. There's somebody who's a host of a show whose last name is Hostin.
00:16:23.140 Huh? Somebody named Hostin is Hostin a show. That's probably a coincidence. But she said that
00:16:36.260 white women voting Republican is like roaches voting for raid. Now I and a number of other people said,
00:16:44.340 whoa, did you just compare white women to roaches? Did you just do that? Now I have a confession.
00:16:53.860 It's confession time. Do you like it when I confess my true motives?
00:17:03.140 Okay, when I retweeted this and it got like 10,000 likes and, you know, thousands of retweets,
00:17:08.980 when I said that she compared women to cockroaches, white women to cockroaches,
00:17:14.340 I didn't really mean that. That was for revenge. And I don't feel good about it because I don't have
00:17:23.620 any reason to have revenge against Sonny Hostin because I have no contact with her. This was revenge
00:17:30.660 for something that happened to me about 15 years ago. Now, I'm not going to surface the whole story,
00:17:38.100 but the most trouble I ever got into in terms of getting canceled was in a blog post about 15 years
00:17:45.140 ago in which I said something that I thought people would understand to be funny, but they didn't.
00:17:52.900 And what I did was I intentionally put a list of three things
00:17:57.860 things which was supposed to make you say, Hey, you're insulting women. But when they thought
00:18:03.700 about it, they'd realize I wasn't. And then that was the joke. The joke was that in your mind,
00:18:08.420 you'd think something terrible had happened, that I'd said something really awful about women. But if
00:18:14.180 you actually read it carefully, you'd say, Oh, he's screwing with us. He didn't say that at all.
00:18:19.300 He worded it carefully. So we think that and that's the joke. All right. So here's what I said.
00:18:27.460 That men, when it comes to arguing, there are three groups that men don't like to argue with.
00:18:33.700 Children, people who are mentally, mentally challenged, and women.
00:18:46.420 You see what trouble I got into? And then what did people say? They took it out of context that they
00:18:51.780 said that I compared women to mentally ill people. Did I do that? Did I compare them? No, I did not. I did
00:19:02.100 not compare them. They were in the same list. They were just in the list. And that was the funny part.
00:19:09.060 The joke was that nobody should compare those groups. That was my point, right? So if you understood
00:19:16.100 the joke, or you understood it was a joke, you'd realize that the people criticizing me are on the
00:19:21.780 same side as me, which is you would never compare children and the mentally disabled and women.
00:19:29.620 Like, that wouldn't make any sense. But when they said, hey, you're insulting women by comparing
00:19:35.860 them to the mentally disabled, I could have argued the details and said, but you're also,
00:19:41.860 do you think I also compared babies to the mentally disabled? Like, are they all being compared to each
00:19:48.500 other? Or did I compare nobody? Right? The truth is, I didn't compare anybody. Nobody was compared to
00:19:56.180 anybody. The joke was, if you felt like they were being compared, the joke's on you. The joke's on
00:20:02.660 you if you thought they were being compared. That was the joke. But instead, since a third of the
00:20:10.180 country wouldn't know what a joke looks like, I've taught you that before, right? Literally,
00:20:14.420 literally a third of the country can't even identify a joke. They don't know.
00:20:18.260 No. So mostly, I brought this on myself. So I'm not absolving myself from guilt. If you say
00:20:26.660 something that's unclear, and it's your job to say clear things, that's my job. My job is to say
00:20:33.620 clear things, and it wasn't clear. So I brought that on myself. But I got, that probably cost me
00:20:41.300 30% of all my future income. Forever. Yeah. Do you know how much money that was? It was really
00:20:50.980 expensive. That was one sentence that got me probably one-third cancelled forever. That never
00:20:56.740 came back. Because basically, women said, oh, he's a misogynist, and they left. Completely fake news. 100%
00:21:05.060 fake news. So when I saw this Sonny Hostin thing, I said, huh, that looks familiar. This looks like
00:21:13.700 the exact fucking thing that got me cancelled, or one-third cancelled forever. So I thought to
00:21:19.460 myself, huh, I wonder if other people will take it the same way. So I tweeted it, and everybody did.
00:21:27.860 The Republicans did to her, to Sonny Hostin, the same thing that, you know, I don't know what
00:21:35.220 what group they were, but people did to me. They cancelled me for intentionally not understanding
00:21:42.420 the point. Right? Now, do you think Sonny Hostin's point was that white women are like cockroaches?
00:21:51.940 No. Oh, of course it wasn't. Her point was they were doing something that's bad for them.
00:21:57.460 Right? Which actually is showing interest and compassion in white women that she would prefer
00:22:06.740 they did something that was good for them. The context is, you know, how can white women do
00:22:13.060 something that's good for them? They should do that instead of something that's bad for them.
00:22:16.580 Now, is that anti-white? If you're saying you wish white women would do things that are good for white
00:22:23.780 women? Not really. I mean, but if you say to me, what if that had been reversed? You know,
00:22:32.340 what if a white person had said that black people, you know, the usual thing, you do the thing where you
00:22:38.980 just change the group? And then it sounds terrible. You'd all agree with that, right? If you change the
00:22:44.660 ethnicity, it would sound way over the line. And so I think it's fair that people said this is also
00:22:51.700 over the line because there needs to be some pushback that you can't shit on white women, even if it's
00:22:59.220 sort of just casual language and it wasn't your point. You can't even do it. Don't do it accidentally
00:23:04.500 either. Because that's a standard that I would accept the other direction, right? If somebody
00:23:10.660 said to me, Scott, I know you didn't mean to insult whatever group, but don't talk that way because
00:23:18.020 we take it that way. I would say, oh, that's a pretty good point. I will not talk that way because
00:23:24.100 you take it that way. Do you think I have ever once made that mistake I made when I put women and
00:23:30.180 children and the mentally disabled in a list just for joke purposes? I will never make that mistake
00:23:36.660 again because the public pushed back on me. Now, I hate the fact that I got canceled, you know, one
00:23:43.140 third canceled, but it's not a bad thing that the public pushes back, right? I have a little mixed
00:23:50.980 feeling about it. Maybe they should have pushed back on me. Maybe they should have. Not canceling me,
00:23:56.700 but they should have pushed back a little maybe. All right. Apparently, there's a thing now called,
00:24:04.940 you know, you've heard of diversity, but the trouble with diversity is a third of white college
00:24:12.860 applicants were claiming they were black to get benefits. So the diversity thing wasn't working
00:24:19.740 because everybody wanted to claim they were a disadvantaged person. It kind of ruins the entire
00:24:26.540 narrative. What? We can claim we're black? I'm in. Can I claim I'm black? Hey, hey, everybody,
00:24:33.420 we can claim we're black now. It's legal. Well, let's all claim we're black. They didn't see that coming.
00:24:38.700 All right. I think they did not see that people would say, not only am I not a racist, but if you're
00:24:47.820 giving me the option, I'm going to join your fucking team. I mean, you can't be any, you can't be,
00:24:54.940 I don't think you could be less racist than actually joining the team, which is what I've done. That's why
00:25:00.620 I've identified as black for a few years now. And it's worked for me. It's worked for me.
00:25:06.380 But now there's a thing called visual diversity, meaning that if you're a school, for example,
00:25:12.780 Wall Street Journal has an article in this today, that if you're a school and somebody is diverse,
00:25:19.980 but you couldn't tell by looking at them, it's not good enough. And this is not even about what
00:25:26.220 your actual ethnicity is. You have to look it. Because if you don't look diverse, it's not working.
00:25:33.420 So this brings me to my favorite point of the night. Did anybody watch Tucker Carlson last night?
00:25:47.260 Now, I'm going to point out something that I noticed that's bigger than Tucker Carlson.
00:25:53.020 All right. So I turned it on. And Tucker Carlson did an entire comedy segment in which all he did was
00:26:02.300 show the actual clips of Democrats talking recently. Like, you know, professional talkers. I'm not
00:26:10.620 talking about on the street. I'm talking about, you know, MSNBC hosts and hosts of other big news
00:26:18.540 programs. And I don't know how to explain this. He didn't have to add anything. And it was the
00:26:27.900 funniest thing you've ever seen. He didn't have to add the joke. It was a comedy segment of just
00:26:36.300 showing Democrats talking. For example, Joy Reid, my favorite segment was Joy Reid explaining
00:26:46.460 that Republicans are using this word inflation that people don't understand. And they've like
00:26:53.020 invented a new word for politics that people had never even thought about. It wasn't really part of
00:26:58.460 their world. But suddenly Republicans have made this artificial, like, completely imaginary thing
00:27:05.260 called inflation and turned it into a topic when, in fact, people don't even know what that word means.
00:27:11.740 Now, do I have to add anything to that? Is that not hilarious? I mean, I could say the obvious
00:27:19.260 things such as we've been talking about inflation with politics since the Carter years,
00:27:24.700 that anybody with even the slightest association with politics knows exactly what it means.
00:27:31.100 We could go into, you know, again, it seems racist. I mean, it seems racist as black people can't get
00:27:38.940 ID to vote. And the rest of us who are not racist go, I've never met any black people who couldn't get an
00:27:46.300 ID to vote. I've never met anybody that dumb, you know, of any race. Like, they all seem to be able to,
00:27:54.060 because you could always just ask somebody, couldn't you? Like, no matter how much you know,
00:27:59.180 you could just ask somebody who knows. It's the easiest thing in the world. So, anyway,
00:28:06.060 just think about the fact that comedy movies are no longer a thing. Would you agree?
00:28:13.580 Hollywood gave up on making comedy movies, because comedy doesn't make sense anymore,
00:28:19.740 you know, with all the wokeness. But that the news, remember, how long have I been telling you the
00:28:24.860 news is the new comedy? That's not hyperbole. The thing that makes me laugh the hardest most
00:28:32.620 consistently is just the news. And the fact that Tucker no longer has to add anything to the news,
00:28:39.260 he can literally just show the clip and just laugh. And then we just laugh with him. Ah,
00:28:44.940 that was pretty funny. Now, here's why I think it's extra funny right now. Correct me if I'm wrong,
00:28:52.140 but the Democrats probably feeling a little bit backed into a corner. And they realized that most
00:28:58.620 of their issues were imaginary. And the Republicans were focusing on real things. Now, of course,
00:29:05.260 the Democrats say the opposite, because they think inflation's imaginary. They also think crime's
00:29:11.100 imaginary, or at least the extent of it. And that the border problem's kind of imaginary.
00:29:17.180 And Tucker also, I think Tucker showed it, the news saying that Fox News, they keep focusing on crime,
00:29:26.620 inflation, and immigration. And the other news were saying, you know, why do they keep focusing on
00:29:35.740 those things? To which I said, could it be, I'm just going to throw this out there,
00:29:42.540 that they're also the topics that the public most cares about. Now, you're saying that we fear them,
00:29:49.100 but that's why we care the most. If you do a poll of what issues does the public care about,
00:29:59.100 would it match up with what Fox News reports every night? Or would it match up with
00:30:06.300 CNN and MSNBC? Which would match? I mean, it's a no-brainer. If you've looked at the polls,
00:30:13.020 the public is interested in exactly the same stuff that, not exactly maybe, but very close to what Fox
00:30:20.940 News reports every night. And news organizations criticize Fox News for reporting the thing that
00:30:30.300 even the news organizations know the public cares most about. Of course, the problem is,
00:30:35.740 why does the public care most about those issues? Might be because Fox News tells them to.
00:30:47.100 So you do have this problem that people care about what they're told to care about. You know,
00:30:51.180 their opinions are somewhat assigned. But I think there's a difference with crime and inflation.
00:30:58.300 Nobody needs to be told there's crime if they experience it. Even my neighborhood is more
00:31:04.140 dangerous this year. And I live in a really safe neighborhood. And it's more dangerous. It's like
00:31:09.500 literally more dangerous. And I don't know, I think people's lived experience is just making the
00:31:17.020 Democrats crazy because there's nothing they can lie about and get away with anymore, except for their own
00:31:22.380 base, I guess. So Joel Pollack has an interesting article in Breitbart. Rasmussen is having
00:31:33.980 some problems with their polling. And one assumes that others are having the same problem, but we
00:31:40.300 only know, because Rasmussen's reporting it, that apparently the online polling portion of their polls,
00:31:50.540 a number of people are identifying as a Republican, but then voting for like a senator who's a Democrat.
00:31:57.420 Now, you might say to yourself, well, that's not unusual. People split tickets. That's a thing.
00:32:04.620 Except that nobody's doing it the other way. There are no examples of people who look like
00:32:10.380 they're totally Democrats, but they're going to vote for Republican senators. And if it were just sort
00:32:17.660 of a thing that ordinary people can, you know, split their votes, if that were a thing, it would work
00:32:23.580 both ways. But it's only going one way, which suggests that the polls are not dependable.
00:32:33.260 So what would be worse than going into a midterms with the polling companies telling you the polls
00:32:40.700 are not dependable? That's sort of a gas and lighter, isn't it? It's sort of a dangerous situation
00:32:50.860 to be going into a midterm. We'll talk more about that.
00:32:57.500 All right. Molly Hemingway, writing for The Federalist, and by the way, if you're not following
00:33:05.820 Molly Hemingway, I've often called her out as probably the best political pundit who is working
00:33:14.860 at the moment, who is also a writer. I'd say of people who are also writers, best political pundit.
00:33:23.500 So whenever she does anything, I always pay attention to it. But here's something that hasn't
00:33:29.420 been reported enough to Republicans, all right? So here's something you want to hear that you
00:33:34.860 probably haven't heard enough. She writes, the Republican National Committee, other party entities,
00:33:40.620 and dozens of public interest election nonprofit groups built over the last two years, a multimillion
00:33:47.020 dollar election integrity infrastructure. The past laws improving vote ID and other election security
00:33:54.620 measures defended those laws from legal attacks by Democrats and sued states and localities that
00:34:00.460 failed to follow the law. They also recruited, educated, trained, and placed tens of thousands of
00:34:05.260 new election observers and other workers throughout the long midterm voting season.
00:34:11.100 So one thing that you're not quite appreciating is the extent to which Republicans ramped up,
00:34:18.700 right? Because if what happened in 2020, and I think there's a good argument for the only thing
00:34:24.780 that happened that was weird in 2020 was pandemic-related changes that the Democrats pushed through
00:34:31.100 that worked out. So it could be that the Republicans have matched their game just in terms of being
00:34:39.580 able to watch things and control things and make it a little safer. I don't know if any of this makes
00:34:45.500 a difference. I don't have any sense of whether this was enough. But it's good to know that the
00:34:50.780 Republicans were not sitting doing nothing. They did stuff.
00:34:54.940 What do you think of the Democrats play? They're all saying now, it's their new talking point,
00:35:02.220 that on the midterms, democracy is on the ballot. Is it strong or not strong?
00:35:13.260 It's super weak. Do you think they know it?
00:35:16.780 Do you think the Democrats know it's super weak? Well, let me start by saying why it's super weak.
00:35:25.020 Here's what's strong. Build a wall. Because you can see it, right? And you can also feel the danger.
00:35:33.580 Because what are you building the wall for? Well, some kind of economic or other threat.
00:35:38.380 So there's fear. And there's visual persuasion in build the wall. How about crime is overtaking
00:35:47.580 your cities? Good persuasion? Very good. Because crime is scary. And you can also visualize it.
00:35:55.180 Can't you visualize crime? Right? You see somebody, you see riots and stuff. People get mugged.
00:36:02.460 Now try to visualize this. Democracy is on the ballot.
00:36:10.300 Oh, I'm so scared now about your concept that is so generic it is said on every election.
00:36:19.180 There's no visual. There's no visual and there's no fear. Because do you know what's on the ballot every year?
00:36:26.780 Democracy. Democracy. Democracy is always on the ballot. That's where you want it.
00:36:35.660 Now, Tucker did a funny thing where he held up a ballot and he looked for the democracy vote and it wasn't there.
00:36:42.060 But I would go the other direction. Yes, democracy is on the ballot. It absolutely is on the ballot.
00:36:49.260 And don't let the Democrats take it off. Because the Democrats would like to take it off the ballot.
00:36:57.580 Well, that would be the attack vector. I'm not saying that they do.
00:37:05.180 So I would agree and amplify. If I'm a Republican, I would say, Democrats have told you democracy is on
00:37:12.460 the ballot. This is the one thing we can agree on. Democracy is always on the ballot.
00:37:18.060 If you don't vote, you're letting the evil creep in. Democracy is always on the ballot.
00:37:28.460 Republicans could take their entire frame and use it without explanation.
00:37:35.100 Imagine if you could take the other side's slogan and use it without explanation.
00:37:41.020 That is the worst slogan you could ever fucking have. If the other team could just say it and they don't
00:37:49.020 even have to like add the, you know, we took it from the Democrats and what they mean is this,
00:37:53.580 but you don't have to add anything. You just say democracy is on the ballot and you're done.
00:37:59.180 Because it's always on the ballot. Democracy is on the ballot. Do you know what that tells me to do?
00:38:03.900 What's it tell you? What's it tell you to do? Democracy is on the ballot. What are you going to do?
00:38:11.420 I'd vote. Yeah, I'd vote. So, I mean, it really, it just comes down to a you should vote kind of thing.
00:38:18.140 And both sides want people to vote. So, it works just as well, both ways. Total failure.
00:38:27.340 Or is it? Why do you think the Democrats, who know how to hire professionals who know how to persuade,
00:38:37.500 you know the Democrats know how to do that. They do have people who know what they're talking about.
00:38:43.420 They know how to listen to them. They know how to execute. But they're not.
00:38:49.260 Why would they have a slogan that is clearly not useful? Well, what would be a reason for that?
00:39:00.860 Well, there is a reason. And I'll tell you.
00:39:05.340 It's foreshadowing.
00:39:13.260 Yeah, it's foreshadowing.
00:39:16.060 Have you noticed the pattern that the Democrats pre-accus Republicans of whatever they're planning to do?
00:39:26.020 You've noticed the pattern, right?
00:39:28.420 If they're planning to do something, they're going to start by saying that,
00:39:32.320 oh, those Republicans are going to do this thing. And then when it happens, you're going to say,
00:39:37.280 oh, the Democrats warned us. There's those Republicans.
00:39:40.260 Who else uses that technique?
00:39:43.060 Where have you seen that technique used recently?
00:39:45.980 You recognize it?
00:39:47.060 Where somebody blames you as something they're going to do.
00:39:50.800 Where have you seen that?
00:39:53.140 The Russians.
00:39:54.240 The Russians have warned the world that the Ukrainians might try to use a dirty bomb.
00:40:01.620 Some kind of tactical nuclear situation.
00:40:05.140 That's right.
00:40:06.120 When the Russians tell you that the Ukrainians are planning to use a dirty bomb,
00:40:11.380 that tells you the Russians might use a dirty bomb.
00:40:15.460 Does anybody disagree with that?
00:40:17.420 It's just sort of obvious, right?
00:40:18.880 Literally, that's the way it's reported.
00:40:22.200 Every news story says, oh, there's those Russians.
00:40:25.380 Those Russians are projecting and they're setting up their excuse in advance.
00:40:34.920 It's exactly what the Democrats are doing.
00:40:37.420 The reason that they're using such a weak slogan,
00:40:42.040 there's only one reason they would use a weak slogan.
00:40:44.740 Because they need to put your focus on blaming the Republicans for the thing they plan to do.
00:40:53.820 I can't see another reason.
00:40:56.440 If you assume the Republicans are completely incompetent,
00:41:00.160 then you can imagine that they sat around and said,
00:41:02.300 hey, how about saying democracy is on trial?
00:41:07.580 Something like that.
00:41:09.540 You put Axelrod in that room.
00:41:12.460 Just work with me.
00:41:15.280 You put David Axelrod in the room.
00:41:17.020 Does he say, yeah, that's the way to go?
00:41:19.520 Does he?
00:41:21.100 I don't think so.
00:41:23.480 Maybe, but I don't think so.
00:41:26.720 I think he would advise against it.
00:41:29.380 I don't know.
00:41:30.240 I think he would advise, you know, maybe do something stronger.
00:41:33.940 So, the signal that they're sending
00:41:36.660 is that they're setting us up for a stolen election.
00:41:40.660 Now, I'm not saying that they are.
00:41:44.200 I'm saying that the signals they're sending us are unambiguous.
00:41:49.280 Would you agree?
00:41:50.660 Which doesn't mean it's true.
00:41:53.060 I'm just saying the signals are really clear.
00:41:55.900 It could be false signals, but they're really clear.
00:41:59.160 Right?
00:41:59.580 Why would they send us clear signals that they're going to cheat on the election?
00:42:03.680 Why would they do that?
00:42:05.240 Because most people don't pick up the signal.
00:42:08.080 Right?
00:42:08.540 Most people can't see it.
00:42:09.600 If you're following enough, you start to recognize the players
00:42:13.140 and the patterns.
00:42:15.820 Right?
00:42:16.840 You want to recognize the...
00:42:18.320 You remember Nancy Pelosi explained the wrap-up smear?
00:42:22.500 Where you leak something to the news,
00:42:25.180 the news reports it,
00:42:26.580 and then you say,
00:42:27.500 well, it must be true because it's in the news,
00:42:29.500 but you're the one that gave them the news.
00:42:31.540 Once you recognize their tricks,
00:42:34.400 you see that they just do the same ones over and over again.
00:42:36.840 All right?
00:42:37.980 So here's your signal to tell you whether it happened or not.
00:42:42.860 If John Brennan comes out after the midterms,
00:42:47.320 and let's say there's an unexpected result.
00:42:49.920 Let's say Democrats do way better than you thought.
00:42:52.220 And John Brennan comes out to tell you that the election was fair,
00:42:57.180 you know it wasn't.
00:42:58.860 Because they only bring him out for the big lies,
00:43:01.520 like the laptop and the Russian collusion.
00:43:03.960 They don't even bring him out for the little stuff.
00:43:06.980 Am I right?
00:43:08.040 They only bring him out for big lies.
00:43:10.860 He's like their go-to utility guy, big lie guy.
00:43:13.620 And the same with Bernstein.
00:43:17.260 Bernstein?
00:43:18.020 Stein?
00:43:18.680 They only bring him out when they need somebody
00:43:21.080 to say something's worse than Watergate.
00:43:23.900 So once you understand the players,
00:43:26.660 now, who do they bring out?
00:43:28.240 I'll give you another example of this.
00:43:29.860 Who do the Democrats bring out
00:43:31.380 if there's a question of something that's a secret document,
00:43:37.020 but they want you to believe that somebody saw this secret document,
00:43:40.580 and it's really much worse than you can imagine?
00:43:44.340 Schiff, right.
00:43:45.520 It will always be Schiff, right?
00:43:48.220 So once you recognize who the players are,
00:43:51.340 you know exactly what the play is,
00:43:53.300 because they only use some players for some types of plays.
00:43:56.920 And Brennan is the one you want to look for.
00:44:00.660 If Brennan goes on one of the national news
00:44:03.580 and says these Republicans are crazy,
00:44:06.960 this election was totally secure,
00:44:09.400 you, I guarantee it wasn't.
00:44:12.380 I guarantee it wasn't.
00:44:14.260 Now, if they don't bring Brennan out,
00:44:17.880 and it's just, you know, experts
00:44:19.200 and people actually know what they're talking about,
00:44:21.140 let's say the only people you hear from
00:44:25.460 are like the attorney,
00:44:27.520 who is it who runs the elections in each state?
00:44:31.860 What's the name of the job
00:44:33.300 of who runs the election in each state?
00:44:35.320 State?
00:44:36.140 Secretary of State?
00:44:36.940 So if the only people we hear from
00:44:40.080 are the secretaries of state,
00:44:42.360 and the secretaries of state say,
00:44:43.940 this election was fine, right?
00:44:46.240 The election was fine.
00:44:47.720 And some of them would be Republicans,
00:44:49.380 and some of them would be Democrats, right?
00:44:50.880 But if you heard from that group,
00:44:53.520 and that group said,
00:44:54.360 yeah, you know, I ran the election,
00:44:56.540 and I did a good job,
00:44:57.540 and I took care of it,
00:44:58.880 might be true.
00:45:00.640 But if the only person who goes on TV
00:45:03.240 saying this election was absolutely fair
00:45:05.640 is John Brennan,
00:45:07.720 they couldn't signal that more clearly.
00:45:12.540 So we'll see.
00:45:13.360 A worst-case scenario for Democrats
00:45:17.720 might be evolving,
00:45:20.960 which is they try to rig the election
00:45:24.500 and get caught.
00:45:26.800 That's actually possible,
00:45:28.900 because the Republicans are going to be looking
00:45:32.360 under every rock, behind every poll.
00:45:35.340 They're going to be watching every drop box,
00:45:37.680 which may not be a good idea,
00:45:39.440 especially if they're looking menacing,
00:45:41.120 because you don't want to give the Democrats
00:45:42.460 too many reasons to say
00:45:43.860 that the election was rigged the other way.
00:45:47.280 You know, don't put the armed people
00:45:49.140 at the drop boxes.
00:45:50.120 That's a bad idea.
00:45:53.580 But watching them with a trail cam
00:45:55.560 might not be a bad idea.
00:45:58.440 Is there any reason you couldn't put a trail cam
00:46:00.480 at every drop box?
00:46:03.980 Or put a trail cam at all the important ones?
00:46:07.660 Is it even illegal to put your own trail cam
00:46:10.020 up in public?
00:46:10.640 I guess it'd be stolen pretty quickly.
00:46:14.620 All right.
00:46:17.320 Let's talk about Twitter.
00:46:19.700 So apparently the Twitter curation team,
00:46:23.040 on social media,
00:46:24.880 people are saying the entire curation,
00:46:27.680 moderation content group got fired.
00:46:30.880 That's not true.
00:46:32.320 All right.
00:46:32.880 So there's a new emerging star
00:46:35.200 in the Twitter universe,
00:46:36.980 which is sort of fascinating,
00:46:40.520 which is Yoel Roth.
00:46:43.900 And he tweeted a long explanation.
00:46:45.900 I think 15% of that group
00:46:48.740 did get laid off.
00:46:51.660 But it's not changing much about what they do.
00:46:54.580 So nothing's changed yet.
00:46:55.720 So don't worry about those people being laid off.
00:47:00.680 They will be replaced, et cetera.
00:47:05.000 Now,
00:47:06.480 so Musk continues to be hilarious on Twitter.
00:47:12.520 Dan Rather tweeted this.
00:47:14.360 Is Musk running Twitter like Trump ran his casinos?
00:47:19.340 It's kind of a fucked up thing to say, isn't it?
00:47:22.640 Like, that's just such a useless troll thing to say.
00:47:28.380 Because, you know,
00:47:31.200 literally Elon Musk is the most successful entrepreneur
00:47:36.020 of all time.
00:47:40.520 And idiot Dan Rather is asking
00:47:43.040 if he's going to run it like Trump's casinos,
00:47:45.740 which would be an example of something
00:47:47.440 that didn't work out business-wise at all.
00:47:50.380 All right.
00:47:50.920 Now, why would he even ask that question?
00:47:53.320 Like, that's just purely an insult.
00:47:55.140 Right.
00:47:56.060 There's no news value.
00:47:58.680 It's not even an opinion.
00:48:00.660 It's just a public insult.
00:48:02.660 Right.
00:48:02.780 So what does Musk say
00:48:04.680 when Dan Rather publicly insults him?
00:48:08.620 Is Musk running Twitter like Trump ran casinos?
00:48:11.620 Musk tweets back $8.
00:48:16.380 Perfect.
00:48:18.160 Perfect.
00:48:20.280 You know, he's used that joke a few times now,
00:48:23.320 but it gets funnier every time he uses it, right?
00:48:26.580 Because he's now just shortened it to $8.
00:48:28.260 And I love how that reframes the situation, right?
00:48:35.880 Because it could have been a fight.
00:48:38.840 But he reframed it as not a fight.
00:48:40.800 It's like, thank you very much.
00:48:42.520 That was $8 worth of value you got out of that.
00:48:45.220 $8, please.
00:48:47.080 It's really strong.
00:48:51.360 All right.
00:48:51.960 Here's a persuasion question just for your general knowledge.
00:48:58.540 It's too late to make this change.
00:49:00.960 But suppose, just imagine,
00:49:03.520 if the first time you heard that Musk wanted to introduce an $8 fee,
00:49:08.360 right, it's too late now,
00:49:09.440 but imagine the first time you heard it,
00:49:11.680 he said, I'm only going to give you one thing for that.
00:49:14.840 I'm going to make sure that it suppresses the bots and the trolls.
00:49:20.000 That's all you get.
00:49:20.900 For $8, you can take bots and trolls out of your life, mostly.
00:49:25.380 Couldn't get them all.
00:49:27.200 Now, how would you feel about that
00:49:28.940 versus the current thing where he's sort of negotiating it,
00:49:33.860 you know, in real time with the users,
00:49:35.560 which is fascinating, by the way.
00:49:36.900 I love that.
00:49:37.900 But what it does is it gives you too many things to think about.
00:49:41.600 So now I'm thinking, okay, for $8,
00:49:43.920 would I be happy if I could, let's say,
00:49:46.220 maybe edit some things or I've got a little tag
00:49:49.680 or, you know, maybe the other comments are, you know,
00:49:54.440 different or something like that.
00:49:56.060 Now, if I try to think through those things,
00:49:58.420 what happens to me?
00:49:59.360 I automatically make a comparison.
00:50:03.240 And what is the automatic comparison?
00:50:05.840 The automatic comparison is free Twitter
00:50:09.620 versus paying for the thing that used to be free.
00:50:13.980 If you're talking about a feature set
00:50:16.140 and people largely didn't know they needed the features,
00:50:21.380 right, most Twitter users just go and they tweet and they go home.
00:50:24.160 They're not like, oh, my life will be complete if I had this feature.
00:50:28.360 Not really.
00:50:29.320 Like, we talk about the edit button,
00:50:31.580 but it doesn't matter that much, right?
00:50:34.320 You know, most of it doesn't really matter.
00:50:36.580 So if you talk about a bunch of features
00:50:38.960 that you might get for $8,
00:50:40.780 people's brains automatically compare free,
00:50:44.440 which was working fine,
00:50:46.580 to paid in the context of inflation
00:50:49.720 and everything seems too expensive now.
00:50:52.200 That's not really the best comparison.
00:50:54.160 But if the only thing you're comparing it to
00:50:57.960 is those damn bots,
00:51:01.020 and I said for $8 you can get rid of them,
00:51:03.240 but you don't need to.
00:51:04.580 You can have exactly the same experience.
00:51:07.140 It's up to you.
00:51:07.940 Or you could have the no bot experience,
00:51:10.700 whichever you like.
00:51:12.860 That would actually be a stronger...
00:51:14.940 So this is an example, persuasion-wise,
00:51:17.660 this is an example of less is more.
00:51:20.920 100% of people would say,
00:51:22.560 I don't want bots, right?
00:51:25.060 100% of people.
00:51:26.360 But what happened when you saw people
00:51:27.900 talking about the features?
00:51:30.420 When we talked about features,
00:51:31.880 people disagreed.
00:51:33.380 If you talk about bots,
00:51:35.340 nobody disagrees.
00:51:36.480 Now you could argue if that's worth $8 or not.
00:51:38.640 That's a different argument.
00:51:39.520 So I'm not saying he should have done it differently,
00:51:43.240 because I love the fact that he's designing the product in public,
00:51:48.660 and you're getting an MBA value class
00:51:52.000 of just watching him try to navigate this situation.
00:51:54.820 It's the most interesting business thing you've ever seen.
00:51:59.040 Would anybody argue with that?
00:52:02.880 We have never watched a business development
00:52:05.800 with this level of transparency
00:52:08.240 combined with this level of dollar value,
00:52:12.320 combined with this importance,
00:52:14.960 combined with the time.
00:52:16.600 The times are important, right?
00:52:17.960 Midterms are approaching.
00:52:18.760 So everything about this is interesting,
00:52:21.980 and Musk has added that
00:52:23.640 by making his thought process transparent.
00:52:28.740 The amount you're going to learn
00:52:30.880 by watching him navigate this,
00:52:33.500 even if he makes mistakes, right?
00:52:35.640 The mistakes are going to teach you something,
00:52:37.380 and him too, I suppose, if he makes any.
00:52:40.000 So you are getting educated like nobody's business.
00:52:43.300 I said the same thing about Trump.
00:52:45.340 Remember how much you learned about the government?
00:52:47.760 Just how it works, because of Trump.
00:52:51.880 Trump was like a college course.
00:52:54.840 No matter what you thought of him,
00:52:56.120 you learn so much about how things are supposed to work.
00:53:00.480 Anyway, I'm loving all that part of it.
00:53:03.120 So Musk reports that Twitter had a massive drop in revenue
00:53:09.340 because activists, I don't know if they're Soros people,
00:53:13.180 some people are saying that.
00:53:14.260 I don't know if that's confirmed.
00:53:15.280 But some activists are putting pressure on advertisers to drop out.
00:53:22.060 And as Musk says, it's extremely messed up,
00:53:25.020 and they're trying to destroy free speech in America.
00:53:27.660 That is literally what they're doing.
00:53:30.300 Am I wrong?
00:53:32.980 Because, yeah.
00:53:35.740 I mean, they are literally...
00:53:37.000 I don't think that's even hyperbole.
00:53:38.540 They're literally trying to degrade the biggest source of free speech.
00:53:45.140 They're trying to put the one place where you could imagine free speech could happen.
00:53:50.940 And it's also big.
00:53:52.080 You know, there are smaller places you could imagine that.
00:53:54.640 But it's pretty big.
00:53:57.560 And somebody said, tell us those advertisers so we'll, you know, we could respond by not buying their shit.
00:54:04.500 You know, boycott the boycotters.
00:54:06.580 And Musk said, a thermonuclear name and shame is exactly what will happen if this continues.
00:54:12.080 I have a suggestion.
00:54:18.680 Just pick three.
00:54:20.960 I don't know how many there are.
00:54:22.620 Pick your top three.
00:54:25.160 And see if we can make their stock dip.
00:54:29.340 I'll bet we can.
00:54:29.980 You don't think that, let's say, half of Twitter or whatever percentage would participate.
00:54:35.980 You don't think half of Twitter could bend somebody's stock price?
00:54:41.860 You could bend the shit out of it.
00:54:44.100 Now, you don't have to even be, like, permanent non-customers.
00:54:48.480 You could just send a warning shot.
00:54:50.460 You could give them one month of 20% decline.
00:54:54.180 And no CEO can survive that.
00:54:56.000 A CEO cannot survive a 20% decline because of a CEO decision.
00:55:02.540 Can't survive it.
00:55:04.400 So you could probably take out three CEOs in one month.
00:55:10.400 Worth a shot.
00:55:12.620 I think they have it coming.
00:55:15.360 Although, you know, the CEOs are probably just operating on fear.
00:55:19.320 I doubt the CEOs are operating on anything but fear.
00:55:22.200 But you could, you know, you could balance out the fear so at least the CEO could make a business decision instead of a fear decision.
00:55:33.260 I saw a button that appeared, I've only seen it once, on Twitter, that only appeared on Elon Musk's Twitter feed.
00:55:42.260 And it was a notice that says, readers added context.
00:55:45.320 And then, very noticeably, you could see what context, you know, a little summary.
00:55:51.140 And then you could see, oh, there's a story that explains more about what he's saying.
00:55:55.700 Now, I saw that for the first time today.
00:55:58.280 Has anybody else seen it?
00:56:01.240 Did you see it for the first time?
00:56:03.800 And was it only on Musk's account?
00:56:08.600 I'd never seen it.
00:56:09.560 Now, does that look exactly like what I described they should do?
00:56:16.160 Can somebody, give me a fact check here.
00:56:19.480 Is it exactly what I described they should do?
00:56:22.300 Just allow us to attach context.
00:56:25.180 You don't have to say what's right or wrong.
00:56:26.900 Just allow the best counter-argument to be surfaced.
00:56:31.520 That's all.
00:56:32.060 Just allow the best counter-argument to be noticeable.
00:56:36.780 I feel like they did it.
00:56:38.160 Like, this is like, it's so small it's not even news.
00:56:44.700 And might be the biggest thing that's happened in 10 years.
00:56:49.360 Do you know how big that is?
00:56:51.260 What would happen if people had access to the counter-argument?
00:56:55.860 It's never happened.
00:56:57.620 The news can't do it.
00:56:58.960 CNN can't do it.
00:56:59.940 Fox News can't do it.
00:57:00.820 Nobody else can do it.
00:57:02.600 Twitter is literally the only entity
00:57:04.740 that has any ability to show you both sides.
00:57:10.100 And that magnificent bastard,
00:57:12.720 he may have already implemented it.
00:57:14.700 It looks like it might be beta.
00:57:16.980 He may have already fixed it.
00:57:19.520 If you look at the rapid change,
00:57:22.900 I think you're going to see.
00:57:24.160 I think you're going to see some rapid upgrades.
00:57:25.760 It's going to be breathtaking, I think.
00:57:30.920 From a business nerd perspective.
00:57:33.300 I say breathtaking from the perspective of
00:57:35.580 not just what it's doing for the country,
00:57:39.160 free speech-wise,
00:57:40.120 but as a business nerd,
00:57:42.500 watching business models being created in real time,
00:57:45.440 it just doesn't get any better than that.
00:57:47.180 All right.
00:57:54.300 So,
00:57:55.440 Thomas Massey had a,
00:57:58.920 Representative Massey had a
00:58:00.520 very interesting comment on Twitter today.
00:58:03.520 It was based on the fact that there are these layoffs
00:58:06.120 that are happening at Twitter.
00:58:08.480 And Representative Massey says,
00:58:11.120 I wonder how many painstakingly curated
00:58:13.760 clandestine government connections
00:58:17.020 within Twitter,
00:58:18.720 Elon Musk has already serendipitously severed
00:58:21.900 as a result of the reorg.
00:58:24.040 It could take years to reestablish
00:58:27.780 those valuable points of influence.
00:58:30.160 Now, he's using some big words here.
00:58:33.580 So, Thomas Massey,
00:58:35.460 your audience is not as smart as you.
00:58:37.280 You might want to lay off the serendipity.
00:58:41.100 Just dial back the serendipity part.
00:58:43.820 I guess,
00:58:44.320 just smaller words on Twitter.
00:58:47.020 On one hand,
00:58:48.900 yeah,
00:58:49.280 on one hand,
00:58:50.740 don't you love that you have
00:58:51.920 an elected representative
00:58:53.680 who went to MIT
00:58:54.820 and isn't afraid to look smart?
00:58:58.000 Okay,
00:58:58.280 I love that.
00:58:59.540 I love that.
00:59:00.720 So,
00:59:00.960 maybe he's playing it right.
00:59:02.800 But,
00:59:03.140 I think his point
00:59:04.140 maybe got lost a little bit
00:59:06.200 and it's a good one.
00:59:06.940 So,
00:59:07.620 we were talking about how
00:59:09.600 clandestine government connections
00:59:13.600 can act like your friend.
00:59:17.240 Do you think that executives
00:59:20.240 or maybe key engineers within Twitter
00:59:22.540 had friends,
00:59:25.600 had friends,
00:59:26.680 that sort of popped up
00:59:27.860 when those people found out
00:59:29.140 what jobs they had?
00:59:30.880 Sort of instant friends
00:59:32.380 who were like trying really hard
00:59:33.880 to be their friend
00:59:34.640 and maybe offer them some benefits
00:59:36.720 that you wonder why.
00:59:38.840 Yeah.
00:59:39.460 Now,
00:59:39.920 I think Thomas Massey
00:59:41.160 is 100% accurate.
00:59:43.560 There's no doubt
00:59:44.520 that Democrats
00:59:46.520 had cultivated friends
00:59:48.460 within Twitter.
00:59:50.200 There's no doubt,
00:59:51.240 is there?
00:59:51.800 Would you doubt that?
00:59:53.580 Of course it happened.
00:59:55.480 Now,
00:59:55.780 some of it might have been
00:59:56.560 just natural.
00:59:57.720 It might not be part
00:59:58.780 of some big plan.
01:00:00.040 It could be just
01:00:01.280 who they hung out with.
01:00:02.900 But definitely
01:00:03.580 the personal connections
01:00:05.060 between the powers
01:00:06.260 and the engineers
01:00:07.660 who control the algorithm,
01:00:09.400 it's very possible
01:00:10.540 that Musk severed
01:00:11.700 those connections.
01:00:13.640 It's very possible
01:00:14.480 he did.
01:00:15.940 Yeah.
01:00:16.540 Or,
01:00:17.020 let me put it this way.
01:00:18.740 If foreign countries
01:00:20.480 are not already
01:00:21.880 embedding their own employees
01:00:23.120 or influencing employees
01:00:24.480 at Twitter,
01:00:25.380 why not?
01:00:27.020 We would do it.
01:00:27.960 Do you think
01:00:29.360 the United States
01:00:30.280 wouldn't try to embed
01:00:31.520 their own people
01:00:33.080 in Twitter
01:00:33.600 if Twitter were,
01:00:34.760 let's say,
01:00:35.020 a Chinese company?
01:00:36.480 Of course they would.
01:00:37.840 Of course we would.
01:00:39.500 Like,
01:00:39.720 if they didn't,
01:00:40.400 what are they doing?
01:00:41.320 What are we paying them for?
01:00:43.040 Right?
01:00:43.620 Yeah.
01:00:44.240 And yeah,
01:00:44.720 maybe they've all,
01:00:45.560 or maybe the CIA
01:00:46.480 is already embedded
01:00:47.860 in TikTok.
01:00:48.960 So,
01:00:49.320 we don't know
01:00:49.800 who's embedded where,
01:00:51.040 but I do like
01:00:52.240 hearing from
01:00:53.620 an elected representative
01:00:54.720 that at least
01:00:56.520 one very smart person
01:00:57.920 thinks it's obvious
01:00:59.740 that Twitter
01:01:00.640 had influenced
01:01:01.780 people on its staff.
01:01:03.840 That's just obvious.
01:01:06.900 Bill Maher
01:01:07.860 has joined the,
01:01:10.360 I guess,
01:01:13.480 democracies at risk
01:01:14.600 crowd,
01:01:15.860 and
01:01:16.340 here's what he said.
01:01:17.860 He predicted
01:01:18.320 that once Republicans,
01:01:19.300 and this is sort of
01:01:20.920 scaring you
01:01:21.800 about the future,
01:01:23.740 that if Republicans
01:01:24.920 retake both chambers
01:01:26.100 of Congress,
01:01:26.740 they'll begin
01:01:28.120 impeaching Biden
01:01:29.020 and never stop
01:01:30.040 over a myriad of things,
01:01:31.720 making the president
01:01:32.560 a, quote,
01:01:33.560 crippled duck
01:01:34.300 when he goes up
01:01:35.060 against Trump
01:01:36.240 and Carrie Lake
01:01:37.280 ticket in 2024.
01:01:39.540 So,
01:01:40.200 Bill Maher's already
01:01:40.880 calling Carrie Lake
01:01:42.380 as the likely
01:01:43.520 running mate
01:01:44.900 for 2024.
01:01:46.720 So,
01:01:47.340 okay,
01:01:47.660 I hear the complaint
01:01:48.660 that if Republicans
01:01:51.060 take over,
01:01:51.860 it'll be like
01:01:52.540 an impeachment
01:01:53.340 frenzy.
01:01:55.540 what's missing
01:01:58.120 from that opinion?
01:02:00.140 What's missing
01:02:01.000 from the opinion?
01:02:03.620 Whether the impeachments
01:02:05.600 would be justified.
01:02:08.860 Right?
01:02:10.380 Doesn't that matter?
01:02:13.360 Doesn't it?
01:02:14.820 I mean,
01:02:15.860 can we just ignore
01:02:17.020 the question
01:02:17.720 of whether
01:02:19.000 said impeachments
01:02:20.460 would be good
01:02:21.200 for the country
01:02:21.920 or are completely
01:02:23.220 deserved?
01:02:24.860 I think it matters.
01:02:26.780 Right?
01:02:27.380 Now,
01:02:28.000 I don't like
01:02:29.620 having
01:02:30.400 each team
01:02:32.360 just
01:02:32.840 suing
01:02:33.980 and,
01:02:34.440 you know,
01:02:35.140 impeaching
01:02:35.580 the other team
01:02:36.300 nonstop.
01:02:37.540 But,
01:02:38.920 it does seem
01:02:39.920 to me
01:02:40.300 that the Democrats
01:02:41.180 have some
01:02:41.760 impeachable stuff
01:02:42.760 and it does
01:02:43.780 seem to me
01:02:44.240 that the Republicans
01:02:44.980 have to pay
01:02:45.700 them back
01:02:46.160 for what
01:02:46.480 they did
01:02:46.780 to Trump.
01:02:48.300 I feel like
01:02:48.980 payback
01:02:49.560 might be
01:02:50.300 important.
01:02:51.660 Like,
01:02:51.860 sometimes it
01:02:52.460 creates this
01:02:52.960 infinite,
01:02:53.620 you know,
01:02:54.040 series of
01:02:54.600 payback,
01:02:55.040 payback,
01:02:55.580 tip for that,
01:02:56.480 but sometimes
01:02:57.300 it's why you
01:02:57.980 need to
01:02:58.460 brush back
01:02:59.280 the batter,
01:03:00.400 right?
01:03:01.700 Sometimes you
01:03:02.400 need to throw
01:03:02.880 a brushback pitch
01:03:04.000 just to say,
01:03:05.240 well,
01:03:05.340 you can do it
01:03:05.800 all you want,
01:03:06.340 but we're going
01:03:06.660 to do it
01:03:06.940 back to you,
01:03:07.620 so maybe
01:03:08.000 we shouldn't
01:03:08.420 do it.
01:03:09.600 Now,
01:03:09.980 I don't think
01:03:10.580 they're ever
01:03:10.920 going to end up
01:03:11.620 with less of it.
01:03:12.760 So I think
01:03:13.480 we're in this
01:03:13.960 permanent
01:03:14.380 impeachment hell,
01:03:15.900 and I'm not
01:03:16.940 looking forward
01:03:17.520 to it,
01:03:18.480 but I think
01:03:19.160 you can't
01:03:19.680 leave out
01:03:20.260 the would
01:03:21.340 it be
01:03:21.880 appropriate
01:03:22.580 to impeach
01:03:23.320 somebody.
01:03:24.660 Mayorka is
01:03:25.360 one of those
01:03:25.740 people that
01:03:26.260 people talk
01:03:26.800 about because
01:03:28.360 of the border.
01:03:31.740 Anyway,
01:03:33.320 then,
01:03:34.680 let's see,
01:03:35.580 what else
01:03:35.860 Bill Maher
01:03:36.660 says?
01:03:38.220 Bill Maher
01:03:38.760 says that
01:03:39.400 even if
01:03:39.840 Trump loses,
01:03:40.700 it doesn't
01:03:41.160 matter.
01:03:41.520 on Inauguration
01:03:42.900 Day 2025,
01:03:44.140 he's going
01:03:44.460 to show up
01:03:45.100 whether he's
01:03:45.640 on the list
01:03:46.100 or not,
01:03:46.700 and this
01:03:47.300 time he's
01:03:47.780 not going
01:03:48.200 to take
01:03:48.540 no for
01:03:48.980 an answer
01:03:49.360 because this
01:03:50.260 time he'll
01:03:50.820 have behind
01:03:51.340 him the
01:03:51.720 army of
01:03:52.200 election
01:03:52.580 deniers
01:03:53.160 that are
01:03:54.260 going to
01:03:54.540 be elected
01:03:55.160 at the
01:03:56.200 same time.
01:03:58.340 There are
01:03:58.740 about 300
01:03:59.320 candidates on
01:04:00.080 the ballot,
01:04:00.500 he says,
01:04:01.200 who don't
01:04:02.400 believe in
01:04:02.840 ballots.
01:04:04.100 Well,
01:04:04.560 that's what
01:04:04.800 he says.
01:04:05.500 They don't
01:04:05.940 believe in
01:04:06.360 ballots.
01:04:06.680 Okay,
01:04:09.360 let me ask
01:04:10.160 you,
01:04:11.540 if there
01:04:13.360 is an
01:04:13.860 election
01:04:14.620 and Trump
01:04:16.040 loses,
01:04:18.240 would you
01:04:19.040 be willing
01:04:19.900 to stage
01:04:21.540 an insurrection
01:04:22.240 to keep
01:04:24.280 him in
01:04:24.620 power even
01:04:25.300 though the
01:04:25.680 election said
01:04:26.260 he lost?
01:04:27.260 Go.
01:04:28.180 How many
01:04:28.640 of you are
01:04:29.120 willing to
01:04:29.600 join the
01:04:30.140 insurrection
01:04:30.620 to keep the
01:04:32.060 person who
01:04:32.520 lost the
01:04:33.060 election in
01:04:33.600 power?
01:04:33.840 Yeah,
01:04:35.720 fucking
01:04:35.980 nobody.
01:04:37.060 Nobody.
01:04:38.560 Zero.
01:04:40.200 There isn't
01:04:40.820 even a
01:04:41.800 little bit
01:04:42.220 of energy
01:04:42.620 for that.
01:04:44.660 Do you
01:04:45.180 know what
01:04:46.080 you would
01:04:46.340 see if
01:04:46.920 there were
01:04:47.240 any energy
01:04:47.920 for that?
01:04:49.420 Here's what
01:04:50.080 it would
01:04:50.260 look like.
01:04:51.260 Every night
01:04:51.900 on the
01:04:52.220 news,
01:04:53.220 MSNBC
01:04:53.960 would show
01:04:54.540 you a
01:04:55.040 person on
01:04:55.720 the street
01:04:56.080 interview with
01:04:56.720 a Republican
01:04:57.300 who said,
01:04:59.360 I don't
01:04:59.700 care what
01:05:00.140 the vote
01:05:00.540 is,
01:05:01.400 Trump's my
01:05:01.920 president and
01:05:02.560 I've got
01:05:02.940 weapons.
01:05:04.840 Don't you
01:05:05.540 think if
01:05:05.940 those people
01:05:06.440 existed,
01:05:07.480 you don't
01:05:07.980 think they'd
01:05:08.400 find them?
01:05:09.500 You don't
01:05:10.180 think they
01:05:10.520 could find
01:05:10.900 people who
01:05:11.340 would say
01:05:11.620 that if
01:05:12.460 they existed?
01:05:14.660 The reason
01:05:15.460 you've never
01:05:15.900 heard anybody
01:05:16.440 say that is
01:05:18.140 because they
01:05:18.440 don't exist.
01:05:20.040 The Democrats
01:05:21.140 have a
01:05:21.780 thoroughly
01:05:22.340 imaginary
01:05:23.580 platform.
01:05:25.060 Inflation
01:05:25.640 isn't real
01:05:26.400 and crime
01:05:27.060 isn't up
01:05:27.880 and immigration
01:05:29.780 doesn't matter
01:05:30.680 and it's
01:05:32.100 all imaginary.
01:05:32.920 the whole
01:05:34.080 fucking
01:05:34.400 thing,
01:05:34.720 it's all
01:05:34.960 imaginary.
01:05:37.900 Now,
01:05:38.780 what is
01:05:39.540 the proper
01:05:40.220 thing to
01:05:40.660 do if
01:05:41.020 the election
01:05:41.460 is held
01:05:41.960 and you
01:05:43.320 don't believe
01:05:43.960 the results?
01:05:46.260 Let's game
01:05:48.060 the sound.
01:05:49.260 Let's say
01:05:49.680 you really,
01:05:50.520 really,
01:05:50.840 really wanted
01:05:51.460 the Republican
01:05:52.060 to win,
01:05:53.040 whoever it
01:05:53.500 is,
01:05:53.780 let's say
01:05:54.080 it's Trump.
01:05:55.140 You really,
01:05:55.600 really wanted
01:05:56.100 to win
01:05:56.500 and the
01:05:57.520 election
01:05:57.840 says he
01:05:58.560 narrowly lost.
01:06:00.340 What are
01:06:01.280 you going
01:06:01.420 to do
01:06:01.580 about it?
01:06:03.940 What are
01:06:04.600 you going
01:06:04.800 to do?
01:06:07.520 Are you
01:06:08.180 going to
01:06:08.420 support a
01:06:09.020 march on
01:06:09.500 the Capitol?
01:06:12.220 Would you?
01:06:13.420 Would you
01:06:14.120 support any
01:06:15.000 kind of
01:06:15.720 the electoral
01:06:17.960 college
01:06:18.720 overthrowing
01:06:20.700 or not
01:06:21.160 voting the
01:06:21.680 way the
01:06:21.940 voters went?
01:06:24.780 Yeah,
01:06:25.500 nothing.
01:06:25.780 nothing.
01:06:30.240 Here's my
01:06:30.920 take,
01:06:31.720 and I
01:06:32.080 realize none
01:06:33.060 of you are
01:06:33.460 going to
01:06:33.680 accept this,
01:06:34.740 but I'll
01:06:34.960 tell you my
01:06:35.440 take.
01:06:36.740 If the
01:06:37.420 election is
01:06:38.020 rigged,
01:06:39.260 that is also
01:06:40.060 the election.
01:06:42.320 There's a
01:06:42.920 reason that I
01:06:43.520 accepted the
01:06:44.400 2020 election
01:06:45.520 immediately.
01:06:46.500 As soon as the
01:06:47.040 election was
01:06:47.600 called,
01:06:48.540 I said,
01:06:49.200 that's my
01:06:49.560 president.
01:06:51.600 It's not my
01:06:52.360 first choice,
01:06:53.620 but Biden's
01:06:54.160 my president.
01:06:54.660 Because the
01:06:56.780 system elected
01:06:57.480 him.
01:06:59.040 If that
01:06:59.780 system also
01:07:00.620 has some
01:07:01.140 cheating in
01:07:01.620 it, well,
01:07:02.880 both sides
01:07:03.380 have access
01:07:03.900 to cheating.
01:07:05.660 If one
01:07:06.580 side cheated
01:07:07.360 a little bit
01:07:07.960 and it was
01:07:08.980 a close
01:07:09.360 election and
01:07:10.020 it tipped
01:07:10.380 it one,
01:07:11.080 that was
01:07:11.540 the election.
01:07:13.200 So I
01:07:14.420 prefer that
01:07:15.700 the election
01:07:16.140 goes exactly
01:07:16.920 where the
01:07:17.360 voters are.
01:07:18.540 I prefer
01:07:19.040 that.
01:07:20.400 But my
01:07:20.900 second choice
01:07:21.740 is that if
01:07:23.600 there's some
01:07:24.000 cheating,
01:07:24.660 and we
01:07:25.020 don't find
01:07:25.580 it, as
01:07:26.880 long as the
01:07:27.900 two candidates
01:07:28.720 were roughly
01:07:29.480 equally liked
01:07:31.340 by the
01:07:31.700 country, which
01:07:32.340 is always the
01:07:32.880 case, right?
01:07:33.620 By the time
01:07:34.060 you get to
01:07:34.380 the election,
01:07:34.860 it's always a
01:07:35.220 close election.
01:07:36.360 Do you
01:07:36.720 really think
01:07:37.940 that democracy
01:07:39.140 is destroyed
01:07:41.560 because the
01:07:42.160 person with
01:07:42.620 48% of the
01:07:43.540 vote beat
01:07:43.960 the person
01:07:44.400 with 49%?
01:07:49.040 Is democracy
01:07:50.420 destroyed because
01:07:51.280 of that?
01:07:52.580 Here's the
01:07:53.180 thing.
01:07:53.880 Our elections
01:07:54.920 are not so
01:07:55.700 bad that
01:07:56.500 somebody like
01:07:57.100 Putin could
01:07:57.720 win with
01:07:58.700 90% of the
01:07:59.520 vote if the
01:08:00.580 public didn't
01:08:01.180 actually lean in
01:08:02.400 that direction.
01:08:04.060 So I accept
01:08:06.100 the cheating as
01:08:06.720 part of the
01:08:07.140 system, whichever
01:08:08.440 way it goes.
01:08:09.620 If it had been
01:08:10.240 Republicans or
01:08:11.160 if it had been
01:08:11.700 Democrats, as
01:08:13.020 long as that
01:08:13.540 cheating is below
01:08:14.320 the level where
01:08:15.680 you can identify
01:08:18.500 it, and as long
01:08:20.240 as the two
01:08:20.720 candidates are
01:08:21.420 kind of close,
01:08:23.160 I know I have
01:08:26.180 a preference for
01:08:28.140 who gets elected
01:08:28.820 and so do you.
01:08:29.940 We have a
01:08:30.380 preference, but
01:08:31.780 when it's so
01:08:32.360 close, keep in
01:08:36.220 mind that you
01:08:36.660 live in a
01:08:36.980 country where
01:08:37.580 there are just
01:08:38.640 as many people
01:08:39.320 who prefer the
01:08:40.000 other thing, and
01:08:41.360 if you can't
01:08:41.940 live with that,
01:08:42.520 then democracy
01:08:43.120 is not for you.
01:08:44.820 The fact that
01:08:45.720 you don't get
01:08:46.300 everything you
01:08:46.860 want, it
01:08:48.220 doesn't work
01:08:48.620 that way.
01:08:50.640 Now, I do
01:08:51.940 think we should
01:08:52.580 push as hard as
01:08:53.600 humanly possible
01:08:54.420 to make sure
01:08:55.020 there's no even
01:08:56.220 opportunity for
01:08:57.380 anything.
01:08:58.180 The fact that
01:08:59.180 our elections are
01:09:00.180 not decided the
01:09:01.320 same day, when
01:09:02.800 we know that
01:09:03.340 that's possible
01:09:04.040 because other
01:09:04.720 countries do it,
01:09:06.080 right?
01:09:06.620 There's no doubt
01:09:07.620 that we have the
01:09:09.240 technology, the
01:09:10.240 resources, the
01:09:11.220 knowledge, everything
01:09:12.860 to have paper
01:09:15.020 ballots, count them
01:09:15.980 the same day, do
01:09:17.760 it like Israel
01:09:18.400 does it, for
01:09:18.980 example.
01:09:19.560 That's just one
01:09:20.100 example.
01:09:21.020 We know we
01:09:21.520 could do that.
01:09:22.940 What would be
01:09:23.760 any reason given
01:09:24.920 that we would
01:09:25.900 not do that?
01:09:26.680 There's only one
01:09:27.320 reason, an
01:09:27.960 intention to
01:09:28.660 cheat.
01:09:29.980 Am I wrong?
01:09:31.200 What would be
01:09:31.660 another reason?
01:09:33.020 What would be
01:09:33.740 another reason to
01:09:35.260 favor a system,
01:09:36.740 to favor a
01:09:37.720 system that you
01:09:38.780 know the public
01:09:39.660 finds not
01:09:41.040 credible?
01:09:42.200 Why would the
01:09:42.940 people in power
01:09:43.740 want a system
01:09:44.840 that both
01:09:46.260 sides say is
01:09:47.640 not credible
01:09:48.340 if the other
01:09:49.080 team wins?
01:09:49.940 Both sides
01:09:50.640 don't like it.
01:09:52.400 Only the
01:09:53.180 leaders like it.
01:09:54.200 Why is that?
01:09:55.440 There's only one
01:09:56.200 reason.
01:09:57.680 There is only
01:09:58.420 one reason.
01:09:59.880 Right?
01:10:00.060 There's not a
01:10:00.560 second possibility.
01:10:02.220 They think it's
01:10:02.980 to their advantage.
01:10:04.920 How could it be
01:10:05.860 to their advantage?
01:10:07.340 Because somebody's
01:10:08.240 going to cheat.
01:10:10.040 Here's something I
01:10:11.180 wonder.
01:10:11.480 Do you think
01:10:13.260 that the heads
01:10:13.900 of the
01:10:14.620 Democrat and
01:10:16.420 Republican
01:10:16.880 parties, do
01:10:18.340 you think that
01:10:18.800 the heads
01:10:19.520 actually know
01:10:20.920 how much
01:10:21.340 cheating is
01:10:21.920 happening at
01:10:22.680 the precinct
01:10:23.460 level?
01:10:25.160 I'll bet they
01:10:25.640 don't.
01:10:27.820 You think so?
01:10:29.440 I think they
01:10:30.100 have the same
01:10:30.540 suspicion most of
01:10:31.660 us do, but I'll
01:10:32.160 bet they don't.
01:10:33.260 I'll bet they
01:10:33.820 don't know how
01:10:34.580 much cheating is
01:10:35.260 going to happen
01:10:35.660 in this next
01:10:36.260 election.
01:10:37.020 And I'll go
01:10:37.640 further.
01:10:38.840 They probably
01:10:39.400 make sure that
01:10:40.140 nobody tells
01:10:40.760 them.
01:10:42.480 Right?
01:10:43.180 Because remember,
01:10:43.940 any kind of
01:10:45.100 communication is
01:10:45.940 discoverable,
01:10:47.400 including somebody
01:10:48.320 testifying that
01:10:49.100 they had the
01:10:49.480 conversation.
01:10:50.760 So it should
01:10:52.340 be sort of a
01:10:53.740 mafia situation
01:10:54.740 where the
01:10:56.200 people, if you
01:10:57.480 speculate that
01:10:58.280 there's any
01:10:59.260 badness that
01:10:59.980 could happen in
01:11:00.800 the election,
01:11:01.320 so this is just
01:11:01.880 speculation, if you
01:11:03.480 speculate that it's
01:11:04.320 a real thing,
01:11:06.640 the people like
01:11:07.520 Nancy Pelosi would
01:11:08.540 probably say,
01:11:09.440 do not tell me
01:11:11.260 anything about
01:11:11.960 this.
01:11:12.820 I don't want to
01:11:13.680 hear about
01:11:14.240 anything that's
01:11:14.820 happening that
01:11:16.040 sounds sketchy by
01:11:17.300 my team.
01:11:19.160 Just don't tell
01:11:20.040 me.
01:11:20.640 Because when I go
01:11:21.480 on TV, I want to
01:11:22.360 say I don't know
01:11:22.820 anything about that.
01:11:24.740 Right?
01:11:25.220 Right?
01:11:26.280 If you were in
01:11:27.180 charge, you would
01:11:27.800 say don't tell me.
01:11:30.940 Because if it
01:11:31.740 works, it works.
01:11:32.960 And if it's not
01:11:33.680 happening, then
01:11:34.380 nobody told you.
01:11:35.060 It doesn't matter.
01:11:35.660 That's your best
01:11:37.140 play.
01:11:37.640 Don't tell me.
01:11:38.920 So I don't think
01:11:39.620 the heads actually
01:11:40.320 know.
01:11:41.300 They probably
01:11:41.660 don't know.
01:11:46.520 Let's see what
01:11:47.300 else is going on.
01:11:48.760 That's about it.
01:11:50.640 I'm going to
01:11:51.400 play one little
01:11:52.840 audio clip.
01:11:56.080 So yesterday,
01:11:58.040 oh shit, did I
01:11:59.540 lose my audio
01:12:00.120 clip?
01:12:00.420 So yesterday,
01:12:03.560 while I'm
01:12:04.260 minding my own
01:12:04.900 business, just
01:12:05.580 watching that
01:12:06.540 documentary, at
01:12:09.380 about the same
01:12:10.060 time, this was
01:12:10.940 happening.
01:12:12.680 This is Elon
01:12:13.420 Musk in an
01:12:15.600 interview that
01:12:16.800 happened yesterday
01:12:17.400 at about the same
01:12:17.940 time.
01:12:20.440 Let's see if it
01:12:21.220 plays at the
01:12:21.620 right point.
01:12:25.900 Will I have a
01:12:27.180 technical problem?
01:12:28.280 The production
01:12:30.800 team said, oh,
01:12:31.360 that's for crash
01:12:32.340 safety.
01:12:32.900 So then I called
01:12:33.700 the crash safety
01:12:34.380 team and said, is
01:12:35.540 this for crash
01:12:36.040 safety?
01:12:36.440 They said, oh,
01:12:36.940 no, that didn't
01:12:38.120 do anything.
01:12:38.720 We should delete
01:12:39.280 it.
01:12:42.000 That turned out
01:12:42.660 to be totally
01:12:43.060 useless.
01:12:43.680 They forgot to
01:12:44.260 tell the production
01:12:44.900 team.
01:12:47.320 Honestly, a bunch
01:12:48.200 of these things
01:12:48.600 just feel like
01:12:49.340 you're living in a
01:12:49.840 Dilbert cartoon.
01:12:53.100 I'm like, oh,
01:12:54.300 no, what's our
01:12:55.120 one?
01:12:55.500 I mean, any
01:12:56.160 given company,
01:12:57.360 they should have
01:12:57.720 like, what's
01:12:58.120 your Dilbert
01:12:58.600 ratio?
01:12:59.460 OK, it's not
01:13:00.680 zero.
01:13:02.840 So is this you
01:13:04.700 or is this your
01:13:05.440 Dilbert portion?
01:13:06.360 Try to keep it
01:13:07.140 low.
01:13:07.760 So is this you
01:13:09.580 or is this, so
01:13:11.160 you do all
01:13:11.840 these different
01:13:12.240 things?
01:13:12.680 So this is
01:13:13.560 yesterday, Elon
01:13:14.840 Musk telling
01:13:17.240 an interviewer
01:13:18.360 that you want to
01:13:19.740 keep your Dilbert
01:13:20.480 ratio as low as
01:13:21.420 possible.
01:13:23.460 Now, let me give
01:13:24.360 you some update
01:13:24.840 on the Dilbert
01:13:25.360 ratio.
01:13:25.700 Now, the
01:13:26.220 Dilbert ratio,
01:13:27.540 I've seen it
01:13:29.720 work two
01:13:30.260 different ways.
01:13:31.880 I interpret it
01:13:32.860 a little bit
01:13:33.240 differently than
01:13:33.780 some other
01:13:34.140 do.
01:13:34.780 And it has
01:13:35.680 to do with
01:13:36.100 how many
01:13:36.480 Dilbert comics
01:13:37.280 are on the
01:13:37.900 wall at your
01:13:38.740 business.
01:13:39.720 And the
01:13:40.140 Dilbert ratio
01:13:40.980 says that if
01:13:41.880 there are too
01:13:42.840 many Dilbert
01:13:43.520 comics on the
01:13:44.300 walls, that's a
01:13:46.020 sign of bad
01:13:46.620 management.
01:13:48.040 But I add to
01:13:49.260 that the worst
01:13:50.680 sign of bad
01:13:51.540 management, like
01:13:52.260 the most strongest
01:13:52.920 sign of bad
01:13:53.600 management, is
01:13:55.240 no Dilbert
01:13:55.980 cartoons on
01:13:56.700 your wall.
01:13:58.520 That's your
01:13:59.340 worst case
01:13:59.960 scenario.
01:14:01.020 You know why,
01:14:01.660 right?
01:14:02.260 Because it
01:14:02.620 means they
01:14:02.900 can't even
01:14:03.340 speak honestly.
01:14:06.420 They can't
01:14:07.040 have an
01:14:07.300 opinion.
01:14:07.760 They can't
01:14:08.060 be individuals,
01:14:08.820 basically.
01:14:10.900 Yeah.
01:14:11.460 So, I mean,
01:14:11.980 this is just
01:14:12.380 for fun.
01:14:12.800 It's not like
01:14:13.200 a scientific
01:14:13.620 thing.
01:14:13.960 But somebody
01:14:18.400 asked me after
01:14:19.300 I tweeted
01:14:20.260 this, is it
01:14:23.000 obvious, is
01:14:25.180 it becoming
01:14:25.640 more obvious
01:14:26.380 that I'm
01:14:27.420 somehow central
01:14:28.240 to the
01:14:28.680 simulation?
01:14:31.300 To which I
01:14:32.580 tried to
01:14:33.400 reply to
01:14:35.000 that, and
01:14:36.760 Twitter wouldn't
01:14:37.440 let me.
01:14:39.100 It hung up,
01:14:40.020 and then I
01:14:40.520 lost the
01:14:41.140 tweet.
01:14:43.960 Now, that's
01:14:44.840 exactly what
01:14:45.400 the simulation
01:14:46.000 would do.
01:14:47.140 If the
01:14:47.780 simulation were
01:14:48.520 designed so
01:14:49.280 that you
01:14:49.520 couldn't find
01:14:50.320 out you're
01:14:50.700 in a
01:14:50.940 simulation, it
01:14:52.700 would sort
01:14:53.320 of not let
01:14:54.540 you see a
01:14:54.960 tweet.
01:14:56.200 It would sort
01:14:56.920 of act like
01:14:57.440 that.
01:14:58.040 Now, I'm not
01:14:58.400 saying that's
01:14:58.820 what's happening.
01:14:59.280 It was just a
01:14:59.720 funny coincidence.
01:15:01.720 But imagine
01:15:04.280 being me.
01:15:06.720 Just think
01:15:07.340 about it.
01:15:08.360 There are
01:15:09.140 seven and a
01:15:09.740 half billion
01:15:10.200 people in the
01:15:10.820 world.
01:15:12.440 Only one of
01:15:13.260 them is the
01:15:13.780 richest person
01:15:14.500 and also
01:15:16.300 the person
01:15:16.760 that's in
01:15:17.260 the news
01:15:17.580 all the
01:15:17.860 time.
01:15:19.400 And then
01:15:21.000 somehow I
01:15:21.940 got pulled
01:15:22.400 into the
01:15:22.860 headline.
01:15:23.860 Now, this
01:15:24.320 isn't a
01:15:24.660 headline.
01:15:25.080 It's just
01:15:25.340 something that
01:15:25.660 happened.
01:15:26.540 But how
01:15:27.960 did I get
01:15:28.340 pulled into
01:15:28.740 this?
01:15:32.600 I haven't
01:15:33.400 told you how
01:15:34.020 many things
01:15:34.620 that are in
01:15:35.000 the headlines
01:15:35.440 that I'm
01:15:36.440 actually involved
01:15:37.180 in for
01:15:38.600 various reasons.
01:15:39.600 I don't talk
01:15:40.040 about it.
01:15:40.440 but if
01:15:42.000 you were
01:15:42.300 me, you
01:15:44.280 could not
01:15:44.860 believe that
01:15:45.480 any of this
01:15:45.900 is real.
01:15:48.100 My life
01:15:48.920 so exceeds
01:15:50.900 anything that
01:15:52.780 could be like
01:15:53.420 a realistic,
01:15:55.400 you know,
01:15:55.720 you just got
01:15:56.760 lucky or it's
01:15:57.600 a coincidence or
01:15:58.700 something like
01:15:59.080 that.
01:15:59.660 It's just too
01:16:00.680 weird.
01:16:01.820 Just too
01:16:02.340 weird.
01:16:02.600 All the
01:16:07.120 weak ego
01:16:07.920 people are
01:16:08.580 signing in.
01:16:09.540 James,
01:16:10.040 anybody else
01:16:10.500 have a
01:16:10.780 weak ego
01:16:11.440 who would
01:16:13.980 like to
01:16:14.540 feel
01:16:15.280 uncomfortable
01:16:15.860 that I
01:16:17.120 said a
01:16:17.580 true fact
01:16:18.220 which has
01:16:18.800 obvious
01:16:19.320 relevance to
01:16:20.220 my audience
01:16:20.840 would make
01:16:22.000 me look
01:16:22.400 good?
01:16:24.100 Is there
01:16:24.620 anybody else
01:16:25.000 who is
01:16:25.280 offended or
01:16:26.220 are you
01:16:27.060 threatened by
01:16:27.540 that?
01:16:28.840 Would
01:16:29.120 anybody else
01:16:29.600 like to
01:16:30.040 insult me
01:16:30.780 for simply
01:16:31.840 reporting
01:16:32.360 an important
01:16:32.940 thing that
01:16:33.320 happened on
01:16:33.740 the news
01:16:34.060 today?
01:16:35.920 Anybody?
01:16:37.120 Come on.
01:16:38.920 I know you're
01:16:39.740 there.
01:16:40.320 Let's go.
01:16:42.240 Yeah.
01:16:42.640 Just admit
01:16:43.540 you have a
01:16:43.980 weak ego
01:16:44.540 and then if
01:16:45.660 anybody succeeds
01:16:46.500 at anything
01:16:46.980 it makes you
01:16:47.420 uncomfortable.
01:16:48.480 Just go ahead
01:16:49.080 and say it.
01:16:50.580 Just be
01:16:51.160 uncomfortable
01:16:51.600 with other
01:16:52.120 people's
01:16:52.480 success.
01:16:54.800 Is it
01:16:55.380 Jordan Peterson
01:16:56.540 who says,
01:16:58.040 I think he
01:16:59.000 said it
01:16:59.280 recently,
01:17:00.360 that the
01:17:01.140 people you
01:17:01.720 should spend
01:17:02.180 time with
01:17:02.820 are the
01:17:03.200 people who
01:17:03.640 celebrate
01:17:04.100 your success.
01:17:07.680 And if
01:17:08.320 somebody won't
01:17:08.840 celebrate your
01:17:09.640 success like
01:17:10.340 genuinely,
01:17:11.520 like they're
01:17:11.980 genuinely happy
01:17:12.900 for your
01:17:13.260 success,
01:17:14.420 stay away
01:17:15.180 from them.
01:17:16.920 Have you
01:17:17.220 ever had
01:17:17.540 anybody who
01:17:18.000 was important
01:17:18.520 in your
01:17:18.860 life?
01:17:20.760 Who was
01:17:21.020 important in
01:17:21.560 your life?
01:17:24.660 Yeah,
01:17:25.020 well,
01:17:25.620 I don't have
01:17:26.060 to finish
01:17:26.380 that.
01:17:29.900 All right.
01:17:36.900 So Arden
01:17:37.800 says,
01:17:38.460 God,
01:17:39.040 do I
01:17:39.300 hate
01:17:39.560 Jordan
01:17:39.940 Peterson?
01:17:40.800 Let me
01:17:41.240 follow up
01:17:41.680 on that.
01:17:43.160 So Jordan
01:17:43.680 Peterson
01:17:44.020 elicits lots
01:17:45.600 of strong
01:17:46.020 responses both
01:17:46.760 ways.
01:17:47.240 Well,
01:17:47.520 what is the
01:17:48.060 argument for
01:17:48.600 disliking him?
01:17:49.740 I don't know
01:17:50.260 that I've ever
01:17:50.780 heard it.
01:17:52.260 There are
01:17:52.640 things which
01:17:53.060 I disagree
01:17:53.620 with.
01:17:54.820 Not very
01:17:55.280 often,
01:17:55.700 by the way.
01:17:56.120 I agree
01:17:56.500 with him
01:17:56.860 98% of
01:17:57.920 the time.
01:17:58.800 But why
01:18:00.120 would you
01:18:00.420 dislike him?
01:18:02.020 What would
01:18:02.440 be the
01:18:02.700 argument?
01:18:03.200 So I'm
01:18:03.720 looking over
01:18:04.160 here on
01:18:04.580 YouTube.
01:18:05.800 Give me
01:18:06.260 just in
01:18:06.940 one word
01:18:07.520 or sentence
01:18:08.200 or something.
01:18:14.100 God has
01:18:14.700 chosen me?
01:18:15.480 Well,
01:18:15.660 that's one
01:18:15.960 way to look
01:18:16.320 at it.
01:18:19.920 Make
01:18:20.320 friends with
01:18:20.780 people who
01:18:21.100 want the
01:18:21.340 best for
01:18:21.740 you.
01:18:22.060 That's his
01:18:22.780 quote.
01:18:24.060 But some
01:18:25.720 people said
01:18:26.200 you hated
01:18:26.660 him, but
01:18:27.540 just give
01:18:27.840 me a
01:18:28.020 reason.
01:18:30.140 I think
01:18:31.140 it would
01:18:33.020 be a
01:18:33.260 reasonable
01:18:33.560 opinion if
01:18:34.740 he has
01:18:34.960 something to
01:18:35.720 back it
01:18:36.040 with.
01:18:37.320 He doesn't
01:18:37.860 return your
01:18:38.360 calls.
01:18:38.900 He's not
01:18:39.240 woke.
01:18:42.640 Yeah.
01:18:43.320 No, but
01:18:44.400 it's okay to
01:18:45.080 disagree with
01:18:45.680 his opinions.
01:18:47.140 But why
01:18:47.580 would you
01:18:47.820 have a
01:18:48.080 problem with
01:18:48.540 him?
01:18:49.840 See, here's
01:18:50.320 my thing.
01:18:51.740 Jordan
01:18:52.040 Peterson is,
01:18:53.220 involved in
01:18:54.900 a business
01:18:55.540 model in
01:18:56.140 which he
01:18:56.580 could make
01:18:57.040 good money
01:18:58.180 doing what
01:18:59.320 he does.
01:19:01.020 But I'm
01:19:03.020 almost positive
01:19:04.020 that he's
01:19:05.680 arrogant,
01:19:07.240 somebody says.
01:19:08.860 Is that the
01:19:09.600 problem?
01:19:10.980 The problem
01:19:11.640 that he's
01:19:11.960 arrogant?
01:19:15.480 Hmm.
01:19:16.860 I mean, I
01:19:17.540 can see that
01:19:18.360 because he
01:19:18.860 is.
01:19:20.460 Somebody says
01:19:21.080 he's not
01:19:21.560 arrogant.
01:19:21.800 Are you
01:19:22.140 kidding?
01:19:24.460 You think
01:19:25.460 Jordan
01:19:25.780 Peterson is
01:19:26.500 not arrogant?
01:19:29.200 That would
01:19:30.020 be like saying
01:19:30.540 I'm not
01:19:30.940 arrogant.
01:19:32.480 Nobody
01:19:33.000 believes that,
01:19:33.640 do they?
01:19:36.880 Well, here's
01:19:37.740 the thing.
01:19:38.380 I would
01:19:38.960 define arrogant
01:19:39.880 as somebody
01:19:41.200 who would
01:19:41.700 insult somebody
01:19:42.780 who disagrees
01:19:44.780 with them
01:19:45.180 intellectually.
01:19:46.600 Does Jordan
01:19:47.260 Peterson insult
01:19:48.520 people who
01:19:49.240 disagree with
01:19:49.980 him intellectually?
01:19:50.720 I think he
01:19:52.560 does that all
01:19:53.020 the time,
01:19:53.820 right?
01:19:55.440 I think I
01:19:56.160 do that all
01:19:56.640 the time,
01:19:57.020 too.
01:19:57.780 Aren't we
01:19:58.180 both pretty
01:19:58.740 arrogant?
01:20:00.860 Isn't that
01:20:01.420 why you
01:20:01.700 watch?
01:20:03.520 It's a big
01:20:04.140 part of the
01:20:04.560 show.
01:20:05.380 The big
01:20:05.720 part of the
01:20:06.080 show is
01:20:06.560 saying we're
01:20:07.300 smarter than
01:20:08.040 our critics.
01:20:10.760 That's half of
01:20:11.580 what I do,
01:20:12.120 is tell you I'm
01:20:12.640 smarter than my
01:20:13.340 critics,
01:20:13.740 directly or
01:20:14.760 indirectly.
01:20:15.620 I'm usually
01:20:16.120 trying to make
01:20:16.620 the argument,
01:20:17.100 but directly
01:20:18.240 or indirectly
01:20:18.880 we're both
01:20:21.040 pretty arrogant.
01:20:22.220 You don't
01:20:22.700 do this job,
01:20:23.920 this job
01:20:24.540 meaning somebody
01:20:25.400 who talks to
01:20:26.040 lots of people
01:20:26.640 all the time,
01:20:27.340 you don't do
01:20:28.000 this job without
01:20:28.700 being arrogant,
01:20:30.380 do you?
01:20:33.280 I mean,
01:20:33.800 I suppose if
01:20:34.320 you're like a
01:20:34.940 religious leader
01:20:35.720 you could pull
01:20:36.280 it off,
01:20:37.040 but if you're
01:20:37.760 just a person
01:20:38.780 who talks about
01:20:39.480 politics,
01:20:40.540 I think we
01:20:41.660 all run down
01:20:42.420 the intellect
01:20:43.260 of the people
01:20:43.760 who disagree
01:20:44.240 with us.
01:20:45.380 Pretty sure
01:20:45.880 we all do
01:20:46.380 that.
01:20:47.700 I'm not
01:20:48.180 proud of it,
01:20:48.800 it's just
01:20:49.020 something that
01:20:49.440 happens.
01:20:51.200 You say
01:20:51.720 neither of us
01:20:52.220 do,
01:20:52.320 I do,
01:20:53.420 I do,
01:20:54.560 I run down
01:20:55.340 the intellect
01:20:55.940 of people
01:20:56.360 who disagree
01:20:56.760 with me.
01:20:57.200 I was doing
01:20:57.720 that today.
01:20:58.740 When I
01:20:59.260 talked about
01:20:59.780 Joy Reid,
01:21:01.200 I was very
01:21:02.020 arrogantly
01:21:02.740 putting myself
01:21:04.160 above her,
01:21:05.560 wasn't I?
01:21:07.380 Isn't that
01:21:08.020 obvious?
01:21:09.000 That I was
01:21:09.400 putting my
01:21:09.880 own intellect
01:21:10.520 above hers,
01:21:12.220 overtly,
01:21:12.840 I wasn't
01:21:13.180 trying to hide
01:21:13.660 it.
01:21:15.880 But here's
01:21:17.000 maybe this
01:21:17.860 is why
01:21:18.160 you didn't
01:21:18.480 notice,
01:21:19.320 because I
01:21:20.000 put your
01:21:20.500 intellect
01:21:20.880 over hers
01:21:21.560 as well.
01:21:22.840 Maybe that's
01:21:23.260 why you
01:21:23.500 didn't
01:21:23.660 notice,
01:21:24.360 because I
01:21:24.900 guess I
01:21:25.440 was arrogant
01:21:25.900 on your
01:21:26.360 behalf.
01:21:27.600 Like we
01:21:28.020 were all
01:21:28.500 in this
01:21:28.800 one
01:21:28.940 together.
01:21:30.660 I'm
01:21:31.180 arrogant,
01:21:31.660 you're
01:21:31.860 arrogant,
01:21:32.360 let's go
01:21:32.720 be arrogant
01:21:33.180 about Joy
01:21:34.340 Reid.
01:21:35.440 By the way,
01:21:36.060 Joy Reid is
01:21:36.800 a very high
01:21:38.140 intellect
01:21:38.500 person,
01:21:40.000 just,
01:21:41.380 you know,
01:21:41.740 if I'm
01:21:42.400 being
01:21:42.600 honest.
01:21:43.800 Now,
01:21:44.300 I think
01:21:44.700 that she
01:21:45.300 plays a
01:21:45.940 part in
01:21:46.900 which she
01:21:47.320 does
01:21:48.660 everything she
01:21:49.280 can to
01:21:49.780 support a
01:21:50.380 team.
01:21:51.440 But I
01:21:53.380 don't think
01:21:53.780 she has
01:21:54.060 low
01:21:54.240 intelligence.
01:21:55.980 I think
01:21:56.560 she actually
01:21:56.940 has above
01:21:57.380 average
01:21:57.740 intelligence,
01:21:58.500 well above
01:21:59.080 average
01:21:59.460 intelligence.
01:22:00.820 Right?
01:22:02.220 You could
01:22:02.720 not like her
01:22:03.200 for other
01:22:03.480 reasons.
01:22:04.240 But you
01:22:04.580 can't like
01:22:05.000 her for
01:22:05.280 lack of
01:22:05.680 intelligence.
01:22:06.020 But when
01:22:06.780 I make
01:22:07.080 fun of
01:22:07.400 her for
01:22:07.740 the
01:22:08.020 inflation
01:22:10.380 thing,
01:22:11.160 I don't
01:22:11.920 believe for
01:22:12.320 a second
01:22:12.680 that she
01:22:12.980 believes what
01:22:13.480 she's
01:22:13.700 saying.
01:22:14.740 So it
01:22:15.320 doesn't
01:22:15.640 come off
01:22:16.200 as dumb
01:22:16.640 to me.
01:22:17.000 It just
01:22:17.240 comes off
01:22:17.820 as thinking
01:22:18.320 you're
01:22:18.620 dumb.
01:22:21.140 All right.
01:22:22.400 Did I
01:22:22.980 miss any
01:22:23.280 stories?
01:22:25.000 Any big
01:22:25.460 stories I
01:22:25.960 missed?
01:22:30.440 About
01:22:30.900 Lee
01:22:31.220 Zeldin's
01:22:31.820 persuasion.
01:22:33.920 Well,
01:22:34.480 Lee
01:22:34.700 Zeldin is
01:22:35.340 over-performing,
01:22:36.520 is he
01:22:36.800 not?
01:22:37.980 So I
01:22:38.960 don't know
01:22:39.220 exactly what
01:22:39.740 you're asking
01:22:40.120 about his
01:22:40.480 persuasion.
01:22:41.520 But my
01:22:42.120 understanding
01:22:42.600 is he's
01:22:43.320 just crushing
01:22:43.920 it.
01:22:45.640 My
01:22:46.120 understanding
01:22:46.620 is he's
01:22:47.100 just hitting
01:22:47.460 every note.
01:22:48.640 Is that
01:22:48.920 true?
01:22:49.740 Is anybody
01:22:50.320 watching him
01:22:50.900 to know
01:22:51.180 is he
01:22:51.960 really hitting
01:22:52.400 all the
01:22:52.720 notes?
01:22:53.380 It looks
01:22:53.800 like he
01:22:54.100 is.
01:23:00.160 How will
01:23:00.880 the lockdown
01:23:01.420 kids vote
01:23:02.340 when they
01:23:02.660 come of
01:23:02.980 age?
01:23:03.620 Same as
01:23:04.040 their parents.
01:23:05.340 smart doesn't
01:23:11.320 have to
01:23:11.660 equate to
01:23:12.320 kind or
01:23:12.940 good.
01:23:13.320 That's
01:23:13.480 right.
01:23:15.640 I'm
01:23:16.240 still off
01:23:16.800 blood
01:23:17.220 pressure
01:23:17.540 meds
01:23:17.880 completely.
01:23:20.520 And yes,
01:23:21.380 I am
01:23:21.640 checking my
01:23:22.260 blood
01:23:22.500 pressure
01:23:22.880 every day
01:23:23.940 so that
01:23:26.600 apparently
01:23:27.420 there's
01:23:27.860 some kind
01:23:29.320 of bounce
01:23:29.760 back risk.
01:23:30.520 so a week
01:23:31.520 after you
01:23:31.920 get off
01:23:32.220 of blood
01:23:32.520 pressure
01:23:32.860 meds
01:23:33.400 there's
01:23:34.760 some
01:23:34.920 predictable
01:23:35.460 bounce.
01:23:37.500 So I'm
01:23:37.920 watching for
01:23:38.460 that.
01:23:38.680 It hasn't
01:23:38.940 happened yet
01:23:39.440 but I'm
01:23:40.280 watching for
01:23:40.720 it.
01:23:40.920 that's the
01:23:48.680 steroids.
01:23:49.560 What is
01:23:49.760 it?
01:23:51.740 Tiffany
01:23:52.200 Cross got
01:23:52.980 fired.
01:23:53.880 Who is
01:23:54.300 Tiffany
01:23:54.640 Cross?
01:23:56.900 Tiffany
01:23:57.500 Cross is
01:23:58.700 who?
01:24:02.900 MSNBC?
01:24:03.540 MSNBC?
01:24:06.780 Did she
01:24:07.540 do something
01:24:08.400 a weekend
01:24:09.580 host?
01:24:11.480 Okay.
01:24:12.920 All right.
01:24:13.780 Let's
01:24:14.020 choose a
01:24:14.260 weekend
01:24:14.480 host.
01:24:16.980 Or was.
01:24:18.760 All right.
01:24:19.160 Did I
01:24:19.400 miss anything?
01:24:20.120 I think
01:24:20.480 we hit
01:24:20.780 everything,
01:24:21.200 right?
01:24:22.080 Got it
01:24:22.780 all.
01:24:24.500 How many
01:24:24.940 of you
01:24:25.220 are actually
01:24:25.620 going to
01:24:26.000 vote?
01:24:26.800 Or how
01:24:27.100 many of you
01:24:27.360 are voting
01:24:27.640 this year?
01:24:28.100 I won't
01:24:28.320 say on
01:24:28.620 Tuesday.
01:24:29.280 How many
01:24:29.660 of you
01:24:30.380 are voters?
01:24:31.900 Yes or
01:24:32.320 no?
01:24:32.820 Are you
01:24:33.160 voters this
01:24:33.720 year?
01:24:34.020 Yes or
01:24:34.380 no?
01:24:36.660 A lot
01:24:37.340 of yeses.
01:24:38.780 Wow.
01:24:39.280 It's all
01:24:39.620 yeses on
01:24:40.140 the net
01:24:40.360 platform.
01:24:41.500 On
01:24:41.660 locals,
01:24:42.060 it's all
01:24:42.300 yeses.
01:24:43.880 If it's
01:24:44.880 an,
01:24:45.200 I think
01:24:45.540 the no's
01:24:46.060 are probably
01:24:46.480 embarrassed.
01:24:47.900 Probably
01:24:48.200 people don't
01:24:48.780 want to
01:24:49.020 say no.
01:24:50.860 But it
01:24:51.420 could be
01:24:51.820 that I'm
01:24:52.700 attracting
01:24:53.660 listeners who
01:24:54.480 care about
01:24:54.880 politics.
01:24:55.440 That makes
01:24:55.760 sense.
01:24:56.580 I could
01:24:57.020 see,
01:24:57.400 oh,
01:24:57.620 you're
01:24:57.780 Canadian.
01:24:58.300 Okay.
01:25:01.180 You don't
01:25:01.780 want to be
01:25:02.180 Scott and
01:25:02.680 not vote.
01:25:03.360 That's a good
01:25:03.800 reason.
01:25:04.580 Don't be
01:25:04.980 like me.
01:25:05.440 There are
01:25:07.940 so many
01:25:08.340 ways in
01:25:08.800 which you
01:25:09.240 should not
01:25:09.660 be like
01:25:10.080 me.
01:25:11.080 It's a
01:25:11.540 pretty long
01:25:11.960 list.
01:25:16.020 All right.
01:25:17.460 Somebody says
01:25:18.200 not embarrassed,
01:25:18.940 it's a waste of
01:25:19.520 time.
01:25:21.920 A micro
01:25:22.340 lesson on
01:25:22.820 talking to
01:25:23.300 teens about
01:25:23.900 TikTok.
01:25:24.280 you would
01:25:25.680 like a
01:25:26.200 micro lesson
01:25:26.980 in which I
01:25:27.600 teach a
01:25:28.280 teen not
01:25:29.040 to use
01:25:29.480 the most
01:25:29.880 addictive
01:25:30.320 thing which
01:25:32.340 has ever
01:25:32.680 been created.
01:25:35.080 TikTok.
01:25:35.960 There's
01:25:36.440 nothing you
01:25:36.860 can do
01:25:37.160 about that.
01:25:38.320 If you
01:25:38.820 want TikTok
01:25:39.360 to go
01:25:39.840 away,
01:25:40.380 you've
01:25:40.680 got to
01:25:40.880 work on
01:25:41.240 banning
01:25:41.620 it.
01:25:43.200 Nothing
01:25:43.660 will keep
01:25:44.100 it away
01:25:44.360 from kids
01:25:44.820 otherwise.
01:25:49.340 Oh,
01:25:49.900 what?
01:25:50.400 Tim Poole
01:25:50.840 has a
01:25:51.200 number one
01:25:51.900 music video?
01:25:54.280 So I'm
01:25:56.840 hearing that
01:25:57.280 Tim Poole
01:25:57.840 has an
01:25:58.260 iTunes,
01:25:59.140 on iTunes
01:25:59.880 you could
01:26:00.160 buy,
01:26:00.840 music video
01:26:01.860 for 69
01:26:02.640 cents and
01:26:03.320 it's number
01:26:03.700 one on
01:26:04.100 iTunes charts.
01:26:06.660 Oh,
01:26:06.860 is it,
01:26:08.720 does he,
01:26:09.360 is he
01:26:09.900 musical?
01:26:12.020 Does he
01:26:12.540 actually
01:26:12.820 perform it?
01:26:17.240 He has
01:26:17.800 a band.
01:26:18.480 Oh,
01:26:18.640 I didn't know
01:26:18.960 that.
01:26:19.220 Tim Poole
01:26:19.540 has a band.
01:26:20.340 I wonder
01:26:20.580 if they
01:26:20.820 need a
01:26:21.100 drummer.
01:26:22.020 I wonder
01:26:22.240 if they
01:26:22.480 need a
01:26:22.700 really bad
01:26:23.120 drummer.
01:26:23.380 And it's
01:26:25.800 funny.
01:26:27.360 Oh,
01:26:27.740 okay.
01:26:28.900 All right,
01:26:29.260 well,
01:26:29.600 go out
01:26:30.080 and buy
01:26:30.300 that 69
01:26:31.000 cent
01:26:31.480 thing.
01:26:34.220 Why don't
01:26:34.720 you wear
01:26:35.040 a beanie?
01:26:37.540 Well,
01:26:38.080 then people
01:26:38.460 would think
01:26:38.740 I'm
01:26:38.940 Tim Poole.
01:26:40.620 That's
01:26:41.020 why.
01:26:45.940 All right,
01:26:46.700 all right,
01:26:47.420 I think we've
01:26:48.180 done it all.
01:26:49.260 Have we done
01:26:49.740 it all?
01:26:50.020 you know,
01:26:52.940 we saved
01:26:53.680 Brittany.
01:26:54.700 I think
01:26:55.100 we're going
01:26:55.360 to have
01:26:55.560 to save
01:26:55.940 Gay
01:26:56.220 from himself
01:26:58.020 and from
01:26:58.480 his personal
01:26:59.100 trainer.
01:27:00.760 But we're
01:27:02.640 good for
01:27:02.980 today.
01:27:03.920 I think
01:27:04.220 we've,
01:27:06.440 from
01:27:07.620 Offspring
01:27:08.100 plays,
01:27:08.580 oh,
01:27:08.760 the drummer
01:27:09.120 from Offspring
01:27:10.000 plays with
01:27:10.620 them.
01:27:11.240 Damn it,
01:27:11.680 they have
01:27:11.940 a drummer.
01:27:14.800 I'm trying
01:27:15.480 to learn
01:27:16.120 Nirvana
01:27:17.060 song.
01:27:17.940 I'd love
01:27:19.020 to get
01:27:19.320 Dave Grohl
01:27:20.080 to join
01:27:21.820 me for
01:27:22.220 A Man
01:27:22.600 Cave.
01:27:24.800 What do
01:27:25.520 you think
01:27:26.000 of my
01:27:26.240 odds
01:27:26.480 of getting
01:27:26.800 that done?
01:27:30.220 So,
01:27:30.740 Dave Grohl,
01:27:32.640 you know,
01:27:32.960 arguably,
01:27:34.140 you know,
01:27:34.460 the best
01:27:34.940 living rock
01:27:36.180 drummer,
01:27:36.940 because a
01:27:37.340 number of
01:27:37.860 greats have
01:27:38.460 passed away
01:27:39.040 recently.
01:27:42.340 Zero
01:27:42.980 Chance?
01:27:44.520 Oh,
01:27:45.960 no.
01:27:46.380 I think
01:27:46.780 I could
01:27:47.060 get Dave
01:27:47.580 Grohl
01:27:47.820 to give
01:27:48.100 me a
01:27:48.540 drum
01:27:48.760 lesson
01:27:49.100 in my
01:27:49.500 man
01:27:49.680 cave.
01:27:52.960 So,
01:27:53.560 I have
01:27:53.980 an idea
01:27:54.460 for how
01:27:55.240 I'd like
01:27:55.640 to do
01:27:55.880 the
01:27:56.020 man
01:27:56.240 cave,
01:27:56.680 but I
01:27:57.460 don't
01:27:57.600 have
01:27:57.760 the
01:27:57.900 clout
01:27:58.180 to do
01:27:58.500 it.
01:27:58.980 And
01:27:59.080 the
01:27:59.360 idea
01:27:59.660 goes
01:27:59.940 like
01:28:00.120 this,
01:28:01.160 that
01:28:01.500 every
01:28:01.820 time
01:28:02.060 I
01:28:02.220 do
01:28:02.340 the
01:28:02.480 man
01:28:02.720 cave,
01:28:03.060 which
01:28:03.200 I
01:28:03.320 do
01:28:03.460 from
01:28:03.740 my
01:28:04.640 man
01:28:04.840 cave,
01:28:05.720 that
01:28:06.800 it
01:28:06.920 would
01:28:07.040 look
01:28:07.280 like
01:28:07.520 it's
01:28:07.720 just
01:28:07.900 going
01:28:08.080 to
01:28:08.120 be
01:28:08.240 me,
01:28:09.240 and
01:28:09.840 then
01:28:09.980 there
01:28:10.120 would
01:28:10.220 be
01:28:10.400 a
01:28:10.640 surprise
01:28:11.140 guest
01:28:11.620 who's
01:28:12.960 just
01:28:13.160 in
01:28:13.300 the
01:28:13.420 man
01:28:13.600 cave,
01:28:14.140 just
01:28:14.320 hanging
01:28:14.540 out.
01:28:15.520 And
01:28:15.700 there's
01:28:15.860 no
01:28:16.000 explanation
01:28:16.500 for it.
01:28:17.580 It's
01:28:17.680 like one
01:28:18.040 day I'll
01:28:18.400 just be
01:28:18.680 in the
01:28:18.880 man
01:28:19.060 cave,
01:28:19.520 and the
01:28:21.020 most
01:28:21.500 famous
01:28:21.920 musician
01:28:22.500 in the
01:28:22.800 world
01:28:22.940 just
01:28:23.160 happens
01:28:23.360 to be
01:28:23.580 hanging
01:28:23.800 out.
01:28:24.460 It would
01:28:24.660 just
01:28:24.780 be
01:28:24.920 sort
01:28:25.120 of a
01:28:25.320 running
01:28:25.520 gag
01:28:25.940 that
01:28:26.820 interesting
01:28:28.180 people
01:28:28.540 just
01:28:28.780 stop
01:28:29.140 by
01:28:29.280 the
01:28:29.400 man
01:28:29.600 cave.
01:28:31.380 That's
01:28:31.860 Bill
01:28:32.020 Maher's
01:28:32.380 gig.
01:28:33.680 Is
01:28:33.880 that
01:28:34.020 what
01:28:34.180 his
01:28:34.380 show
01:28:34.540 does?
01:28:35.960 He
01:28:36.140 has
01:28:36.300 one
01:28:36.740 interesting
01:28:37.180 person,
01:28:37.700 but he
01:28:38.240 doesn't
01:28:38.520 do
01:28:38.800 the
01:28:39.880 they
01:28:40.180 just
01:28:40.400 happen
01:28:40.660 to be
01:28:40.940 there.
01:28:41.640 So
01:28:41.760 it's
01:28:42.160 the
01:28:42.340 just
01:28:42.580 happen
01:28:42.820 to be
01:28:43.100 there
01:28:43.280 part
01:28:43.540 that's
01:28:43.860 interesting.
01:28:46.440 But
01:28:46.880 I don't
01:28:47.320 have the
01:28:47.600 clout
01:28:47.880 that he
01:28:48.180 has
01:28:48.360 so he
01:28:48.600 can get
01:28:48.980 people
01:28:49.760 like that
01:28:50.120 to show
01:28:50.420 up.
01:28:53.980 Who's
01:28:54.420 the most
01:28:54.920 famous
01:28:55.560 person
01:28:56.040 you think
01:28:56.480 I could
01:28:56.820 get
01:28:57.040 to
01:28:57.640 join
01:28:58.080 me
01:28:58.380 on
01:28:58.820 a
01:28:59.060 live
01:28:59.360 stream?
01:29:01.260 Who
01:29:01.700 do you
01:29:01.860 think?
01:29:02.220 Who's
01:29:02.440 the most
01:29:02.780 famous
01:29:03.120 person
01:29:03.520 you think
01:29:03.860 I could
01:29:04.140 join
01:29:04.460 me
01:29:04.620 on
01:29:04.800 a
01:29:04.920 live
01:29:05.120 stream?
01:29:06.260 Trump?
01:29:07.700 Jordan
01:29:09.380 Peterson?
01:29:11.300 Trump?
01:29:12.020 Elon
01:29:12.240 Musk?
01:29:13.980 Toobin?
01:29:15.200 Jake
01:29:15.740 Tapper?
01:29:16.300 Snoop?
01:29:17.440 I
01:29:17.800 couldn't
01:29:18.100 get
01:29:18.260 Snoop
01:29:18.700 or
01:29:18.840 Elton
01:29:19.120 John?
01:29:22.280 Joe
01:29:22.880 Rogan's
01:29:23.400 got his
01:29:23.680 own
01:29:23.840 show.
01:29:27.260 Gutfeld
01:29:27.740 could
01:29:28.100 probably
01:29:28.540 get
01:29:28.860 Gutfeld
01:29:29.400 for
01:29:29.760 reciprocal
01:29:30.540 reasons.
01:29:33.320 All
01:29:33.460 right.
01:29:34.140 Well,
01:29:34.580 I'll
01:29:36.940 make you
01:29:37.680 a
01:29:37.840 commitment.
01:29:39.400 If
01:29:39.580 Trump
01:29:39.880 gets
01:29:40.140 nominated
01:29:40.660 and
01:29:42.560 runs,
01:29:43.080 I
01:29:43.240 will
01:29:43.580 invite
01:29:44.080 him
01:29:44.320 on
01:29:45.520 here.
01:29:46.720 I
01:29:47.260 think
01:29:47.520 he'll
01:29:47.680 say
01:29:47.860 yes.
01:29:49.580 Because
01:29:50.040 the thing
01:29:50.540 is that
01:29:51.160 wherever
01:29:52.720 somebody
01:29:53.460 like
01:29:53.760 Trump
01:29:54.020 appears,
01:29:54.780 the audience
01:29:55.240 will be
01:29:55.660 big because
01:29:56.400 social media
01:29:56.920 would boost
01:29:57.400 it.
01:29:58.040 So I
01:29:58.620 don't
01:29:58.760 think it
01:29:59.020 would make
01:29:59.300 any
01:29:59.500 difference.
01:30:01.540 Rob
01:30:01.860 Reiner
01:30:02.220 would be
01:30:02.660 terrific.
01:30:03.020 how
01:30:05.000 much
01:30:05.240 would
01:30:05.400 you
01:30:05.520 like
01:30:05.720 to
01:30:05.860 see
01:30:05.980 me
01:30:06.160 interview
01:30:06.500 Rob
01:30:06.840 Reiner?
01:30:09.080 That would
01:30:09.720 be
01:30:09.800 amazing.
01:30:10.540 Because
01:30:10.780 here's
01:30:11.040 what I
01:30:11.360 would do.
01:30:13.120 I
01:30:13.320 would
01:30:13.500 treat
01:30:13.780 his
01:30:14.200 opinions
01:30:14.580 with
01:30:14.920 respect.
01:30:17.280 I
01:30:17.780 wouldn't
01:30:18.080 invite
01:30:18.420 somebody
01:30:18.860 to be
01:30:19.240 on my
01:30:19.520 live
01:30:19.780 stream
01:30:20.040 and
01:30:20.280 not
01:30:20.520 treat
01:30:20.800 their
01:30:20.980 opinion
01:30:21.680 with
01:30:21.960 respect.
01:30:22.500 On
01:30:22.620 social
01:30:22.900 media,
01:30:23.800 everybody's
01:30:24.400 a jerk,
01:30:24.820 including
01:30:25.140 me.
01:30:26.120 But
01:30:26.440 in
01:30:26.640 person,
01:30:28.500 I
01:30:28.940 would
01:30:29.360 never
01:30:29.600 invite
01:30:29.980 somebody
01:30:30.340 to
01:30:30.520 show
01:30:30.700 up
01:30:30.900 and
01:30:31.020 not
01:30:31.200 give
01:30:31.380 them
01:30:31.540 a
01:30:31.740 full
01:30:32.220 platform
01:30:33.300 to
01:30:33.640 do
01:30:33.780 their
01:30:33.940 thing.
01:30:35.480 He'd
01:30:36.000 be
01:30:36.140 fun.
01:30:37.820 Because
01:30:38.140 Rob
01:30:38.920 Reiner
01:30:39.220 is
01:30:39.580 presumably
01:30:41.100 smart,
01:30:43.200 talented,
01:30:44.080 funny,
01:30:44.680 interesting
01:30:45.000 person who
01:30:45.620 just has
01:30:45.940 different
01:30:46.240 politics than
01:30:46.940 some of
01:30:47.280 you.
01:30:48.100 So he'd
01:30:48.520 probably be
01:30:48.920 fun if
01:30:49.880 he would
01:30:50.120 do it.
01:30:51.140 Kathy
01:30:51.460 Griffin.
01:30:51.820 I don't
01:30:53.880 think
01:30:54.100 would do
01:30:55.760 do it
01:30:56.040 necessarily,
01:30:56.960 but I
01:30:57.520 do have
01:30:57.820 some
01:30:58.000 history
01:30:58.320 with
01:30:58.580 her.
01:30:59.580 She
01:30:59.740 was
01:31:00.000 the
01:31:00.180 voice
01:31:00.480 of my
01:31:00.880 Alice
01:31:01.240 character
01:31:01.660 when
01:31:01.920 Dilbert
01:31:02.180 was
01:31:02.440 animated.
01:31:05.140 So I've
01:31:05.720 had some
01:31:06.020 contacts
01:31:06.460 with her
01:31:06.860 a few
01:31:07.720 times.
01:31:08.620 And
01:31:09.020 I like
01:31:10.300 her.
01:31:11.580 And I
01:31:11.920 think she
01:31:12.520 knows that.
01:31:13.700 So maybe
01:31:14.200 I could
01:31:14.520 get her,
01:31:15.080 but I
01:31:16.280 think she
01:31:16.620 would be
01:31:17.560 justifiably
01:31:18.800 concerned about
01:31:19.740 what my
01:31:20.540 audience would
01:31:21.140 do to
01:31:21.420 her.
01:31:22.820 My audience
01:31:23.400 would be
01:31:23.820 in control.
01:31:24.900 Netanyahu,
01:31:25.600 now that
01:31:25.920 would be
01:31:26.180 interesting.
01:31:27.860 I don't
01:31:28.540 think I
01:31:28.880 could get
01:31:29.180 Netanyahu.
01:31:30.920 I don't
01:31:31.280 think I
01:31:31.580 could do
01:31:31.840 that.
01:31:33.080 What
01:31:33.480 about
01:31:33.700 Putin?
01:31:37.160 Do you
01:31:37.620 think I
01:31:37.900 could get
01:31:38.220 Putin?
01:31:42.380 And the
01:31:42.880 other thing
01:31:43.220 I wonder
01:31:43.540 is,
01:31:43.860 would it
01:31:44.200 even be
01:31:44.580 legal?
01:31:47.780 Would it
01:31:48.620 be legal
01:31:49.160 for me
01:31:49.580 to
01:31:49.880 interview
01:31:50.320 Putin?
01:31:54.040 Because it
01:31:54.660 shouldn't
01:31:54.940 be.
01:31:56.520 I think
01:31:57.100 it is
01:31:57.400 legal,
01:31:57.760 but it
01:31:57.980 shouldn't
01:31:58.220 be.
01:31:59.380 Do you
01:31:59.620 know why
01:31:59.840 it shouldn't
01:32:00.220 be?
01:32:01.360 Because
01:32:01.800 we're at
01:32:02.180 war with
01:32:02.620 him.
01:32:04.320 And I'd
01:32:04.920 be giving
01:32:05.240 him a
01:32:05.580 platform.
01:32:07.220 I mean,
01:32:07.520 I think
01:32:07.860 it is
01:32:08.240 legal as
01:32:09.280 far as
01:32:09.560 I know,
01:32:09.960 but
01:32:10.160 probably
01:32:11.400 shouldn't
01:32:11.920 be.
01:32:13.180 Probably
01:32:13.560 shouldn't
01:32:13.900 be.
01:32:14.840 Kim
01:32:15.240 Jong-un,
01:32:16.040 that would
01:32:16.560 be amazing.
01:32:18.860 You know,
01:32:19.060 the language
01:32:19.520 program,
01:32:19.800 or Pasternak,
01:32:20.660 oh my
01:32:21.160 God,
01:32:21.780 he would
01:32:22.060 never do
01:32:22.420 it.
01:32:23.360 You think
01:32:23.700 Pasternak
01:32:24.220 would say
01:32:24.560 yes?
01:32:24.880 No,
01:32:25.040 he'd never
01:32:25.280 do it.
01:32:26.000 Madonna,
01:32:26.660 she would
01:32:26.940 never do
01:32:27.280 it,
01:32:27.500 but,
01:32:29.460 all right,
01:32:29.860 well,
01:32:30.060 you guys
01:32:30.260 have some
01:32:30.380 good ideas.
01:32:31.300 All right,
01:32:31.640 thanks for
01:32:32.200 all your
01:32:32.680 suggestions,
01:32:33.940 and thank
01:32:35.740 you.
01:32:35.940 I'm
01:32:36.080 refreshingly
01:32:36.780 arrogant.
01:32:37.800 I accept
01:32:38.480 that.
01:32:38.780 I believe
01:32:40.420 I'm
01:32:40.720 refreshingly
01:32:42.200 arrogant,
01:32:43.520 almost like
01:32:44.700 mint,
01:32:46.960 sort of
01:32:47.380 like a
01:32:48.040 palate
01:32:48.400 cleanser
01:32:48.840 sort of
01:32:49.220 thing.
01:32:50.100 Refreshingly
01:32:50.820 arrogant.
01:32:51.480 I think
01:32:51.820 I'm going
01:32:52.060 to add
01:32:52.360 that to
01:32:52.700 my Twitter
01:32:54.560 bio,
01:32:56.980 you know,
01:32:57.900 Black Lives
01:32:58.520 Matter,
01:32:59.700 Ukraine,
01:33:01.640 and then
01:33:01.980 that.
01:33:04.140 Refreshingly
01:33:04.740 arrogant.
01:33:06.680 All right,
01:33:08.700 bye for
01:33:09.120 now.