Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1993 Scott Adams： Persuasion Analysis Of Trump, Crowder v The Daily Wire, Ukraine, Lots More

00:00:00.000 Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of civilization. Today's show will be

00:00:05.800 really some that, well, I feel sorry for the people who aren't here. Honestly, I do. You're

00:00:12.940 going to be so much smarter when you're done. And if you'd like to prepare yourself for the

00:00:18.900 incoming amazingness, well, all you need for that is a cupper mug or a glass of tanker,

00:00:25.320 chalester, stye, and a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite

00:00:30.380 liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine here

00:00:34.240 of the day, the thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip and

00:00:36.940 it happens. Now go. Yeah, you weren't ready, were you? Gotcha. Gotcha. See, sometimes you

00:00:47.920 got to be ready to leap at it. All right, today's presentation is going to be primarily

00:00:55.100 about persuasion. This is the one time you don't all hate me. I don't think I'm going

00:01:04.480 to say anything today that will offend any of you. In fact, you'll probably like the whole

00:01:08.360 thing. I don't know, but we'll find out. But I want to show you something to start off

00:01:13.100 with the sweetest thing I've ever seen. Now, I hate to be a big old softy, but I just have

00:01:21.020 to give a shout out to this. Most of you know conservative Matt Walsh, right? Matt Walsh.

00:01:30.900 And you may know that if you follow his Twitter account, he had some twins recently. So congratulations

00:01:37.780 on that. And he reports that wife and babies were finally discharged from the hospital. This gets

00:01:42.860 better, by the way. This gets to something you're going to like. Hold on. So it just sounds

00:01:51.160 like somebody's baby. But so he gets these twins. And what I learned from his tweet today

00:01:58.040 is he already had twins. So he has two sets of twins. But here's what he tweets. Wife and

00:02:04.680 babies were finally discharged from the hospital today. I assume there was some concern that they

00:02:10.720 stayed a little extra. And he says, the older twins haven't left their brother's side since

00:02:16.720 they came home. My daughter explained that someone needs to be sitting and watching over them even

00:02:24.600 while they nap. And here's a picture of his older twins. We're not that older. I can't tell

00:02:32.380 what, maybe 10? 10 years old or something? And they decided on their own that these, that

00:02:40.220 their siblings could not be alone. So they're sitting there reading, it looks like, and making

00:02:47.220 sure that the babies are never alone, even when they're sleeping. Now, here's the thing. I've

00:02:55.620 had this discussion before in which, so let's say Matt Walsh is the, you know, the poster child

00:03:03.360 for traditional marriage. Wouldn't you say? If there's anybody who's like the person you

00:03:09.920 think of when he talks about traditional marriage, I think of him. And I always say traditional

00:03:16.360 marriage is absolutely the best way to go for about 25% of people. The trouble is, you know,

00:03:24.360 if one of you is an addict or crazy or something, you know, nothing works. But for about 25%,

00:03:30.360 25%. And I know you would argue, oh, it's higher, it's maybe 75%. But today, I'm not going

00:03:36.040 to have that argument. I think it's 25%. You think it's 75. But, you know, it's not 100

00:03:41.680 and it's not zero. But talk about winning. Oh, my God. How many of you, like, heard this

00:03:52.340 story and just said, uh, if I could, if I could have that life, that looks pretty good. Doesn't

00:03:59.760 it? Like, you can already, you can already, like, fast forward yourself into the future

00:04:03.780 where they're having, you know, big family events and all the twins are there and stuff.

00:04:08.720 That sounds like so much fun. I'm just going to call it out because it's the best, it's just

00:04:16.380 the best little anecdote of why people like traditional families. It looks pretty strong.

00:04:24.840 So congratulations, Matt Walsh. I'll just add this one thing that no matter how winning

00:04:30.460 other people seem to be, uh, remember, do you remember the basket case theory? Basket case

00:04:40.040 theory. I've told you this before, that what you know about other people is a very small

00:04:46.640 amount of who they are, right? So if you imagine that the Walsh family has solved all of their 1.00

00:04:53.100 problems, I'm sure that's wrong. I'm sure they have some challenges like everyone. But

00:05:00.480 on the surface, this is a pretty amazing story. And I just liked it. Elizabeth Warren tweets,

00:05:06.720 apparently a bunch of people are worried that Zelle, the digital payment service that is owned by some

00:05:12.800 of the big banks, including Bank of America, is stealing their money. What? Like, I don't even

00:05:20.640 know what to say about this. Apparently there are a whole lot of people, and I don't know what

00:05:26.120 percentage, and I don't know how true it is. But a whole bunch of people, um, I think Laura

00:05:33.160 Loomer was one of them. I saw a tweet from her, who say that, uh, their payments, payments are being

00:05:38.460 sent, and then they don't, they're not received on the other end. It looks like Bank of America's

00:05:43.540 keeping it, or somebody's keeping it, or it's disappearing. So it's a little bit of fog of war

00:05:48.600 right now. So I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna claim that I know what's happening in this story,

00:05:53.280 because I don't think anybody does. In fact, Elizabeth Warren's, you know, puts it as sort of a

00:05:58.160 question. She's, she's, uh, she says, I've called out serious fraud issues on Zelle, and

00:06:03.420 this is their latest failure. So I don't know what the other fraud issues are on Zelle.

00:06:09.000 Is there some reason to, uh, is Laura Loomer credible? Well, on this she is. Sure. Do you,

00:06:15.480 do you think Laura Loomer would tweet that she was having problems with Zelle if she just made it up?

00:06:20.720 Now, I'm not saying it's true because she said it, but really? You think somebody would just make

00:06:28.720 that up? There's nothing in her history that would suggest she would do that. Is there? Like,

00:06:35.400 you could like, you know, like or dislike other things you said, but I don't think that doesn't

00:06:39.920 sound like a lie. Could be. Anything's possible, but it doesn't sound like a lie to me. Anyway,

00:06:46.600 we'll keep an eye on that. Uh, New Zealand, New Zealand's prime minister resigned. Uh,

00:06:53.520 Yacinda, what's her name? Uh, Ardern. Now she was famous for being a progressive and doing things a 1.00

00:07:02.180 little differently. She was also famous for having a baby while prime minister, because she was one of 0.98

00:07:07.680 the youngest leaders we've ever had. She had a baby and she managed to do her job while being a mom as

00:07:16.260 well, being a young mom. But she's decided that, uh, it's a little too much. And she's decided she's,

00:07:23.220 I'll use my own words, burned out. And then she doesn't have the, the drive or energy to run New 0.96

00:07:31.800 Zealand and run her family, I guess. So here's how CNN described it. And this is in a, in the CNN's

00:07:42.940 website. Um, it started off by saying burnout is real and it's nothing to be ashamed of. That's

00:07:49.440 the conclusion. Trailblazing New Zealand, uh, leader, Yacinda Ardern, Ardern seems to have reached

00:07:55.740 after almost six brutal years in office. So CNN is first saying, you know, burnout must be recognized

00:08:02.740 as a, a genuine phenomenon and we should not ignore it. Okay. Uh, I'm all with you on that.

00:08:09.080 Later on in the story, they say during her time in power, Ardern showed that it was possible

00:08:14.400 to juggle a young family and a demanding role. Good for her. Look at that. She managed to run a 1.00

00:08:22.280 country and, you know, juggle her home demands as well. Very good. And now she's leading by example

00:08:29.200 to show that when a tank is empty and there's no more to give, it's also okay to opt out. Now this

00:08:34.900 is pretty good. This is pretty good on her part. Not only is she proving that you can,

00:08:40.800 you can run a country and have a family, but she's also proving at the same time that you

00:08:47.380 can't run a country and have a family. So a lot of people would just try to demonstrate

00:08:53.740 one thing at a time. She's doing two. This is quite impressive. And CNN, uh, I credit them

00:09:00.700 for calling the sale that she's not only proving that you can do everything, have a family and

00:09:05.900 have a demanding job, but also that you can't. So what? I'm going to read a comment from Erica.

00:09:21.600 And she says, so this is not me. This is Erica. And you wonder why I don't want women in charge of 1.00

00:09:29.040 anything. Okay. I think that's too far. Too far, Erica. You've gone too far. Uh, but let's live in

00:09:39.540 the real world. Who in the world could do both of those things? Well, nobody, nobody. It's not a man

00:09:46.340 or woman thing. You know, women happen to be the ones who, you know, bear the children. So, you know, 1.00

00:09:52.060 they end up, and for other reasons, they end up, I guess, having a big role in the child's life as

00:09:57.400 they should. So I don't see how you can do both. Do you? How in the world could you do both?

00:10:03.460 And do you, do you imagine that, um, New Zealand got a good job out of her? I mean, maybe it was good

00:10:13.040 enough. I don't know. But it doesn't matter what the external, uh, what the external, let's say,

00:10:20.940 competition for the leader's time is. Whether it's a baby or they've got lawsuit problems or they're

00:10:27.440 having troubles at home, it matters. It all matters. So if we're, if we're being, uh, open-minded

00:10:35.100 about this, I guess the right place to land is, uh, everybody should have the opportunity to try

00:10:41.240 anything they want. And if it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out. So I don't think there's any

00:10:47.120 judgment to put on this. Do you? I wouldn't put any judgment on it. It's just a thing that happened.

00:10:53.640 Well, the New York Times has a story. And because it's in the New York Times, that's actually the

00:11:01.780 big part of the story. If this were some obscure publication who had the following story I'm going

00:11:08.200 to tell you about, it wouldn't mean much. But because it's in the New York Times, that's,

00:11:14.580 it means it's, uh, let's say it's reaching common or because of the story is now a common story

00:11:23.560 or a common understanding. And it goes like this. Hacking the simulation. So there are some

00:11:31.700 serious people and one in particular, uh, I guess it was, uh, it was a professor or, uh,

00:11:38.920 scientist, computer scientist, David Anderson. And during the pandemic, he did some noodling on

00:11:45.040 if we're in a simulation. So if our so-called reality is a computer simulation, could you hack it

00:11:51.220 from the inside? Now, I don't think the article is very interesting, so I'm not going to get into

00:11:56.820 the details. But do you think if we're a simulation that we could hack it from the inside?

00:12:04.860 Because here's my take on that. If that's not true, that we're a simulation and you can hack it

00:12:11.420 from the inside, I can't explain my life experience. Because I've been using this thing called

00:12:17.140 Affirmations that apparently hacks the simulation. And, you know, the, the list of things that I've

00:12:25.180 affirmed that actually happened in the real world is so wild. And you only know some of them.

00:12:32.700 You know, there's some that are just private. The private ones are crazy, crazy. Like you wouldn't, 0.96

00:12:39.540 you wouldn't even, and, and, you know, even recently, like I'm not even talking about in the

00:12:44.260 distant past, you know, something worked out for me once. I'm talking right up to this week. Crazy.

00:12:51.260 And I'll just put this out there. If we live in a simulation, and that's not guaranteed,

00:12:59.400 and if we can hack it, and that's certainly not guaranteed, my best instinct is that the affirmations

00:13:06.520 or the amount of, basically the amount of focus you put on the things you want to happen

00:13:12.540 might make reality fork in that direction. So, one possibility is that all possibilities exist.

00:13:22.680 And they're all here at the same time.

00:13:26.600 Do you know how, um, uh, animation works? Animation is a series of still pictures

00:13:33.960 that if you were to put them together in, let's say, pages of a book, and then you flip through the

00:13:38.920 pages, it would look like the animation is moving, which is how you do movie TV animation.

00:13:45.640 Now, I've always imagined that our reality is a three-dimensional cube in which, you know,

00:13:53.800 conceptually, let's say you're somewhere in the middle of the cube, and your direction of the future

00:13:59.260 is every direction. So you have infinite directions from where you are. And each of those directions

00:14:05.360 looks exactly like our reality with a small change. And the small change is based on whatever,

00:14:12.460 you know, whatever path you take. Now, my understanding of reality, or let's say the standard

00:14:20.340 understanding of reality is that you're a conscious being, and you're in this big moving machine.

00:14:26.660 Reality is moving all around you, and you're also moving. So it's a bunch of moving stuff.

00:14:31.740 What if the only thing that moves is your point of view? That's how I see the universe. That it all

00:14:41.060 exists, and always has, and there's no time. It just sits there, all of the possibilities as a solid

00:14:48.460 cube. And the only thing that's changing is your point of perception in which path you follow.

00:14:54.600 And nothing else changes. The universe is static, and always has been. And that the Big Bang,

00:15:03.600 the Big Bang is simply a location within the cube. It might be the middle. Imagine the Big Bang is the

00:15:11.580 middle of the cube, and from that middle, all the possibilities. And they just sit there as a solid,

00:15:17.880 and it's only your mind or your, you know, you can say your soul or whatever is passing through it.

00:15:23.740 And as you pass through it, it appears to be moving. But that's because your conscious went

00:15:28.400 through a series of still frames. Now, the reason that I mentioned that frame is not because I think

00:15:36.960 it's necessarily true, but it would perfectly explain how you could hack reality, because you

00:15:44.200 wouldn't be changing anything except your direction. And how hard would it be to change the direction

00:15:52.100 of a mind that is not bound by a physical laws? Maybe easy, right? It might be as easy as dreaming.

00:16:05.400 It might be almost something we do automatically.

00:16:07.200 Exactly. So, I just put that weird possibility out there to spin your brains around a little bit.

00:16:15.000 All right. It's going to get weirder. This is going to be one of the most interesting live streams

00:16:21.140 you've ever seen. And we're going to get to Trump persuasion. My sweet spot. So wait for that.

00:16:28.360 All right. Let's talk about Ukraine persuasion. Question number one. Remember I said that I

00:16:38.160 believe that Ukrainians would outperform expectations at the beginning of the invasion? And I said primarily 0.99

00:16:44.980 because of modern equipment that they would get from NATO and the US, and that drones in particular

00:16:52.340 would be the things that made the difference. But then other people said, drones? Really, Scott? It's

00:16:59.640 really the HIMARS. It's the HIMARS that are making the difference. And then they're introducing these

00:17:06.580 new kinds of missiles called GLSDB. So precise, it can hit the radius of a car tire. And it can hit a

00:17:17.200 moving object within 150 miles. And it can go around it and come back in another direction.

00:17:23.740 So it can, you know, evade radar. It can do anything you want. And it can hear something under a bridge.

00:17:30.680 Right? You can hear something hiding under a bridge from the air. So apparently this is good weapons.

00:17:39.160 And apparently these are heading toward Ukraine. And that they would be especially good for taking out 1.00

00:17:44.520 supply lines. Now, remember I told you that I feel like Russia has a real problem because they won't

00:17:53.280 be able to supply as long as Ukraine can, you know, drone their supply chains from the air. 0.65

00:18:00.060 So that's what they're doing. You know, they're doing exactly what would be obvious.

00:18:05.400 But here's my question to you. What is the definition of a drone? And would you call a HIMARS?

00:18:10.580 You know, the rocket that comes out of it. And the GLSDB systems, would you call those drones?

00:18:19.900 Here's the definition of a drone. Any unmanned aircraft or ship that is guided remotely

00:18:25.720 or could be autonomous. So in other words, you can control it directly or you can give us some

00:18:33.440 instructions to do something and it goes and does it. That's a drone.

00:18:37.120 I think the HIMARS and the GLSDB systems are drones.

00:18:48.520 Whenever I talk about this, all of the Russian assets start yelling Scott Ritter.

00:18:56.300 You can tell all the Russian assets. Scott Ritter and also wrong and big letters.

00:19:02.320 It's so easy to pick out the Russians now. Anybody else want to say Scott Ritter so we 0.98

00:19:10.820 know who all the Russians are? Go ahead. Let's see if I can quiet them down. 1.00

00:19:19.520 Scott Ritter literally writes for the Russian-controlled publication RT, which is called

00:19:26.700 Russia Today. So do I think that Scott Ritter would have a different take on whether Ukraine

00:19:34.180 is winning? Huh? Why don't we see what the guy who works for Russia thinks?

00:19:39.820 Hmm. Hmm.

00:19:41.660 And Andrew says, and who do you write for? Got me. Whoa. You nailed me. Burn. Burn. Who do I

00:19:53.560 write for? Whoa. Whoa. Well, as you know, I write for UT. Oh, you didn't know that? I write for Ukraine

00:20:03.580 today. The publication that's owned by Zelensky. Yeah. No. I talk to him every day. Hold on. He's

00:20:12.200 calling again. You want me to write what? Write Ukraine has nuclear weapons. You don't have 0.54

00:20:21.780 nuclear weapons. Okay. I'll say you do. I'll say you do. I will do an article on that. You know,

00:20:27.660 there's talk that they have nuclear weapons. Anything else? F-15s? You don't have any. Okay.

00:20:34.120 I'll say F-15s. F-15s. You got hundreds of them. Hundreds of them. Thousands? Thousands of F-15s.

00:20:42.160 All right. I got my assignment. Got to write for Zelensky. Now, for the dumb people, that was just

00:20:52.500 theater. And I don't actually write for Ukraine. But I think it's funny that you asked. 0.99

00:20:59.680 Anyway, I would just like to make the following point. I can see why you would call these missile

00:21:04.540 systems not necessarily the same as drones. I get it. But I wasn't making that distinction when I

00:21:11.020 talked about it. My trolls are just so pathetic today. You know, when the trolls are in the 1.00

00:21:22.480 they're doing a good job and they're like getting under your skin, like they're annoying. But when

00:21:28.260 they do an unusually bad job, they just become part of the entertainment. And today they're

00:21:34.660 totally entertaining. It's the same person. Anyway, that's pretty funny. Let's talk about

00:21:43.280 everybody weaponizing everything. So, you know, the Republicans are doing this investigation into

00:21:50.560 the weaponization of the intel community. And now the Democrats are going to match that

00:21:58.280 persuasion by saying that the House Republicans are setting up a committee to, that it's the

00:22:05.740 Republicans that are weaponizing stuff. So everybody is weaponizing. Is that good persuasion?

00:22:12.060 To say everybody's weaponizing stuff? I don't know. It feels a little generic, doesn't it? A little

00:22:20.660 bit generic. I don't think the weaponization thing is quite hitting. But we're going to talk

00:22:27.460 about Trump's recent statements. I'm going to show you how to do it right. And I want you

00:22:35.480 to contrast the weaponization word with where Trump goes. So you can see the weak sauce, and then you're

00:22:46.200 going to see Trump just punching it right in the fucking face. Now, whether you like it or not, he 1.00

00:22:54.280 definitely has a skill, a very specific skill set. We'll get to that in a little bit.

00:23:00.160 All right. Apparently, Trump is reportedly, NBC says, going to come back to Twitter. And he's

00:23:10.760 petitioned Facebook to go back there as well. Now, Facebook would have to say yes. Twitter already

00:23:16.620 did. But he's not back. So we'll see if that's real. I think most people assumed that running for

00:23:23.840 office would require it. Don't you think? Now, I don't know what that does to the viability of

00:23:29.940 truth social. So that's going to take a hit. But I saw a comment about Trump's support of his work to

00:23:43.440 bring the vaccinations out. Now, how many of you think that's going to be just a huge problem?

00:23:49.380 That Trump was behind Operation Warp Speed, and that a lot of his base is pretty unhappy about

00:24:00.900 vaccinations. So how does he solve that? Is that solvable? You tell me, is that solvable for his base?

00:24:07.660 Yeah, it is solvable. I wasn't sure how. But he's putting together a package of persuasion

00:24:20.180 in which this folds into it really well. And I almost hate to see it. Because, you know,

00:24:30.640 this time around, I'm not going to support Trump on, you know, his policies, except one. He's the

00:24:36.720 strongest one on fentanyl. He would go after the cartels. He says. I mean, so far, that's the best

00:24:43.020 take. So I'm going to talk about his persuasion skills. If you can be, let's say, alert enough

00:24:50.460 to know that doesn't mean I support everything he says and does, right? I'm a one policy voter this

00:24:57.760 time, just on fentanyl. But unhoodwinked on Twitter, Twitter user unhoodwinked, who is also a good

00:25:07.100 follow. Very provocative tweets if you'd like to follow somebody interesting. And he says, and this

00:25:13.320 is why Trump won't be re-elected, talking about his support of the vaccinations. He continues to fail

00:25:19.980 to read the room on this issue. And he says, it wasn't an accomplishment, warp speed meaning.

00:25:26.980 It was a hyper-rushed departure from safety protocols on an experimental drug administered

00:25:34.360 to millions without full informed consent. How many of you would agree with this statement? I'll just

00:25:40.380 read it again. Agree or disagree with this statement. Warp speed wasn't an accomplishment.

00:25:44.780 It was a hyper-rushed departure from safety protocols on an experimental drug administered

00:25:50.780 to millions without full informed consent. Boom. Agree, agree, agree, agree, agree. All right?

00:25:58.900 May I offer a counterpoint? I'm not going to try to change your mind.

00:26:06.960 If that makes you feel better. Because I don't think I need to. I feel like you've all made up

00:26:13.600 your minds and you can stay there. But wouldn't you like to see the counter to that? Just out of

00:26:20.360 curiosity. Do you think there is any counter to that point? All right, here's my counter to the

00:26:27.020 point. It was fully disclosed. And it was not mandatory. Let me say, it was not mandatory

00:26:35.040 from Trump. There were definitely mandates. But Trump is anti-mandate. Now, you're saying that

00:26:42.960 it was rushed and it did not meet the normal safety protocols. Who didn't know that?

00:26:50.840 We were told that directly and daily every single day. Everyone knew that you can't know what will

00:26:59.380 happen in five years if you've only tested for six months or whatever it was. Is there anybody who

00:27:06.280 didn't understand the vaccinations had a risk? And is there anybody who didn't understand that the risk

00:27:13.760 was more than normal? Anybody? So when you say there wasn't informed consent, I've never seen more

00:27:21.000 informed consent. Or well informed. The consent part is optional. I've never seen more information

00:27:27.680 information that this was not the same safety protocol as before. And I think we were told

00:27:34.260 directly, consistently, and often, that we also don't know how bad the virus itself would be.

00:27:42.020 So we're looking at two unknowns and we're taking our best shot. But nobody was presented with

00:27:48.060 safety. Not a level of safety that was consistent with the past. Right? So the informed consent

00:27:58.240 thing is ridiculous in my mind. Because I was informed. Why were you not informed? I was totally

00:28:04.260 informed. Do you remember that I waited from the time that I was eligible, which was early on because

00:28:10.120 of my age? I waited, I don't know, six months or so? Do you remember why I said I waited? I said

00:28:17.440 because they're telling us it's not as safe as regular things in the past. I waited because they

00:28:25.280 told me, they informed me, it might not be as safe. And that I acted according to my own desires and

00:28:34.460 wishes. You don't think Trump can defend that? Yeah, he can. Yeah, he can. Now here's the part you're

00:28:44.820 missing. Everything is compared to something else. No matter who Trump runs against, he's going to look

00:28:53.620 better on this. Because there's nobody, everybody has something to explain about their actions, right?

00:29:00.080 Everybody, including me. Everybody has something to explain. He's not going to run against somebody who

00:29:06.680 has less to explain. He's only going to be running against somebody who's probably pro-mandate, right?

00:29:12.820 I mean, it's not even going to be close. If your only choice is a pro-mandate and an anti-mandate,

00:29:19.160 he wins. He owns it. Now he's barely even tried to defend himself. He's just said what he did.

00:29:28.840 But all he'd have to do is say what I did. Every one of you people complaining knew there was extra risk.

00:29:35.020 That's why you didn't get vaxxed. You can't simultaneously say we all knew there was a

00:29:41.360 risk and then say you weren't informed. You can't say both. Everybody who told me they didn't get a

00:29:50.540 vax, they said it's because it was very clear from day one this was not the same risk profile as the

00:29:57.180 past, right? So how can you argue both sides? I totally knew what the risk was and it was more

00:30:03.560 than normal. And nobody told me the risk. Pick a side. You got to pick a side. So like I told you,

00:30:14.620 I'm not going to convince anybody to change their mind about this. I'm just saying that Trump has,

00:30:20.240 he's got a freeway right through it. I mean, he can slice through this like a hot steel through

00:30:27.140 butter. It just doesn't feel like it because he hasn't really ramped up yet. But he will. He will.

00:30:34.260 Now, he could also blow it, right? I mean, he could say the wrong thing, blah, blah. He could.

00:30:40.060 But wait till you see what else he's got cooking. Oh, this gets better. This gets so much better.

00:30:48.140 And it's going to really challenge me to stick to my single issue vote and not get involved in his

00:30:58.580 other opinions. But he's got something that he's sort of signaled today or yesterday that is really

00:31:07.780 cool, persuasion-wise, right? So again, I'm only talking about his persuasion game. That's the part

00:31:14.060 that always impresses me. You know, not necessarily the policies. So here's what Trump has decided to

00:31:23.940 do. Let's see. So he's tweeting about the empty folders. And you're going to say to yourself,

00:31:28.700 but Scott, this is a different topic. The empty folders and the vaccinations, totally different

00:31:34.980 topics, right? They were. Watch what Trump does to the empty folders. All right. Now, here's what he

00:31:46.460 said. He posted on Truth Social that the empty folders were marked classified. And then he explained

00:31:54.620 that it was common for the folders to have contents in them during a meeting. And at the end of the

00:32:02.960 meeting to keep these classified documents safe, they would collect up the documents, but not the

00:32:09.240 folders. Because the folders were unnecessary, because they were just going to maybe destroy the

00:32:14.760 extra documents, probably, because they had copies. And so Trump says that, you know, he had hundreds of

00:32:21.500 them and he kept them as cool keepsakes. Does anybody believe that? Does anybody believe he kept

00:32:27.240 empty documents as cool keepsakes? I don't think so. I doubt it. You might keep one. You might keep

00:32:40.040 three of them. If he said I kept three of them as a keepsake, I'd say, maybe. But they're literally

00:32:49.360 just folders with words on them. Why would you keep 300 of those? So I can't support this take. But he

00:32:58.940 uses this to suggest that maybe the bad people in the FBI would put something in one of those folders

00:33:05.220 to make it look like it was always there. Now, who knows if anything like that would happen. But

00:33:09.920 I think we'd all agree that the FBI is not above it. Would you? I mean, it's an outrageous claim

00:33:18.460 that the FBI would, you know, or somebody else would possibly plant classified documents just to

00:33:25.720 put them away. That's outrageous. And also well within the range of things they've done recently.

00:33:32.760 Totally within the range. So this is the sort of thing that 10 years ago, if you said the FBI is trying

00:33:39.080 to frame me, wouldn't you laugh at that? Well, I think the FBI is trying to frame the president. No,

00:33:45.600 they're not. But today? Yeah, it looks totally within the realm of very reasonably possible. Now, I don't

00:33:56.060 think so. I'd vote, you know, if I had to bet, I'd bet against it. But totally within the range of

00:34:01.660 possible. So Trump puts it out there just to, you know, just to keep that in your head. Because

00:34:07.780 he knows some people are going to believe it. But here's the best part. He said that, oh,

00:34:16.700 he referred to the FBI agents as Gestapo. Gestapo. Do you see it yet? I think he's going to brand

00:34:29.940 the Democrats and the FBI as the real Nazis. God, I hope so. If there's, I'm not a believer, but just 1.00

00:34:44.280 once I'm going to pray, dear God, please let him just brand the Democrats and the FBI as the real 0.76

00:34:51.140 Nazis and just like hammer it to death. And please, if I can ask for one more thing, would you ask him

00:34:59.380 to address directly the fine people hoax? Don't say a word about it. Just create a good little video

00:35:05.980 that shows it's a hoax and tweet it. That's all. That's all I ask.

00:35:14.900 What is Trump's biggest problem? They think he's the Nazi, right? Do you think you could brand

00:35:23.700 the pro-mandate team that sends people in to, you know, rile, let's say, everybody from Roger Stone

00:35:33.360 to you name it? You don't think he can brand them as Nazis? They want to take away your guns,

00:35:40.500 give you mandates, give power to the WEF. Oh, yeah. Yeah. And

00:35:50.100 if you told me there's going to be a politician running for office and he's going to go branding

00:35:56.980 his enemies as Nazis, what would you say? You'd say, I don't like that guy or woman. You would say,

00:36:07.640 no, no, no, no, no. You can't be branding your enemies as Nazis. This is the United States.

00:36:13.500 We're just political. We're not branding anybody as a Nazi. But in this one case,

00:36:20.880 it's exactly the right thing to do. He needs to brand them Nazis 0.59

00:36:25.580 full out and just say, you're Nazi hoaxers. The FBI can't be trusted. It needs to be gutted. 0.96

00:36:34.780 The leadership, not the good people who work there. And he should just go for it. Just go for it.

00:36:44.060 And I think he could win. I think he could win. What do you think? Because his weakest point is,

00:36:54.080 hey, blah, blah, blah, you're racist. Now, let's say he took my advice, which I don't think will happen. 0.62

00:37:00.060 But suppose he took my advice on how to frame the border. Hey, we're never going to agree on this

00:37:06.040 border stuff. Let's get a bunch of economists to tell us how many people to let in and when

00:37:11.660 and what types. And let's have it like the OMB, you know, some quasi-independent organization that

00:37:20.040 can just tell you if it makes sense economically. And whatever it makes sense economically to the

00:37:25.760 people who are already here, we'll open the door a little bit. And when it doesn't make sense,

00:37:31.980 should that ever happen, we'll close the door a little bit. But we're in a new world. Imagine

00:37:36.700 Trump saying this to, just imagine him saying this to conservatives. You know, this isn't the world of

00:37:45.140 five years ago. We might actually have a population problem in the other direction.

00:37:49.880 We might have too few people. Then imagine, and again, he's not going to do this, but imagine he

00:37:57.240 could. You know, the people coming through, we do have to worry about the, you know, the criminal

00:38:03.200 element. But let's not forget that the people coming here tend to have conservative ideology.

00:38:12.760 You know, they're family religion work. Family religion work. You can let a few family religion 0.92

00:38:20.680 work people into the country without it falling apart. You can let a lot of them in. I just don't 1.00

00:38:26.260 know what the right number is. Is it 5 million a year? I don't know. It seems like a lot, doesn't it?

00:38:32.840 It seems like a lot, but I don't know. That might actually be the right number. It might be low.

00:38:38.520 I'm not sure there's any way to know. That's why you need an independent group to just, you know,

00:38:44.500 help us get a feel for the economics of this stuff. So Trump could, because the situation is a little

00:38:52.620 different than it used to be, he could totally sell it as something that should be decided by

00:38:58.000 economics and that the politician should maybe pull back a little bit so you're not just blaming

00:39:04.800 each other of being racist. You can the Hispanic vote. You could. Do you know how? If there's one 1.00

00:39:16.120 thing, if there's one, like, common stereotype that I hate to do stereotypes, but this one seems to hold

00:39:23.700 up. The Hispanic community, especially, you know, one first generation and second generation,

00:39:30.580 they don't like a lot of bullshit. There's sort of a no bullshit culture. You know what I mean? 0.99

00:39:39.220 They're not worried about your wokeness so much. It's just not on their minds. You don't think Trump

00:39:44.100 could win a group like that? All he'd have to do is offer him something. Now, you know, citizenship would

00:39:50.020 be probably too much for his base. But yeah. Now, and I also think that you, yeah, and I think he

00:40:00.580 could find some way to have like a, I don't want to say second rate citizenship for people who are not

00:40:07.980 yet legal, but there probably is something like that that his base would live with. As long as the

00:40:13.840 economic argument was made. If he could make the argument, we could keep the country safe enough

00:40:18.420 and it's good for the economy. I think his base accepts it. And it also accepts that it brings in

00:40:26.380 people who are more like them than the people who are already here, on average.

00:40:34.520 Not the second rate pay. No, not the second rate pay, of course. But you could have somebody who's,

00:40:40.400 has most of the rights of citizenship, but maybe short of voting.

00:40:44.500 If you had somebody, if you knew somebody was here illegally, but also had a job, they had a job, 1.00

00:40:53.860 and how about couldn't own firearms? How about that? So suppose there were some car vans. So yeah,

00:40:59.380 they could totally live here, but they can't vote. They have, you know, they can get a driver's

00:41:05.420 license and do all the work related things, but they can't vote. And they can't own a firearm.

00:41:10.560 I'm just picking two random things. I don't know. Could you live with that? If somebody made the

00:41:18.060 argument that it's in your economic interest to allow more in, but, you know, be a little more

00:41:23.800 careful about the vetting, could you live with that? Now, what's the argument against? If, let's just

00:41:33.480 take this as a hypothetical, because you need to teach me what, there's something I'm missing.

00:41:37.420 There's something in my mental model that's missing. Is it just racism? No, I'm saying if the people

00:41:47.700 who are already here legally, you know, we have a long tradition of pardons and paroles and, you know,

00:41:56.220 reconstituting people who are in prisons and retraining them. We have a long history

00:42:02.100 of uncriminalizing criminals. That wouldn't be new. So that's not your objection, right? You wouldn't

00:42:09.900 object to the general concept that somebody who's minding their own business, but broke a technical

00:42:16.020 law, but they're adding to the country. You wouldn't allow them to have maybe a second-class citizenship, 1.00

00:42:23.960 citizenship, which would, you know, permanently keep them in, you know, not full citizenship, but they're added into the

00:42:31.940 country, and they want to be here, and their kids would be full citizens and blah, blah, blah, you know?

00:42:39.180 Somebody says, you can't have second-class citizens? Yes, you can. What are children?

00:42:44.540 Children are second-class citizens. What are illegal, you know, immigrants? They're not citizens, but, you know, 1.00

00:42:50.920 basically, we always have classes. You know, what are billionaires? Are you the same class as a

00:42:57.060 billionaire? That's not an argument. You can have all kinds of classes of people in a democracy.

00:43:03.840 Join the military? Yeah, maybe they can join the military in certain circumstances. All right, so,

00:43:11.420 I need you to educate me. If you can handle the economics, and you could check them out better so

00:43:20.080 that you're reducing the criminal element, if you could know that they're paying taxes, right? If you

00:43:25.320 knew they were paying taxes and adding to the system, and independent economists said, yeah, we could

00:43:32.620 let in a few more, and let's say Trump agreed to it, tell me the problem with that. It's all hypothetical,

00:43:39.900 right? I'm not saying that's the situation. Right, but if they were let in legally, legally,

00:43:46.360 what would be your problem? Yeah, they pay for their own health care, right? They would just be like us,

00:43:53.680 with a few fewer rights, maybe. Their kids vote blue? I think you should check that assumption.

00:44:03.580 Do you know why the kids vote blue? Because reds never tried to incorporate them. The moment red says, 0.99

00:44:10.420 you know what? We like workers. We like people like families. We like religion. You know what? We love you

00:44:18.380 guys. They just have to say the words, because in fact, they do. You pick, show me any Republican in Congress.

00:44:29.020 Pick any Republican and say, all right, look at this guy. This guy is, you know, loves his family. He's working.

00:44:36.100 American, hasn't broken any laws, just wants to be an American. You have a problem with that person?

00:44:42.340 Like, really? Like, that's your problem? The person who's living the ideal life that you wish everybody

00:44:48.060 would live? So, if you think that they're all going to vote blue, and you could be right,

00:44:55.780 just don't give them the vote. By the second generation, they're going to be Republicans.

00:45:05.580 The second generation will just be Republicans, because by then, the Republicans will have figured

00:45:10.840 out how to deal with this community in a more productive way, and the Republicans have a perfect

00:45:16.060 way to do it. How about we just agree with your character, and we reach some agreement about the

00:45:23.980 economics, and who can vote, and who can own a gun, and then we're all good? I don't know. So,

00:45:32.000 the only thing I'm going to try to convince you of is that there's a third path on immigration that's

00:45:38.300 neither Democrat nor Republican, and it's the right one. It's the one that makes sense. 0.74

00:45:45.160 All right, so, let me acknowledge everybody's yelling, legal, legal, legal. The people who are saying,

00:45:52.500 because they're illegal, you should give them nothing. Do you do understand that we have a

00:45:57.660 long tradition of making legal people who were illegal? It's an ordinary thing we do all the time.

00:46:05.780 So, that's not really an objection that makes sense on any logical or other basis. We do it all the time.

00:46:13.380 And the reason we do it is for our own benefit, right? We wouldn't be doing it for the benefit of

00:46:19.300 the criminal. We'd be doing it for ourselves. I want everybody to be paying taxes, don't you?

00:46:28.900 Why wouldn't you? So, yeah. All right, I'm just going to put it out there as something that could

00:46:36.680 be improved in terms of the messaging. But I do like Trump saying that mandates are going to be,

00:46:41.980 that's what the Nazis do to you. I just gave you options. And then when they say, but you gave us 0.53

00:46:49.140 this risky vaccine, then Trump says, who didn't know it was a risk? We could not have been more

00:46:55.540 clear about that. And I would agree. He also says China is buying up all of our assets. There's

00:47:05.380 something to that, but I don't know what the extent is. All right, here's my provocative thought for the

00:47:12.320 day. Would you agree with the following statement? That the social media platforms, if their algorithms

00:47:22.760 are favoring, you know, one political side or the other, that effectively they're running the country.

00:47:29.300 Would you agree with that statement? That the algorithms could program the country so effectively

00:47:37.480 based on what they see, that the algorithm ends up running the country and not, you know, Congress

00:47:43.400 and not the vote. Congress ends up just, you know, going along with whatever social media forced into

00:47:48.360 the thing. Well, here's your provocative thought of the day. The World Economic Forum is just an algorithm.

00:47:55.440 It just happens to be a physical one you can look at. Here's why. What an algorithm does is decide

00:48:03.660 what you see and how often, right? That's all it does. An algorithm decides what you see and how often.

00:48:11.940 What does the World Economic Forum do? Let's say you went to the World Economic Forum and say,

00:48:17.480 you know, I'd like to have a presentation there. And I'd like it to be on the topic of we should use

00:48:26.200 more fossil fuels. Do you think they'd say, you know, we like opinions on both sides. So yeah, here's a

00:48:34.020 full platform for you to say your thing that's opposite of what we usually say. And we'll give you all the

00:48:40.800 attention you want because we like balance. Do you think that's happening? I don't think so.

00:48:47.480 I think that the World Economic Forum decides what they present and also who attends. They didn't

00:48:54.780 invite me. Did they invite any of you? So if they can decide who's in and who's out, at least they can

00:49:04.120 decide who they invite. And they can decide what information from their attendees, you know, rises

00:49:11.480 to the point where it gets promoted. And what doesn't? They're an algorithm. They are a physical

00:49:19.920 algorithm. And that's how they can run the world. Because all they have to do is control

00:49:26.200 the information that they allow to be promoted through them. And then they get everybody on board

00:49:34.280 and they get their people in office. And everybody's like, ooh, I better make these World Economic Forum

00:49:39.560 people happy because they invite me on excellent vacations in Switzerland. I love vacations in

00:49:45.000 Switzerland. And I get like luxury accommodations. And I get to meet all these other people. And all I have

00:49:51.720 to do is do what they want. And then I get all these benefits. Yeah. And the beauty of it is that because

00:50:01.320 it's an organization, they use the fact that they have members who are the members of the ones who are

00:50:07.480 surfacing all the ideas. So the illusion is that there's some kind of quasi-democracy group

00:50:15.480 group decision making. So it's not Klaus. Oh, no, no, it's not Klaus. He's just like the organizer guy.

00:50:24.120 It's all these individuals who collectively, nothing like that's happening. Because somebody decided who's

00:50:31.800 there. And of course, they know what that group of people is likely to say. That's why they got invited.

00:50:37.560 Right. They invited Al Gore. They didn't invite Alex Epstein or Michael Schellenberger. Did you see

00:50:45.480 Michael Schellenberger anywhere at the World Economic Forum? Do you think he was invited?

00:50:51.960 Do you? I don't think so. I don't think so. Nope. Bet he wasn't. So the World Economic Forum acts just

00:51:00.120 like an algorithm on a social media platform. But if that's invisible to you, you easily get fooled into

00:51:06.840 thinking. It's all the smart people who got together and then came up with smart ideas.

00:51:13.640 And then only the good, smart ideas, you know, filtered up. And so you're seeing the best of the

00:51:18.440 best. It's like the smartest, most connected people and all their best ideas. That's how it's presented.

00:51:25.560 Is it? No. It's probably Klaus or maybe a handful of people who decide what's in and who's in.

00:51:35.320 And that's it. It's just like an algorithm. So it is an algorithm that can control the world in those

00:51:42.840 elements, you know, those areas that they want to, which are primarily financial, which is really

00:51:48.280 everything. If you control the finances of the world, what else do you need? You don't want to control

00:51:56.920 their military, do you? That's just work. You don't want to control who picks up the garbage,

00:52:03.720 do you? That would just be work. No, you want to control the economy of everything. And then you get

00:52:11.240 your cut. You have your power, you have your influence. And basically the economy influences

00:52:16.600 the military and everything else. Well, apparently Greta has been caught faking a staged arrest. 1.00

00:52:24.760 So we've seen the video as she's laughing and joking with the people who are allegedly going to drag 1.00

00:52:30.920 her away. And, you know, they're all putting on a show. I don't really mind that. That doesn't offend

00:52:37.080 me. Because the whole point of activists getting arrested is for the cameras, right?

00:52:44.200 So the fact that, you know, she's such a celebrity that even the people arresting her are just having

00:52:49.880 a laugh with her and, you know, they're just preparing the camera angles so that when they drag

00:52:54.280 her away, it looks good, I don't have any problem with that. No problem at all. Do you? Because you

00:53:02.360 know all activists are doing it for theater. Nobody's pretending, right? They don't pretend they're

00:53:08.760 really going to jail for a long sentence or anything like that. So I don't know. As long as it's all

00:53:14.360 theater, I don't care. I saw Al Gore getting very worked up at the World Economic Forum

00:53:21.080 and just shouting at the world about how they're not doing enough about climate change.

00:53:28.200 Now, whether or not he is right or wrong, separate conversation and worthy having. But here's my

00:53:34.760 problem. You know, as many have noted, he doesn't act the way he talks. In other words, he takes private

00:53:45.080 jets and, you know, lives a lifestyle that uses a lot of energy. He would argue that he bought

00:53:51.640 carbon offsets. By the way, did he know that? I think he did. So I think he used some of his

00:53:58.520 vast recent money to buy carbon offsets, which is not a problem. I'm actually going to give him

00:54:07.480 a pass for that. Did you know that? By the way, I could use a fact check on that. But I believe,

00:54:14.280 you know, he was quite aware that he used more energy than the average person. And I think he just

00:54:19.400 went to the whatever market there is, he bought. Now, the thinking behind that is that if you create

00:54:26.360 a free market for buying and selling carbon offsets, or yeah, I guess that's what it's called, that

00:54:33.160 eventually that drives everything down to a more efficient, you know, less carbon producing world. And I

00:54:39.880 think the logic of that makes sense. So in theory, he is being consistent by doing what he says some

00:54:48.840 people will have to do, which is by carbon credits, and maybe that's the best you can do.

00:54:52.280 But here's the problem. If Mahatma Gandhi had been fat, do you think he'd been just as effective?

00:55:05.800 Do you? Hey, everybody, I'm really fat and happy, but you know, we should take the British. No, 1.00

00:55:13.960 he had to starve himself literally near death to be credible. His credibility came with his suffering

00:55:21.400 that was equal to or greater than the people he represented. That's a problem, persuasion-wise,

00:55:28.120 for Al Gore, because he's clearly living a more awesome life than the people he's trying to get to

00:55:36.360 give stuff up, right? If a rich person tells you to give up your stuff, you're not going to take that

00:55:42.520 well. If somebody who's suffering more than you and has less than you basically lives in a, you know,

00:55:48.360 one dirty diaper, you're going to say, all right, well, if you can do that, I can give up a little

00:55:54.440 bit. You know, I can take on some risk to get rid of the British rule or something. So that's definitely 1.00

00:56:00.760 working against Gore is that even though I think he's on a logically solid basis, people don't work on

00:56:08.600 logic. It just looks like he's not walking the walk. So that'll be a problem.

00:56:18.440 Let's see what else. Are you all aware of the

00:56:22.760 Steven Crowder versus the Daily Wire controversy? I don't know if that's risen to your attention yet.

00:56:31.560 So I'll give you a, all right, a lot of you not. So Steven Crowder recently, I think I have the

00:56:37.240 details right, recently out of his contract with The Blaze. And he always, I think, independently

00:56:44.600 produced his show. So he can just do his show with or without any other platform. But the Daily Wire,

00:56:51.240 realizing that he was a, you know, a superstar in their, in their domain, made him an offer.

00:56:57.720 And there was one element of the offer that he objected to. And he talked about it on the air.

00:57:03.080 He didn't name the entity that made it, but everybody figured it out in about a minute.

00:57:07.480 So I was asked who was winning the persuasion. Because on one hand, it was a very generous offer,

00:57:16.680 $50 million over four years. But he would have to do his own production. So that $50 million would

00:57:22.840 have to pay for his production costs as well. So let's say that, I don't know, takes 10 or 20 percent

00:57:28.920 off of that. It's still a real big number. And then an option for two more years at the same per

00:57:34.280 year price. Now, the party objected to was there was some language in there that if he gets strikes or

00:57:43.240 bans on other social platforms, you know, let's say Facebook or Twitter or something, that they would pay him

00:57:50.120 less money. So there would be penalties in there for getting banned on platforms. And he always gets

00:57:56.920 banned on platforms, like he's always getting strikes and stuff. So he thought that that was,

00:58:04.760 I don't know what word he'd use, inappropriate or unfair or too much control. Too much control,

00:58:12.760 right? Probably. But he thought that was sort of icky and don't talk like that. We don't like those

00:58:21.480 words. So over $10 million per year, you know, after expenses probably. And I'll tell you the most

00:58:34.920 interesting part of the story. So first of all, here's my persuasion analysis. I thought they both won.

00:58:43.160 You don't see that often. But I think the Daily Wire and Jeremy Boring, who did a video about it,

00:58:50.600 I thought he totally came off looking great. Because in the process of explaining the offer they made,

00:58:58.120 he also got to explain how substantial their operation is. And I wasn't fully aware of that.

00:59:05.320 And I thought, wow, that looks like a really, the Daily Wire, as a business model, and as a new

00:59:13.960 business, is really something to behold. It, I think they do everything right. Like just everything.

00:59:22.120 It's one of the few companies you can look at and say, all right, it looks like they just keep doing

00:59:26.600 all the right stuff. And they're growing. And now they're going to make movies. And here's how they

00:59:33.400 explain the movies they're going to make. Because they want to be a media entity, not just a,

00:59:38.120 you know, bunch of podcaster types. And the movies they make are movies you want to watch.

00:59:44.040 Isn't it funny that that's like a real thing? That somebody saw an opening for making movies you'd want

00:59:53.640 to watch. Last night, I tried to find a movie I wanted to watch. I ended up with a movie from like

01:00:03.240 the early 90s that I had already seen. That's it. Like there wasn't any movie currently out

01:00:11.720 that wouldn't make me uncomfortable, right? Because if you turn on any, any, basically any movie,

01:00:18.440 it's going to be somebody tortured in a chair, somebody lost their money, somebody's loved one died.

01:00:24.840 I don't get any entertainment from that. That's, that's like stuff I run from, right? You know,

01:00:30.280 but you don't see like sitcoms and funny comedies anymore, because that's sort of phased out. So,

01:00:36.520 so the fact that the Daily Wire has a theory that they want to make movies you might want to watch

01:00:43.320 is pretty interesting. And it's also right on target, right on target. And some TV shows, I guess.

01:00:51.000 But here's what I found out about the Daily Wire. They have 600,000 subscribers.

01:00:55.880 And they have 150 million, I think is revenue per year. That's really substantial. And the part

01:01:04.440 about the subscribers is that that makes them not fully independent, not fully dependent on

01:01:09.880 advertising. Although advertising is part of the model. Everything about that's smart. Everything

01:01:16.360 about that. And the offer that they made, as Jeremy Boring explained, was a first offer.

01:01:25.000 So in the, the normal give and take of negotiating, they made an offer that apparently Stephen Crowder

01:01:32.600 did not like. You know, there's one part of that was just totally unacceptable. But instead of doing what

01:01:37.880 people normally do, a counter offer, he sort of went public with it. Now, does that make him a bad

01:01:46.840 person? Well, it might make him a person who's not experienced at negotiating contracts. But I think

01:01:52.840 he has an agent. So, you know, I feel like, you know, maybe there was a better way to handle that.

01:01:59.640 But here's what I found out about Stephen Crowder that I didn't know. He has about 5 million YouTube

01:02:09.320 subscribers. Did you know that? 5 million? He's one of the biggest media stars in the world. I had no

01:02:21.000 idea. Like, you know, I was well aware of him. I've seen his content a bunch of times. But I had no idea.

01:02:26.520 I had no idea he was that big. And so when you see this $50 million offer, my first thought was,

01:02:32.820 are you kidding? Like, in what world does that make sense? And then I saw his numbers. And you run

01:02:39.480 the numbers and you go, oh, yeah, actually, that, that was actually a perfectly reasonable first

01:02:46.480 offer. Perfectly reasonable. He might have gotten more. In fact, he would have gotten more. All he had

01:02:53.760 to do is push back a little bit and he would have gotten more. Now, maybe he wouldn't have been

01:02:57.220 satisfied with the parts about, you know, if he, if he doesn't perform on social media in some ways,

01:03:05.860 right? But he probably could have negotiated that a little. There was probably a way to,

01:03:12.560 you know, make that work. I don't know. Because if he got kicked off of YouTube, that would be a big

01:03:19.000 hit to the daily wire. So why should they just accept that risk without trying to mitigate it?

01:03:24.840 Now, how they mitigate it, that could be a longer negotiation. But his best, in a traditional world,

01:03:34.840 let me give Stephen Crowder more, more credit than it sounds like I gave him so far.

01:03:40.360 In a traditional world, you should just negotiate these things privately,

01:03:43.580 go back and forth and see what you can do. Not go public, all right? The going public part is a

01:03:49.840 weird part. But he's Stephen Crowder. The rules don't apply to him. Russell Brand, the rules don't

01:03:59.580 apply, right? There are a lot of people for whom the rules don't apply. Greg Goffheld, the rule,

01:04:05.380 all the rules don't quite apply. Joe Rogan, the rules don't apply, right? So when Stephen Crowder

01:04:11.680 goes public, and he says this, you know, huge, solid entity offered me a deal, and then, you know,

01:04:20.880 certainly you find out what the dollar amount is later, he's really making himself more famous and

01:04:27.560 looking more valuable, which he succeeded at. So here's the, here's the persuasion play. After

01:04:34.260 looking into this and just, you know, being aware of their little fight, I came away with a much

01:04:40.620 higher opinion of Stephen Crowder's business model and value of it. At the same time, I came away with

01:04:49.340 a huge respect for the Daily Wire, just how they're running their business. That's a win. That's a double

01:04:55.940 win. Two wins. Now, is there anything that would stop them from still doing the deal?

01:05:01.980 No. No. No. No. Absolutely not. Because they're business people, right? In, in negotiations,

01:05:11.200 you do get, you know, some bad feelings and stuff. But if you're, you know, a Jeremy Boring, or you're,

01:05:16.980 you know, Ben Shapiro, you don't think they know how to get past a little bit of a tiff,

01:05:22.700 you know, and get back to business? Of course they do. Of course. Easily. Easily. You don't think

01:05:28.260 Stephen Crowder can say some things about some people and then get past it? Of course he can.

01:05:34.280 So neither of them lost anything. Zero loss on either side. Both of them raised their profile

01:05:42.340 quite appropriately. Win-win. When you see people seemingly having a conflict and they're all

01:05:50.920 high-end operators, because these are some, these are people who are killing it in their independent

01:05:56.040 fields. Well, same field, I guess. So when you see the fight, you got to put a whole different frame

01:06:01.560 on it, because their, their, their world of options isn't like normal people. You know, Crowder can

01:06:08.400 throw away a $50 million deal with confidence that it might get him another one, all right? Or a higher

01:06:15.620 deal or a better deal or something. So they're not like us. Let's talk about, uh, uh, dumb Joe Biden

01:06:22.960 and his, I, I can't stand it when he says that, uh, people with the, uh, AR-15s, they're not going 0.97

01:06:29.840 to be much good against the F-15s that the American government has if they're going to fight the 1.00

01:06:34.060 government. Number one, every country that the U.S. military has trying to conquer, they had

01:06:45.120 their own firearms, that country won. There's a reason we're no longer in Afghanistan. There's a 1.00

01:06:51.880 reason that, you know, uh, Vietnam kicked us out. We're not really good at beating anything except 0.52

01:07:00.160 the military. But when it comes down to like, you know, getting into their homes, that's sort

01:07:05.540 of a police thing. And there are not enough police in the United States to handle all the residents

01:07:12.640 who have guns, right? The F-15 isn't going to strike your house. And, you know, the F-15s won't,

01:07:20.480 just won't be part of anything. Now, the part that I like to add is that, um, if you're trying to keep

01:07:26.800 an American tyrant from taking over and, you know, turning it into a, into a tyrannical regime,

01:07:33.780 that dictator would have to know that all of their family would be killed in a week 0.50

01:07:38.120 by the people who have guns. Nobody's going to go after Joe Biden, but they'll kill Hunter 0.99

01:07:46.540 within a day or take him captive, right? Hunter doesn't have a chance. Now, just to be clear,

01:07:54.720 I don't recommend any violence, especially against families, you know, so I'm not promoting any of

01:08:00.020 this. I'm just describing. If we actually got to a point where the, whoever was the leader of the

01:08:07.840 country wanted to, you know, turn it into a, you know, a Nazi regime or something, the people with

01:08:14.800 the guns wouldn't go after the leader, but that leader could never go in public again.

01:08:21.640 And nobody in their family could ever be in public again. Who wants that? They would be winning

01:08:31.320 something they didn't want. It would be a terrible life. You could never go outside because somebody

01:08:37.060 would take a shot at you. Now, now, an ordinary rational person will not try to assassinate a

01:08:45.820 political leader just because they don't like their politics. But that's not what we're talking

01:08:49.720 about. We're talking about like a, like a Hitler-like entity taking over the country. If that were to 0.77

01:08:55.640 happen, we would all take a shot at the leader. We would just need an open shot. We would all do it. 0.98

01:09:02.480 I'd do it. I would, I would risk my life to take out Hitler. I would just have to have a shot. 0.98

01:09:08.540 That's all. I might do myself, you know, right afterwards. So, so I didn't have to get tortured

01:09:13.480 to death. But we'd all do it. Yeah. So every time I hear that, oh, those AR-15s will be useless

01:09:23.620 against F-15s. I don't know what Hunter Biden's going to do when, when they go to round him up 0.99

01:09:31.860 and all of his family and everybody that you like and all of your friends, you're basically going to

01:09:37.700 lose everything. Nobody, you know, will be able to go outdoors ever again. So good luck if you want

01:09:44.060 to conquer the country and have that kind of life. So it's a good disincentive.

01:09:47.340 Yeah, that worked in Venezuela. Venezuela didn't have enough guns. Yeah, anything you do to

01:09:57.700 compare the United States to any other country is a waste of time. We're just not like any other

01:10:02.940 country. We're just not. Yeah. Read the screenshot. What screenshot?

01:10:16.020 Why does Joe provoke? What screenshot? You retweeted the screenshot. I don't know what you're

01:10:32.000 talking about. I retweeted the screenshot. Oh, the 4chan thing?

01:10:46.020 All right. Yeah, 4chan had a good rant on this. So you can see that in my Twitter feed.

01:10:56.120 Please reconsider what?

01:10:57.460 Why do they focus on the ARs? Because they look like military weapons, I think. All right.

01:11:11.360 Ladies and gentlemen, that is the conclusion of my prepared remarks. And how many of you know

01:11:20.560 what AR stands for? Go ahead and say it. What does AR stand for?

01:11:28.200 Somebody actually said assault rifle. It is not. It is not assault rifle. But that is

01:11:41.440 a... Oh, this is interesting. It's not automatic rifle. It's Armalite. Armalite. Is it Armalite

01:11:49.740 rifle? Or is it AR for Armalite? But Armalite is the A for sure. So it's not assault. It never

01:11:57.760 was. Geraldo was funny. Yeah. I think you're totally missing the value of Geraldo on the 5.

01:12:11.560 Geraldo was great on the 5. Because he gets them all worked up. He, you know, takes some

01:12:16.740 alternative views that you don't like. You know, he supports them well. I think Geraldo was great

01:12:23.260 on the 5. But I also think Juan Williams was great. Because in both cases, they know their role,

01:12:30.020 right? Geraldo's fitting a role where he's trying to be a little provocative and, you know, get

01:12:35.740 something going. That's his job. I think he does it really well. I absolutely love Geraldo. He's one of

01:12:43.740 my favorite TV people. Brave as hell. Can't get embarrassed. You cannot embarrass him. So I just

01:12:53.560 love that stuff. But I understand. He seems unpopular because you think he's arguing against

01:13:01.960 the people you like. But, you know, that's the show. All right. Was there anything I missed? Any

01:13:08.340 topics I should have mentioned? And by the way, let me just do a little test with you.

01:13:15.680 When I talked about what Trump could do, did it sound like he could win? We don't know what

01:13:22.400 he'll do. But did I describe a path where he could just walk into the White House?

01:13:26.760 I think I did. Yeah. And again, he's very unpredictable. He's going to do what he does.

01:13:36.740 But I think he drew up a plan that if he's stuck to it, he could walk into the White House again.

01:13:43.760 It looks like it.

01:13:44.480 Yeah. Or I'm a light rifle, I think is the right answer.

01:13:55.500 You're flooded with illegals. 1.00

01:14:02.820 Yeah. Okay.

01:14:07.940 Amish rifle.

01:14:09.900 Who is advising Trump? I don't know.

01:14:11.860 Oh, how many of you saw Matt Gaetz on Timcast? Highly recommended. Tim Poole does good work.

01:14:23.280 The Timcast, this is another business model that I have a lot of respect for. Even if you

01:14:29.140 just go to the Timcast website, it's a really good website. It's really put together like

01:14:36.080 exactly, just looks exactly right. You got good advice or good help on that.

01:14:41.860 And then the show itself looks like high production. It's always interesting. By the way, so Matt Gaetz

01:14:47.460 comes on. And I'm going to say something that I want you to test. You tell me if I'm wrong.

01:14:57.880 But you have to watch Matt Gaetz on Tim Poole. If you've seen a lot of Matt Gaetz, he's usually

01:15:03.340 just doing quick one minute hits for a media hit. His one minute hits are really good, but

01:15:10.220 his long form, where he can actually expand on something, the best in the government. There's

01:15:18.900 nobody on either side who does long form explanations better than he does. Period.

01:15:27.540 There's nobody in his class. Now here's the thing that's just amazing. He went from as politically

01:15:36.980 dead as you could possibly be to, are you going to be running for president and would you accept

01:15:44.260 the vice president role if Trump asked you and everybody wants to talk to you and by the

01:15:49.680 way, you did that great job with McCarthy and it's good that you can work with him now.

01:15:53.680 Everybody came out ahead. You're the only one fighting for us. How did he do that? How in

01:16:01.440 the world did he pull that off? But he did pull it off. Am I wrong? Is there anybody here

01:16:09.300 who saw him on Timcast and does not feel he's not only fully redeemed politically, but he has

01:16:17.100 some impressive power levels there? More than we've seen. And here's one of the other things

01:16:23.820 that he does consistently right that I don't see other people doing consistently right. He defended

01:16:29.520 Eric Swalwell from the Fang Fang accusation. Just hold that in your mind. Now he's consistent.

01:16:39.120 Because he also defined Katie. Who is the woman in Congress who got, there were some pictures

01:16:48.000 that came out and Porter? Was that her name? Hill? Katie Hill? Yeah, he defended her like,

01:16:55.920 you know, leave her alone. Basically, that's just her private life. And now, so here's his defense

01:17:01.120 of Swalwell. And by the way, I didn't know this. This was all new to me. So that tells you how bad

01:17:06.640 my bubble is. He said that the Fang Fang thing, the affair anyway, happened when he was a single

01:17:13.880 man. So that's a big deal. Because I thought it happened when he was married. I didn't know.

01:17:19.720 That's a huge deal. All right? It's a huge deal for trust. But also happened when he was a councilman

01:17:27.680 in Dublin in Dublin, California. Now, as Matt Gaetz described it, he described Dublin, California

01:17:38.320 as nowhere California. He was a councilman in nowhere California. I have a small objection

01:17:46.100 to that. Because I lived in Dublin while he was a council member. Yes, I lived in nowhere California.

01:17:56.500 And let me say this about Dublin, California. It's one of the best towns in California.

01:18:01.860 It is fiscally solid with really good schools, low crime, and you would definitely want to live there.

01:18:11.700 Right? Pleasanton's better. It's got a downtown. Dublin doesn't have a downtown. But, you know,

01:18:17.540 if you live next to it, you get all the Dublin benefits plus the Pleasanton benefits. It's one

01:18:21.620 of the best places in the country, honestly. You know, but living in Dublin's not as good as living

01:18:27.700 right next to it. And then you get all the Dublin goodness. So that's my defense of Dublin. But

01:18:36.420 apparently he had an affair, didn't know she was a Chinese spy as soon as he found out. He worked

01:18:45.140 with the FBI and got rid of her. I'm going to accept that. I accept Matt Gaetz's defense of

01:18:55.220 Eric Swalwell. And as Matt Gaetz says, you don't need any of that to kick him off the intel committee,

01:19:02.180 because he was part of the Russia collusion hoax. I mean, that's good enough. That's good

01:19:06.340 enough to kick him off. So you don't need any of that. It's just a distraction. And it also puts

01:19:11.700 you in a weird situation because you know there's going to be another Republican you like who has

01:19:16.660 some kind of like sexual impropriety. So just taking that stuff off the table is the smartest thing

01:19:22.580 a politician could do. There's no other Republican who is smart enough to do that.

01:19:27.460 Now, don't you trust him more, Matt Gaetz? Don't you trust him more because he wasn't willing to

01:19:35.140 to just take a narrative? He rejected the narrative. I do. Does it tell you that? Oh,

01:19:43.060 and he also admitted he got caught on tape or video talking to AOC. And he said, yes,

01:19:50.180 I talked to AOC. I talked to Ilhan Omar. And who was the other one on the squad?

01:19:58.260 And the reason you talked to them about, you know, whether that the Democrats were going to walk out

01:20:02.580 or vote or vote with the other or going to vote with the Republicans or not. So he had a reason to

01:20:07.620 talk to him, Rashida Talib. Yeah, it was Rashida, I think. I think it was Rashida. But

01:20:15.060 now how much do you like the fact that Matt Gaetz can occasionally defend a colleague against really

01:20:23.700 unfair attack and can also talk to them and they seem to be able to respond to him. And he can also

01:20:31.620 talk to McCarthy. Was it Presley? Oh, maybe it was Presley. Yeah. I may have the third person's name

01:20:39.540 wrong. You're right. Oh, you would have a strong border. The only way the economists making decisions

01:20:52.100 about who comes into the country... There was a question here on YouTube. The only way it makes

01:20:56.580 sense to have economists tell you who to let in the country and when is if you completely control the

01:21:03.300 border. So that's just a given. Under all conditions, we should tightly control the border. But we should

01:21:10.740 also decide how to let people in separately. So that's the problem we make. We keep conflating

01:21:16.900 how many people to leave in with the physical security. Those should not be the same topic.

01:21:23.940 One should be total physical security. Second topic, when do you open the door? Just like your house.

01:21:31.220 You know, you don't say, well, people might sneak into my house so I won't have any doors or windows.

01:21:40.100 Nobody makes that decision.

01:21:43.860 Trump versus Newsom. Who would win?

01:21:47.700 Well, I hate to say it might have to do with, you know, mail-in votes and other things that,

01:21:55.380 where the system would favor the Democrats. So probably the system elements are bigger than the

01:22:00.820 candidates at the moment. Maybe Trump could get past that. But I think the system decides who's

01:22:07.940 president and not the voters exactly in our current situation. So if, for example, the total media

01:22:16.900 shut Trump out, then he couldn't be president. Right? So it's not up to Trump. It's also up to the

01:22:24.580 system and how the system works. But yeah, yes, I think it's at least a coin flip. Trump versus

01:22:31.780 Newsom. I think that's a coin flip. With what we know today.

01:22:36.340 How about let the wisdom of crowds specify the number of immigrants? Interesting suggestion.

01:22:48.500 The wisdom of crowds. Let me try to support your idea before I give you an opinion. So that would be,

01:22:53.620 instead of asking the economists who get everything wrong anyway, which is the problem with my

01:22:58.420 suggestion, you let the, let's say the public decide. The problem is the public is poorly informed.

01:23:08.260 So you might, you might need to limit it to people who voted because they're going to try a little

01:23:14.180 harder to be informed. But let's say the people who voted came up with a number of people to come in.

01:23:20.980 The good part about that is that the wisdom of crowds would pick up how people feel about it.

01:23:26.180 And how people feel about it is actually part of the question. Because if you have a really bad

01:23:32.020 attitude about it, you might vote differently, you might treat them differently. So how they feel

01:23:37.860 does matter. And the economists might ignore how people feel and just say, oh, the dollars are better

01:23:42.740 this way. But if it were the wisdom of crowds where you just polled the public and you said,

01:23:48.260 should we let in another million? Yes or no? Then people would look around and they'd say,

01:23:52.980 well, how do I feel? Like, does this feel like a risk to me or not? Because our, our feelings are part

01:24:00.980 of the, are part of the decision. You know, if something makes you feel bad, it costs you. That's

01:24:07.300 a real, that's a price. So you can't ignore that. And I think the economists would ignore that. Whereas the,

01:24:13.380 the wisdom of the crowds, if we just sort of voted on it, would capture how we feel,

01:24:18.020 and also a little bit, a sense of the economics as best we could. That's a good, that's a good suggestion.

01:24:26.020 I think that's a, that's a productive suggestion.

01:24:28.020 All right. Um, should cops, what?

01:24:40.020 Uh, let the economists suggest and the people decide. Well, there you go. There you go.

01:24:50.820 That would be a twofer, wouldn't it? That's not bad. All right. So the suggestion is,

01:24:55.860 you let the economists make their recommendation, but you don't follow it. You, you see how the public

01:25:02.180 feels first, because their feelings matter. You could easily imagine that the economists say,

01:25:07.620 you know, uh, that this is going to be a good, good thing to let in a million people. And you could

01:25:13.220 imagine that the public saying, you know, I don't feel comfortable with that.

01:25:16.900 Like, I, I, I see your numbers, but I just don't feel comfortable with it for whatever

01:25:20.900 reason. And then let, and then maybe, maybe have the president have the final vote,

01:25:28.340 but then the president could look at the economists, or it could look at the public,

01:25:33.540 or it could look at the both of them. Still, you probably want the president to make the decision,

01:25:38.580 or Congress, I suppose.

01:25:39.860 But I'd love to see it informed by the public and the economists. Let the crowds specify and

01:25:49.540 the economists verify. If you flipped it around, I think the public is better at responding to the

01:25:57.380 experts than the experts are at responding to just like a uninformed feeling. I think it works

01:26:05.060 better economists first. But that's a good suggestion. I like all the suggestions that,

01:26:11.140 you know, at least make you think a little deeper. So that, that's like a great suggestion.

01:26:19.700 Yeah, tyranny, blah, blah.

01:26:20.980 Experts responding to feelings is how we got lockdowns. Maybe. How much would you like to see

01:26:30.420 me interview Rob Reiner?

01:26:35.860 Would that be wild? No? Really? You said no? Seriously? You don't think that would entertain you?

01:26:45.300 Or is it just you don't want to hear any more from him? Oh my God. See, here's why I would be the

01:26:54.740 perfect one to interview him. Because I like him. I like him. I don't know, he's just likable. Like,

01:27:02.980 the stuff he says just looks, you know, bad shit crazy. But that's because we're so political animals 0.99

01:27:08.500 at this point. But I know I would have a fun conversation. And I think we'd both learn something.

01:27:17.140 It actually could be useful. Might be good for the country. You never know.

01:27:21.620 All right. So I'm still planning to do interviews. But probably once the real political season gets

01:27:30.020 cranked up. Because then I'll have an unlimited number of people who want to talk to me, you know,

01:27:34.660 for politics. So I think I'll do them not live. Because the tech isn't quite ready for life.

01:27:43.380 Yeah, it would fail too often. So I think I'll do that not live and make some recorded

01:27:49.380 videos. The people I want to talk to are Trump. And I think Trump will do a lot of podcasts.

01:27:57.140 Because that's really a strong play. He'll do that, obviously. I don't know if he would do mine.

01:28:02.740 But he'll do, he'll do most of the big podcasts he gets invited to. And do you think I could get

01:28:10.420 Newsome? I mean, I live in California. And I would give, and here's the thing, here's the thing. I would

01:28:17.220 let all of them show their best face, right? It would not be my job to like embarrass somebody

01:28:24.420 who was nice enough to do the interview. I would certainly, you know, be forceful in my

01:28:32.900 counterpoints. But I'm not going to get excited about it.

01:28:38.580 Steve Cortez. You're recommending him as a guest? I love Steve Cortez. Everything he does, I like.

01:28:47.620 Yeah, I don't think I would ask the same questions as other people, do you?

01:28:56.180 I think that my questions would be completely different than anybody else's.

01:29:04.020 So that would be fun.

01:29:09.700 I'm guessing that Scott would push fentanyl. Well, I would certainly mention fentanyl.

01:29:13.060 Carrie Lake, Matt Gaetz. I'd love to talk to Matt Gaetz.

01:29:30.340 See, here's what I think you need to do a good interview.

01:29:36.660 The person you're talking to has to believe that you're not there to take them down.

01:29:40.660 And I wouldn't do that, because it would be unfair.

01:29:46.260 So I think I can convince people that I'm there to let them show their best side.

01:29:52.420 Andrew Tate. Tate's not a political figure.

01:29:57.700 And I don't think Nick Fuentes is a political figure at this point.

01:30:02.260 Set up the chairs like Shatner did, where the chairs are like knee-to-knee.

01:30:13.300 All right. I'm going to say goodbye to YouTube, and I'll talk to you tomorrow.

01:30:17.380 You're all awesome. It's the best live stream you've ever seen.

01:30:20.660 Matt Gaetz.

01:30:37.300 What?

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - January 19, 2023

Episode 1993 Scott Adams： Persuasion Analysis Of Trump, Crowder v The Daily Wire, Ukraine, Lots More

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript