Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 2119 Scott Adams： DeSantis & Musk, Trans Issues Boycotts, Decoupling, Trump's Meme Game

00:00:00.000 Do, do, do, do, do.

00:00:03.720 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the Highlight of Civilization.

00:00:08.040 We've got a lot of fun stuff to talk about today.

00:00:10.320 I think today will be one of the best live streams I've ever done.

00:00:16.480 Well, don't just take my word for it.

00:00:18.440 You're going to have to see it for yourself.

00:00:20.280 If you like this experience to be somewhere between DMT and Bud Light,

00:00:25.640 all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tanker, gels, a stein, a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind.

00:00:33.260 Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.

00:00:36.820 And join us now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better.

00:00:41.660 It's called the Simultaneous Sip, and it happens now.

00:00:46.000 Go.

00:00:50.720 Ah.

00:00:54.160 Maybe what?

00:00:55.640 Maybe Scott will allow Dilbert to be the face of a revolution.

00:00:59.800 I don't think Dilbert's really the face of a revolution.

00:01:05.180 I don't think Dilbert's exactly inspiring, at least in that way.

00:01:10.380 Well, let's see.

00:01:11.460 We'll get to the DeSantis situation.

00:01:15.260 But first, a little science note.

00:01:17.860 Scientists have figured out how to make electricity from air.

00:01:23.280 Would you like to hear more about that?

00:01:25.640 They can make electricity from air.

00:01:30.100 Now, it turns out that this is something that could be done for a long time.

00:01:34.920 I think maybe 20 years ago, an inventor showed me a video of a little shack in which he was harvesting electricity from the air.

00:01:46.260 Just some kind of static electricity or something.

00:01:49.720 Now, the problem, and it was actually operating machinery.

00:01:55.080 Now, the problem was that it wasn't economical.

00:01:58.480 So it wasn't really a good, clean way to get electricity out of the air.

00:02:03.300 You couldn't get enough.

00:02:04.540 So it might have some, you know, some use in space or something, but that's about it.

00:02:10.380 Well, this new thing makes electricity from air from any material.

00:02:16.320 Just hold that in your head for a moment.

00:02:20.940 You can use any material.

00:02:23.400 It doesn't have to be like nickel or something.

00:02:26.620 Here's all you have to do to it.

00:02:28.680 You have to put holes in it.

00:02:31.060 And that's it.

00:02:33.220 That's it.

00:02:34.320 You have to put holes in it.

00:02:35.340 Now, the secret is that they're tiny holes and that they're just the right size.

00:02:40.840 And what happens is that the normal moisture in the air tries to get through these little holes.

00:02:47.720 The water in the air gets a little bit slowed down or stuck,

00:02:52.180 and it creates momentarily a difference in charge from one side of the material to the other

00:02:58.480 simply because it has tiny holes.

00:03:01.680 Nothing else.

00:03:03.620 Nothing else.

00:03:04.540 Just tiny holes.

00:03:06.920 All you have to do is get the holes the right size, and it creates electricity.

00:03:11.820 Now, you say to yourself, well, how much can it create?

00:03:15.480 Obviously, not much, right?

00:03:17.840 But you can stack them.

00:03:20.100 So you might have one little membrane, and then it's just on top of another little membrane,

00:03:24.280 and I guess you can make them as big as you want and stack them as high as you want,

00:03:29.100 and some people are saying it's going to be a big deal.

00:03:31.760 Now, I like to remind the people who thought the climate models were telling you everything

00:03:38.760 you needed to know, as well as the people who said electric cars will never work because

00:03:43.640 we'll just run out of electricity.

00:03:44.920 You can't see what's coming.

00:03:48.440 It would be impossible to know what's going to happen in the next 30 years, technology-wise.

00:03:54.400 We didn't know in the last 30 years.

00:03:56.180 Why are we going to know in the next 30 years?

00:03:58.620 It's just not something that's knowable.

00:04:01.080 Now, I'm not going to tell you that this little, weird little battery situation,

00:04:07.500 well, not even a battery.

00:04:08.500 It's actually creating energy.

00:04:09.740 It's not storing it.

00:04:10.480 I'm not going to tell you that this is going to be the big breakthrough.

00:04:13.780 Maybe it's fusion.

00:04:15.920 Maybe it's Gen 4 nuclear.

00:04:19.300 Maybe it's this new battery technology so it's easy to restore them.

00:04:23.940 Maybe it's 100 different things.

00:04:26.140 But I can tell you for sure that the climate models did not anticipate any of it.

00:04:30.480 So that's been my point from the start is that projections are always,

00:04:38.280 if you do everything wrong, look where you're going to end up.

00:04:42.320 And that never happens because you never do everything wrong for 30 years in a row.

00:04:47.940 That doesn't happen.

00:04:49.500 You make some things right in 30 years.

00:04:53.520 All right.

00:04:53.860 As you probably know by now, DeSantis announced his campaign for presidency

00:05:00.660 on Twitter's Spaces feature, which is audio only.

00:05:05.480 If you tried to attend it, as I did,

00:05:08.700 and members of the locals community who follow me were with me,

00:05:14.260 and we tried to listen to that thing,

00:05:16.340 and there were massive technology problems.

00:05:20.360 So how long did it take?

00:05:21.800 Did it take 15 or 20 minutes to work out the technical problems?

00:05:27.720 It felt like it.

00:05:28.480 It was something like that.

00:05:30.080 And here's how CNN covered the technical problems.

00:05:38.040 A huge disaster.

00:05:39.600 Let's see.

00:05:41.280 Let's use their exact words.

00:05:46.360 Glitches overshadow the announcement.

00:05:49.560 So this is CNN.

00:05:50.400 The glitches overshadowed the announcement.

00:05:53.840 It was a, quote, launch disaster.

00:05:58.200 And the DeSantis-Musk alliance has been a year in the making.

00:06:04.040 And Twitter's turning into a right-wing site.

00:06:07.720 So CNN, you have to understand, Twitter is now their competitor for news.

00:06:17.140 So when CNN covers a Twitter event, they're not going to be kind.

00:06:23.500 And it's not news.

00:06:25.100 It's not news.

00:06:26.180 It's just marketing.

00:06:27.820 CNN wants you to think that CNN is where you should get the news and the announcements.

00:06:31.500 They don't want you to think that Twitter is where you go for that.

00:06:35.480 So, of course, they dumped on it.

00:06:37.060 And they acted like the technical problem was the story.

00:06:41.420 Do you think the technical problem was the story?

00:06:43.840 Well, all it did was bring attention to it.

00:06:48.700 If there had been no technical problems, they would have had less attention.

00:06:53.220 What was Ron DeSantis trying to accomplish?

00:06:57.340 More attention.

00:06:59.460 So, yes.

00:07:00.000 So, here's what the mainstream media gets completely wrong.

00:07:04.780 They're trying to sell you a narrative that the technical problems that are 100% Twitter's fault

00:07:11.760 are somehow a reflection of Ron DeSantis' preparation.

00:07:20.160 Really?

00:07:21.640 Really?

00:07:22.860 You tried to sell us that?

00:07:25.340 What year is it?

00:07:26.740 It's 2023, people.

00:07:28.220 In 2023, I think we all got educated to understand how an entrepreneur works, Musk,

00:07:36.480 how a software company that's doing something it's never done before,

00:07:42.120 which is host something on Musk's account of that size.

00:07:46.440 And what I saw was everything working the way you expect it to work.

00:07:51.120 How many of you thought Spaces was going to work perfectly

00:07:53.600 when half a million people came in for the first time ever?

00:07:56.920 You know, all at the same time.

00:07:59.920 They've had bigger events, but they didn't all come in at the same start time.

00:08:05.260 Yeah.

00:08:05.960 I mean, so the fact that Twitter had a problem with it,

00:08:10.140 I don't think hurt anybody.

00:08:13.680 Do you know what the sign-ups are on Twitter today?

00:08:17.080 Through the roof, according to Elon Musk.

00:08:19.540 Yeah.

00:08:20.740 So did Twitter do a bad job yesterday because it was a technical problem?

00:08:25.840 Well, not if you judge by sign-ups.

00:08:28.360 How about follow the money?

00:08:30.500 Do you think that CNN reported that Twitter has record sign-ups because of that event?

00:08:37.840 Record sign-ups.

00:08:39.080 Like probably the biggest day ever.

00:08:41.280 No.

00:08:41.960 No, they made it look like it was a failure.

00:08:43.580 Twitter, unambiguously, follow the money.

00:08:47.880 Twitter made more money yesterday and increased their base and power and prestige.

00:08:52.980 Everything about that worked for Twitter.

00:08:55.880 That was 100% successful.

00:08:58.260 The people who are competing with Twitter have to find something bad about it and put that on DeSantis

00:09:07.000 so people don't want to use Twitter for this in the future.

00:09:09.920 But I don't think it worked at all.

00:09:12.460 I think that from the public's perspective, here's what they took away.

00:09:17.040 Ron DeSantis is using a more modern form of campaigning.

00:09:22.140 Is that good or bad?

00:09:24.440 Ron DeSantis understands modern forms of campaigning.

00:09:27.600 It's all good.

00:09:28.800 It's 100% good.

00:09:31.080 There was a big delay in the technology and everybody's talking about it.

00:09:35.800 Bad or good?

00:09:37.480 Well, if everybody's talking about it and they're signing up for Twitter like crazy,

00:09:41.780 I don't even know how that could have been better if you're trying to get attention.

00:09:48.940 Here's something I said in the man cave last night when I was just talking to the locals people.

00:09:57.600 Well, I'll hold off on that.

00:10:00.160 I'll hit you with that later when it's in its proper place.

00:10:04.140 So here are some of the things that DeSantis said and did.

00:10:08.400 I'll give you my persuasion grade for DeSantis.

00:10:14.600 So the first thing you have to consider is that it wasn't an interview.

00:10:20.040 I thought it was going to be more of a conversation interview with maybe a little pushback, but it wasn't.

00:10:26.700 Now, given that it wasn't an interview, I'm not going to grade it as an interview.

00:10:32.160 It should be graded as an announcement.

00:10:34.380 Would you agree?

00:10:34.900 It should be treated as just a speech, an announcement.

00:10:39.380 Because all they did is really introduce him and then let him talk, basically.

00:10:43.560 With a little variation in that, but basically they just let him talk.

00:10:48.360 So there were things he was not asked about.

00:10:51.460 For example, I don't think Trump ever came up.

00:10:55.880 Am I wrong?

00:10:56.500 I think he made one passing reference to Trump being too woke, which made me laugh.

00:11:04.900 Because, you know, he's got a little argument there.

00:11:07.500 He didn't explain his argument.

00:11:09.840 But, you know, there's a little bit of an argument that he's a little less woke than Trump, I suppose.

00:11:15.180 You know, you could make it sound like that.

00:11:17.860 I mean, it's not true, but you could make it sound like that if you want to.

00:11:23.460 So not mentioning Trump was brilliant.

00:11:26.500 Because what would have happened if the mainstream media was the ones who handled this?

00:11:33.680 What questions would the mainstream media ask DeSantis?

00:11:37.760 Nothing but Trump questions.

00:11:39.840 They would have just asked him one Trump question after another, and it would have turned into a Trump event.

00:11:46.180 But by doing it on Twitter and not having questions, per se, you know, he could just handle it any way he wanted.

00:11:55.380 And that was good.

00:11:56.500 Some more things.

00:11:59.420 Overall, I would say that DeSantis' presentation style was A++++ on persuasion.

00:12:09.520 The only negative he has is that he sounds like an AI-generated voice, and he does not have the zing that Trump brings.

00:12:19.540 He doesn't have the sizzle.

00:12:20.980 There's a complete lack of sizzle.

00:12:23.880 However, allow me to give him a compliment for handling his lack of sizzle.

00:12:30.100 The worst thing he could have done is to try to compete with Trump by an hour sizzling him.

00:12:37.120 How would that go?

00:12:38.620 It would look like Mario Rubio. 0.99

00:12:40.700 Yeah, it would look like Rubio trying to joke with Trump about, you know, penis size. 0.99

00:12:46.900 It just wouldn't work. 0.97

00:12:47.860 Because you can't go to Trump's home court and expect to win a game.

00:12:53.040 You're not going to win on his home court.

00:12:55.280 You've got to say, I'm playing a different game, and then play it better than he's playing his game.

00:12:58.900 And I think that's what DeSantis is doing, because he characterized himself as a, quote, energetic executive.

00:13:10.620 What do you think about that?

00:13:12.240 An energetic executive.

00:13:14.140 That's how he described himself.

00:13:16.820 Perfect.

00:13:18.220 It's perfect.

00:13:19.260 Because he's not competing with Trump for the sizzle, and it's the sizzle that gets Trump in trouble.

00:13:25.140 No, I'm not going to be over there sizzling and getting in trouble.

00:13:28.900 I'll be over here getting stuff done.

00:13:31.680 Now, countering Trump, as opposed to competing with him, is exactly the right play.

00:13:37.780 So politically, it appears he's getting good advice.

00:13:42.000 Let me ask you this.

00:13:43.800 Do you think DeSantis is getting good political advice?

00:13:47.880 Does it look like it?

00:13:51.780 I'm saying yeses and noes.

00:13:53.420 What would be an example of the no?

00:13:57.320 I've got lots of examples of yeses, but what would be an example of no?

00:14:01.560 What's he doing wrong?

00:14:06.860 Just saw him next.

00:14:09.380 Hiding too long?

00:14:10.440 Well, no, he was just getting ready to announce.

00:14:13.220 He's not going to be hiding.

00:14:14.780 Overly scripted?

00:14:17.460 Yeah, okay.

00:14:18.240 So, I would say that in terms of describing what the problems are, and then describing how he could be the right person to solve them, I don't think I've ever seen better.

00:14:33.860 I would say in terms of selling himself as a capable, energetic executive, that's what I saw.

00:14:41.320 I saw somebody who did a perfect sale for an energetic executive.

00:14:47.560 But here's what makes that tricky.

00:14:49.900 If you think he's competing with Trump to be more Trump than Trump, then it doesn't look like he did it, right?

00:14:58.220 It looks like he didn't do that.

00:14:59.980 But he's not trying to do that.

00:15:01.880 And I don't think that trying to do that would have been the right play.

00:15:04.680 He's trying to carve out his own unique brand, and then he's selling that brand.

00:15:11.140 And I thought he sold the hell out of it.

00:15:13.560 That was one of the best, probably one of the best just communication jobs you'll ever see.

00:15:21.280 Now, I've said before that Vivek is almost unparalleled in his communication skills.

00:15:28.920 And he brings a little more, a little more X factor, a little more zing.

00:15:33.580 But, you know, he's starting from way behind.

00:15:36.560 DeSantis has got a big advantage on him.

00:15:40.020 So DeSantis, as a capable, smart person who can say,

00:15:44.200 these are the problems and here's what I'll do about them, he nailed it.

00:15:49.420 A plus, plus, plus.

00:15:51.280 However, as Trump points out, maybe he needs a personality transplant.

00:15:56.620 So he'll never be as exciting.

00:16:00.780 And that does matter.

00:16:02.460 And Trump knows it.

00:16:03.920 Trump knows that people will vote for entertainment.

00:16:07.380 I hate to admit it, but I'm very biased by entertainment.

00:16:11.660 I'm very likely to vote for somebody who looks good or sounds good or makes me laugh.

00:16:17.920 I don't like to admit it.

00:16:20.060 I mean, it doesn't make me look good.

00:16:21.600 But I know myself, and I know that I am influenced by those things.

00:16:25.760 Absolutely.

00:16:26.620 So, let's see, what else?

00:16:32.540 Words that DeSantis tried to focus on for his, let's say his brand, would be focusing on merit.

00:16:41.120 You know, the system should be, the United States should be merit-based.

00:16:45.300 You know, not based on your color.

00:16:46.840 Based on sanity, and of course, that's an indirect attack on both Trump and on crazy Democrat stuff.

00:16:56.960 So he wants to bring sanity.

00:16:58.760 And then integrity of institutions, which I think we're all caring about at the moment.

00:17:04.060 Those are good.

00:17:05.020 In terms of selling his brand, that's right on brand.

00:17:09.740 So, I think, given that Musk is making this available to everybody, he's getting a lot of unfair attacks, Musk is, for apparently looking like he's a right-winger now.

00:17:32.880 Because he gave DeSantis a platform to really showcase.

00:17:36.600 But he says publicly, and he just tweeted it today, that all the presidential candidates are invited.

00:17:43.040 And I would assume it would be the same basis, meaning that they would get to talk, and there wouldn't be a lot of pushback, and they'd just get to put their thing out there.

00:17:52.180 Now, as long as there are other places that the candidates can debate, and other places that they could get challenged by the interviewer, I think you have everything you need.

00:18:01.880 I like the fact that DeSantis just got one really big announcement platform, so he could put out there everything he wants to put out there.

00:18:12.120 And now other people can poke at it and push it.

00:18:15.260 But now it's out there.

00:18:16.640 So I thought that was a great service.

00:18:19.480 I appreciated it, and I was mostly entertained.

00:18:22.180 He got a little boring toward the end.

00:18:25.480 All right, here's my favorite subplot of that entire thing.

00:18:31.000 Number one, is the simulation kidding us when it has Elon Musk buying a feature on Twitter called Spaces?

00:18:41.520 Like, he's literally the space guy.

00:18:45.080 And then, just a coincidence that the feature he's using is called Spaces.

00:18:50.880 I don't know, just a weird coincidence.

00:18:52.720 There's a few more of those.

00:18:54.000 But here's the question I ask.

00:18:55.260 I would love to know what happened when they went live and they had the technical problems.

00:19:02.580 Because the way they solved it was, according to Musk, that having all that traffic on Musk's account has a different impact than when they made it work by moving it to David Sachs' account.

00:19:14.260 And it had something to do with the uniqueness of his account or the number of followers or something.

00:19:19.820 But it crashed until they figured out how to move it to Saks' account, and they started from there, and then it worked.

00:19:27.660 Now, wouldn't you love to know how that conversation went in real time?

00:19:32.900 Because here's my question.

00:19:35.060 Who solved that?

00:19:35.980 It turns out, because I was telling my followers at the time, you know, the locals people, I was saying, if it's a volume-related problem, they're not going to fix it.

00:19:47.720 If it's just volume, there's just nothing you can do in real time.

00:19:52.180 You're going to have to go back and retool and try it again.

00:19:55.080 But it turns out it wasn't just volume.

00:19:57.460 It was a combination of volume plus the unique account it was coming from.

00:20:02.440 And here's my question.

00:20:03.580 Who figured that out?

00:20:04.860 Who knew that moving it to the other account would make it work when it was the same amount of volume?

00:20:13.180 And I have a hypothesis that because the person sitting there being embarrassed by it not working is the most storied engineer in the history of the United States, Elon Musk.

00:20:27.160 And don't you wonder if he told the engineers to try that, based on intuition, that that probably would be a way to go?

00:20:35.540 Or did the engineers suggest it to Elon?

00:20:39.700 Which way did it go?

00:20:42.340 Are you curious about that?

00:20:43.880 Because if Elon is the one who figured it out in real time, that sort of goes more to his legend, that he would be, hypothetically, surrounded by the top engineers in Twitter and he had to tell them how to fix it.

00:20:59.100 That might have happened.

00:21:00.100 But, you know, I have no reason to believe it did, except that he's the most storied engineer and he was in charge and he was the one who wanted it fixed.

00:21:08.760 So, I kind of wonder if he thought of it.

00:21:12.860 I'm just so curious about that little technical question.

00:21:17.780 Anyway, did everybody see the Trump parody that came out right after?

00:21:27.680 So, apparently, he had been prepared in advance.

00:21:29.740 And it showed the Spaces page, which is just a page of profiles of different participants.

00:21:36.500 Except the parody version, the only participants were, besides Musk and DeSantis, there was Hitler, Soros, Klaus Schwab, Satan, and Dick Cheney, and the FBI.

00:21:52.040 Now, I can't do it justice.

00:21:55.520 You have to listen to it.

00:21:56.940 But, like, this one falls into the category of, you know, for the, one of the best of all time.

00:22:04.600 It's not just funny.

00:22:06.000 It's one of the best political, humorous parodies you'll ever see.

00:22:10.480 It was just genius.

00:22:11.880 So, go see it.

00:22:13.080 It's on, you can see it on, choose social, you can see it on Twitter, on my account, and a number of releases.

00:22:19.400 But, it's worth five minutes.

00:22:23.340 Trust me.

00:22:24.640 Just trust me on this one.

00:22:25.940 This is five minutes you will not regret.

00:22:30.540 All right.

00:22:33.500 Oh, let's talk about DeSantis.

00:22:36.300 One of the things he talked about with the wokeness that he's against is, you know, getting into college. 0.99

00:22:42.500 And he used this visual language.

00:22:44.340 He said, talking about, you know, your daughter who's going to college.

00:22:48.180 And saying, you don't want her to be roadkill in the woke Olympics. 1.00

00:22:51.940 And if you listen to everything that DeSantis said, it was sort of a brilliant example of visual language.

00:23:02.160 Because he was on an audio-only platform.

00:23:05.160 But when he talked, you could see pictures forming in your head.

00:23:09.720 That's not normal.

00:23:11.660 That's not normal.

00:23:12.440 That's somebody who's probably been trained in persuasion by somebody who knows what they're doing.

00:23:19.720 Because I don't think that was part of his normal tool bag.

00:23:23.180 That stood out as being obviously visual preparation.

00:23:29.800 And very well done.

00:23:35.820 Let's see.

00:23:36.620 Here's what CNN's page was hilarious.

00:23:41.300 If you just look at the headlines in the top left of CNN's page.

00:23:45.640 Because that's where they put the stuff they want you to see first.

00:23:48.700 That's what they think is important.

00:23:50.860 So here are the headlines.

00:23:52.480 Why DeSantis is as dangerous as Trump.

00:23:54.780 How completely predictable was that?

00:24:01.720 Oh yeah, DeSantis is totally normal unless it's possible he could win.

00:24:05.980 Well, if he could win, then he's just as dangerous as Trump.

00:24:10.400 Otherwise, he's just a normal, sane person and nothing like Trump whatsoever.

00:24:14.340 Unless he could win.

00:24:16.120 And then he's just as dangerous.

00:24:18.700 You don't even have to read the article.

00:24:20.340 It's the headlines that are funny.

00:24:21.560 What else did they say?

00:24:25.780 They said the glitches overshadowed the show.

00:24:28.260 It launched disaster.

00:24:30.400 Blah, blah, blah.

00:24:32.000 Yeah.

00:24:32.840 So let's see what New York Times said.

00:24:40.140 Oh, here's some other things CNN said.

00:24:43.160 That he was sending a message of incompetence.

00:24:45.960 That DeSantis was trying to be the capable, competent executive. 0.84

00:24:52.240 But his launch was incompetent.

00:24:54.560 So that's, you know, against his brand.

00:24:56.400 That's not what I saw.

00:24:57.920 What I saw is Twitter had some issues because so many people wanted to see him.

00:25:04.060 If you ever have a chance to fail and somebody gives you a chance of ways to fail,

00:25:09.700 hey, Scott, I'll give you 10 different options of how to fail.

00:25:13.540 Pick the one that makes you look popular.

00:25:18.400 I failed because too many people wanted to hear my message.

00:25:23.040 That's what CNN is calling a failure.

00:25:25.920 The technology broke.

00:25:29.360 It's built as a mass communication product.

00:25:34.460 You know, Twitter and the spaces.

00:25:36.660 It's meant for mass audiences.

00:25:38.980 And he brought such a mass audience, he broke it.

00:25:41.240 But it got fixed by, maybe, the most storied engineer of all time in America in real time.

00:25:50.480 I don't know how that could be more perfect.

00:25:53.800 Like, you can't even get.

00:25:55.100 You could not have scripted that better than having it fail because too many people wanted to hear it.

00:26:01.100 That's, you can't get better.

00:26:04.220 All right.

00:26:04.840 They said it was predictable.

00:26:07.800 CNN said Twitter's problems were predictable, given Twitter's, you know, recent technical problems in the past.

00:26:16.100 Was it?

00:26:17.640 All right.

00:26:18.140 Maybe the risk was higher than normal.

00:26:21.900 I would agree with that.

00:26:23.120 But was it predictable that it wouldn't work?

00:26:26.020 Was that predictable?

00:26:28.700 Twitter didn't know, but CNN somehow knew.

00:26:31.920 Yeah, it's all predictable.

00:26:32.760 Um, and they said there is such a thing as negative attention.

00:26:40.680 So they're trying to make the case that he brought out negative attention.

00:26:45.260 No, he didn't.

00:26:47.580 No, he didn't.

00:26:49.120 It's not negative attention when there are too many people who want to hear you.

00:26:54.100 That's positive attention.

00:26:55.840 Sorry.

00:26:56.680 That's positive.

00:26:57.380 All right.

00:27:00.680 New York Times did some fact checking.

00:27:02.760 And I will use the, um, the lawyer standard for this, which is if you can see that one of the fact checks is obviously fake, it's a fake fact check, meaning it's just propaganda.

00:27:15.480 You don't have to listen to the other fact checks.

00:27:18.020 Would you agree?

00:27:19.200 If one of them is obviously just propaganda, you can ignore all the rest as well.

00:27:24.100 All right.

00:27:24.900 All right.

00:27:26.460 Um, so they fact checked DeSantis saying the whole book ban thing is a hoax.

00:27:32.600 So the accusation is that Florida is banning books.

00:27:36.100 But DeSantis says the whole book ban thing is a hoax.

00:27:39.660 There's not been a single book banned in the state of Florida.

00:27:42.880 You can go buy or use whatever book you want.

00:27:45.460 And they fact check that this way.

00:27:49.540 They say it's misleading.

00:27:51.240 It's misleading.

00:27:52.480 So I hope that they're not misleading in their fact check.

00:27:56.320 Wouldn't that be terrible?

00:27:58.060 Because their whole point is that he's misleading.

00:28:01.420 So he's misleading, they say, because there has been no statewide ban a book.

00:28:05.880 Oh, so he's completely right, because he said there's no statewide ban on books.

00:28:11.680 Oh, that's misleading.

00:28:13.300 Oh, but it's misleading because, but, Mr. DeSantis is vastly playing down the extent to

00:28:20.100 which individual school districts and libraries in parts of the states have removed books.

00:28:26.380 In fact, Florida ranks second behind Texas as the state with the most bans at 357.

00:28:32.620 Did they leave anything out of the story?

00:28:39.440 Is there any fundamentally important part of the story that the New York Times left out

00:28:45.140 when they were telling you that DeSantis was being misleading?

00:28:49.180 Anything left out?

00:28:51.740 That the bans were specifically about material that was too adult for children?

00:28:59.200 That's it.

00:29:00.120 It was too adult material for the age of the children.

00:29:07.080 Do you know how many other books are banned everywhere because they're too adult for the age of the children?

00:29:13.500 Probably 100 million.

00:29:15.080 Is there any place on earth that doesn't restrict pornography from children?

00:29:26.040 The New York Times is actually in favor of adult material for children.

00:29:32.640 Don't you think that they should have mentioned that in the fact check,

00:29:36.160 that it only applied to material that they thought children were not ready for,

00:29:40.820 but when those children reach an age where their minds can handle it,

00:29:45.520 it is 100% available, 100% available to adults.

00:29:51.240 You don't think the New York Times knew that

00:29:53.620 and thought that maybe that was important to the fact check?

00:29:58.200 They leave that out. 0.99

00:30:00.320 So therefore, you are free to say that all their other fact checks are bullshit. 0.98

00:30:04.180 They're probably not. 0.98

00:30:06.900 I mean, some of them probably are right.

00:30:09.640 But you are allowed to say there's no credibility to their fact checking 0.99

00:30:13.520 because this one's obviously bullshit. 1.00

00:30:15.720 Just obviously. 1.00

00:30:16.500 They know it.

00:30:17.460 They couldn't not know it.

00:30:21.540 NBC, this is their take on it, and I remember,

00:30:24.880 NBC is also a competitor to Twitter for political news,

00:30:28.640 so they're going to talk about them as a competitor.

00:30:34.520 And here's their take.

00:30:35.880 A Democratic strategist said the joint must-destantist event

00:30:39.840 was only the latest example of the tech billionaire

00:30:43.240 aligning himself and Twitter with increasingly conservative politics

00:30:47.540 in a rightward shift.

00:30:51.520 Do you think that's what happened?

00:30:52.900 Or do you think he said every candidate is invited

00:30:58.280 and one of them said yes?

00:31:01.980 It's not some rightward shift.

00:31:04.400 The rightward shift is the narrative

00:31:07.160 that their competitors are trying to put on them.

00:31:10.500 It's purely a competitive statement.

00:31:12.520 It's not news.

00:31:13.300 It's propaganda.

00:31:14.480 Well, it's not even propaganda.

00:31:16.160 It's marketing.

00:31:17.820 It's less than propaganda.

00:31:19.500 Propaganda, at least...

00:31:22.500 Even propaganda sounds better than marketing.

00:31:24.700 I guess that's my bias.

00:31:26.260 But NBC is just marketing their own product.

00:31:29.280 But they're making the customers think,

00:31:31.660 oh, that's news.

00:31:33.000 No, it's not.

00:31:34.020 No, that's just marketing.

00:31:40.700 Oh, here's a...

00:31:42.280 I thought this was an insightful, as usual,

00:31:45.160 comment from Mike Cernovich about DeSantis versus Trump.

00:31:49.500 This is a really important point.

00:31:52.200 And as Mike points out,

00:31:54.340 I think it's undervalued.

00:31:56.080 So I agree with Cernovich.

00:31:59.020 So here's what he says in the tweet.

00:32:00.720 DeSantis can hire people

00:32:02.120 who won't see it as their last job.

00:32:04.920 He's comparing it to Trump.

00:32:06.720 In other words, if you take a job with Trump,

00:32:08.880 it might be the last time you ever work.

00:32:12.220 Now, I'm actually an example of that.

00:32:14.940 Do you think I would have been canceled

00:32:16.860 if not known as a past Trump supporter?

00:32:22.200 I don't know.

00:32:23.280 Probably not.

00:32:24.340 Probably wouldn't have cared.

00:32:28.700 However, I find this correct.

00:32:31.640 So Cernovich says,

00:32:32.400 this is underweighted by people

00:32:33.880 who aren't professionals.

00:32:35.720 That's right.

00:32:36.420 If you're a professional,

00:32:37.920 you know that your reputation,

00:32:39.420 who you've associated with,

00:32:40.900 will determine your next career arc.

00:32:43.820 And as Cernovich says,

00:32:46.520 you're Trump's lawyer?

00:32:47.700 That might be your last final client

00:32:49.600 before I'm being disbarred.

00:32:52.280 And then he says,

00:32:53.680 to online people,

00:32:55.100 stuff like this doesn't matter.

00:32:56.700 In the real world, it's huge.

00:32:58.560 And I agree with that completely.

00:33:00.980 If you're looking at DeSantis

00:33:02.600 or anybody else versus Trump,

00:33:05.800 I don't know who Trump hires to work for him.

00:33:09.680 It was a problem before,

00:33:11.340 but it's probably a bigger problem now.

00:33:13.120 Because at least he had Jared and Ivanka,

00:33:16.860 who, in my opinion,

00:33:18.040 were superstars of the administration.

00:33:21.240 I think they were really strong

00:33:23.220 and useful players,

00:33:24.320 but it looks like they won't be involved

00:33:25.820 if Trump wins.

00:33:27.360 So it's hard to know

00:33:28.880 what his inner circle would look like

00:33:31.640 and how that would work.

00:33:33.740 So I think this is an entirely valid point,

00:33:37.000 that a professional going to work for DeSantis

00:33:39.620 would think that's a stepping stone

00:33:42.020 in their career,

00:33:43.280 whereas working for Trump

00:33:44.780 has shown it's a career suicide.

00:33:48.140 And I can prove it.

00:33:51.040 If you'd like an example

00:33:52.040 of a career suicide, right here.

00:33:56.300 RFK Jr. had an interesting comment,

00:33:58.540 I think it was on Megyn Kelly,

00:34:00.280 about Trump.

00:34:01.260 And he said that Trump

00:34:03.480 is the best debater

00:34:04.580 since Abraham Lincoln.

00:34:08.000 He said, quote,

00:34:08.920 President Trump has shown himself

00:34:10.220 to be the most devastating debater

00:34:12.080 probably since Abraham Lincoln.

00:34:16.380 And RFK Jr. says,

00:34:17.900 the key to this so-called success

00:34:20.240 is Trump's, quote,

00:34:22.640 capacity to obliterate

00:34:24.280 and dispatch opponents.

00:34:25.580 And he thinks that Biden

00:34:29.020 would just get rolled

00:34:30.700 if he debated him.

00:34:32.160 Now, of course,

00:34:32.760 RFK Jr. wants

00:34:33.900 to bait Biden into a debate.

00:34:38.180 So this is probably part of his,

00:34:39.920 you know,

00:34:41.820 his priming to see

00:34:43.020 if he can get a debate going,

00:34:44.360 which I doubt.

00:34:45.360 I don't think it's going to happen.

00:34:46.980 But once again,

00:34:49.820 you find something to love

00:34:51.320 about RFK Jr.

00:34:52.820 How did the Kennedys do that?

00:34:54.380 Like, well, like,

00:34:56.020 why does it take a Kennedy

00:34:57.900 to just keep picking out,

00:35:00.200 like, winning frames?

00:35:03.480 That's a totally winning frame.

00:35:05.760 Do you know why?

00:35:07.940 Is it obvious to you

00:35:09.340 why RFK Jr.

00:35:10.860 complimenting Trump's,

00:35:12.140 his debating skill,

00:35:14.800 is it obvious to you

00:35:15.680 why that's a good strategy?

00:35:18.460 Well, let me tell you why.

00:35:20.660 He wants to win Trump supporters

00:35:23.220 and he's the only person

00:35:25.300 who ever tried.

00:35:27.240 Am I right?

00:35:28.460 He's trying,

00:35:29.040 as a Democrat,

00:35:30.680 he's trying to win Trump supporters

00:35:32.180 and he's the only one

00:35:33.620 who's ever tried.

00:35:34.920 And I think to myself,

00:35:36.160 well, wait a minute.

00:35:37.780 Did you just show respect

00:35:39.260 to Trump supporters?

00:35:42.180 He actually showed respect.

00:35:43.700 And there wasn't a but there.

00:35:47.320 You know, you're waiting

00:35:47.800 for the but.

00:35:49.720 He's a great debater,

00:35:51.520 but,

00:35:52.660 and there was just no but.

00:35:55.980 He's confident enough

00:35:57.460 that he can compliment

00:35:59.000 his potential competitor.

00:36:01.400 He could give him

00:36:02.180 a full-throated compliment

00:36:03.340 and just let it sit there.

00:36:05.700 That is so baller strong.

00:36:10.340 Don't,

00:36:10.820 don't you interpret

00:36:11.600 that as strength?

00:36:13.020 He doesn't need

00:36:13.860 to shut him down.

00:36:15.100 He can say what you see.

00:36:16.680 Well, you see it.

00:36:18.080 You see it with your own eyes.

00:36:19.500 I'm not going to deny

00:36:20.680 what you see

00:36:21.260 with your own eyes.

00:36:22.460 Let's accept that as true.

00:36:24.400 And then I have this other

00:36:25.580 basket of stuff

00:36:26.440 I'm offering.

00:36:29.540 I,

00:36:30.160 you can't beat that.

00:36:33.720 Like,

00:36:34.420 and honestly,

00:36:35.380 do the,

00:36:35.860 it makes you wonder,

00:36:36.840 do the Kennedys

00:36:37.660 have some extra speed

00:36:39.080 or something?

00:36:40.100 Like,

00:36:40.360 how the hell did,

00:36:41.320 how the hell

00:36:41.880 can they all do it?

00:36:43.800 It's like,

00:36:44.380 you just have to be born 0.79

00:36:45.240 with that last name

00:36:46.100 and you can do that.

00:36:47.780 Show respect

00:36:48.540 to citizens of the country

00:36:50.640 that disagree with you.

00:36:52.740 That's pretty strong.

00:36:54.620 And,

00:36:55.160 he's the only person

00:36:56.200 who's running

00:36:56.720 that people are saying,

00:36:58.880 do you think he could be

00:36:59.700 a good vice president

00:37:00.660 for Trump?

00:37:02.080 How many times

00:37:02.680 have you heard that?

00:37:03.800 Which is crazy.

00:37:05.540 There's no way

00:37:06.100 that's going to happen.

00:37:07.420 But,

00:37:07.620 but just think about

00:37:08.520 the fact that so many

00:37:09.380 people have suggested it.

00:37:11.480 Have you ever heard

00:37:12.080 that before?

00:37:12.740 In your whole life,

00:37:14.140 your whole life,

00:37:15.020 have you ever seen

00:37:15.520 anybody suggest

00:37:16.260 that a major

00:37:17.380 Democrat candidate

00:37:18.360 should be the vice president

00:37:19.600 for the Republican candidate?

00:37:21.820 That's crazy talk.

00:37:23.400 But only RFK Jr.

00:37:25.140 has ever been

00:37:26.020 treated that way.

00:37:28.060 The,

00:37:28.580 the other thing

00:37:29.140 that I love about him

00:37:30.100 is that even if

00:37:31.280 it turns out

00:37:32.520 he's totally wrong

00:37:33.360 about,

00:37:34.040 let's say,

00:37:34.700 childhood vaccinations,

00:37:36.100 and I don't have

00:37:37.000 a strong opinion

00:37:37.640 about that

00:37:38.200 except that I agree

00:37:39.200 they're under-tested.

00:37:40.560 I don't know

00:37:41.240 it's real.

00:37:42.540 I just agree with him

00:37:43.500 that they're woefully

00:37:44.540 under-tested.

00:37:45.980 But,

00:37:46.520 even if it turns out

00:37:48.280 he was wrong,

00:37:49.380 and I know you think

00:37:50.240 he's not,

00:37:50.840 but suppose he did,

00:37:52.780 he would still be

00:37:53.680 a hell of a candidate.

00:37:55.820 And I think that would

00:37:56.740 be his biggest weakness,

00:37:58.140 and I don't even

00:37:58.780 see it as one.

00:38:00.120 Because even that

00:38:01.000 was sincere,

00:38:01.700 and even that

00:38:03.260 was at least

00:38:04.340 attempted

00:38:04.820 to be completely

00:38:06.400 data-driven,

00:38:07.680 scientifically compatible,

00:38:09.580 without believing

00:38:10.680 Big Pharma.

00:38:12.920 So,

00:38:13.420 he's,

00:38:14.260 he's carved out

00:38:15.600 a place

00:38:16.040 where you can

00:38:16.660 believe science,

00:38:17.940 but disbelieve

00:38:19.340 all the corporations

00:38:20.280 who are doing

00:38:20.840 the science.

00:38:22.000 It's kind of perfect,

00:38:24.040 right?

00:38:25.020 Because everybody

00:38:25.880 else is sort of 1.00

00:38:26.580 the simplistic idiots, 1.00

00:38:29.280 science is bad, 1.00

00:38:30.320 or science is good,

00:38:31.160 experts are bad,

00:38:32.260 experts are good.

00:38:33.260 And he's very cleanly

00:38:34.440 made this distinction,

00:38:35.560 science is good,

00:38:37.060 but the corporate

00:38:37.940 science is all bad.

00:38:40.120 To which all of us

00:38:41.420 say,

00:38:41.820 well,

00:38:42.040 that's true.

00:38:43.180 We love science,

00:38:44.080 we just hate it

00:38:44.680 when corporations

00:38:45.380 pay for it.

00:38:48.220 So,

00:38:48.980 anyway,

00:38:49.420 the reason that

00:38:50.300 RFK Jr.

00:38:51.240 would never be

00:38:52.420 Trump's vice president,

00:38:54.240 if we could put this

00:38:55.020 to bed so nobody

00:38:55.900 asks me about it anymore,

00:38:57.700 nobody's going to pick

00:38:58.580 a 70-year-old

00:38:59.680 vice president

00:39:00.780 vice president,

00:39:01.780 can we just stop there?

00:39:04.380 Is there anything else

00:39:05.300 I need to say?

00:39:06.680 I mean,

00:39:07.180 I could have started

00:39:08.060 with nobody's going

00:39:08.860 to pick a Democrat

00:39:09.560 to be vice president

00:39:10.560 for a Republican,

00:39:11.600 because that's also true.

00:39:13.100 But nobody's going to pick

00:39:15.500 a 70-year-old

00:39:16.480 vice president,

00:39:17.760 especially if you're

00:39:19.680 elderly at yourself,

00:39:21.200 right?

00:39:21.880 I mean,

00:39:22.360 Biden won't either.

00:39:23.620 Biden's not going to pick

00:39:24.500 a 70-year-old

00:39:25.380 vice president.

00:39:25.900 So there's no way

00:39:27.700 that that's going

00:39:28.400 to happen.

00:39:29.860 It's just amazing

00:39:30.720 that it comes up

00:39:31.700 so much that tells

00:39:32.640 you something about

00:39:33.300 how people are thinking.

00:39:35.220 You say he's bad

00:39:36.220 on the climate?

00:39:39.140 I'm going to reserve

00:39:40.520 judgment on that.

00:39:42.580 So,

00:39:43.560 it's my opinion

00:39:44.540 so far

00:39:45.860 that RFK Jr.

00:39:47.000 is not compatible

00:39:47.940 with current science

00:39:49.280 on nuclear energy

00:39:51.520 and climate.

00:39:52.180 I don't think

00:39:53.520 he's fully compatible

00:39:54.700 with what I understand

00:39:56.660 to be the best science.

00:39:58.680 It doesn't mean

00:39:59.400 I'm right,

00:40:00.920 but he has so far

00:40:04.320 demonstrated

00:40:05.000 a legitimate

00:40:07.620 mental flexibility

00:40:09.020 and an ability

00:40:10.780 to understand

00:40:11.420 complicated things

00:40:12.560 that I suppose

00:40:15.080 his opinion

00:40:15.680 could change

00:40:16.420 because the facts

00:40:18.080 seem to be changing.

00:40:19.560 So I believe

00:40:20.500 he could evolve

00:40:21.520 or find

00:40:23.000 a nuanced position

00:40:24.320 that you wouldn't hate.

00:40:28.680 He has not shown

00:40:29.920 that yet.

00:40:31.020 Would you agree?

00:40:32.400 I would say

00:40:32.900 that his climate

00:40:34.000 framing

00:40:35.900 is not

00:40:37.400 compatible

00:40:39.220 with the right

00:40:39.940 and that's a big problem.

00:40:42.220 But I think

00:40:42.700 he could do it.

00:40:44.400 I think he has

00:40:45.000 the skill

00:40:45.500 and I think

00:40:46.020 there's room

00:40:46.600 to do it

00:40:47.200 just by

00:40:48.260 slightly modifying

00:40:49.540 or updating

00:40:50.120 his understanding

00:40:51.940 of a nuclear energy

00:40:52.860 for one thing.

00:40:53.940 That might be enough.

00:40:54.880 It might be all it takes.

00:40:56.840 But he could get

00:40:57.480 pretty close

00:40:58.140 to the Republican

00:40:58.900 take

00:41:00.060 just by doubting

00:41:01.200 projections,

00:41:02.700 which wouldn't be hard.

00:41:05.180 He's a science,

00:41:07.440 yes,

00:41:08.440 but a skepticism,

00:41:09.560 yes,

00:41:09.800 at the same time.

00:41:10.580 he wears both hats

00:41:13.300 just as often.

00:41:15.060 So he could get away

00:41:15.900 with a nuanced

00:41:16.580 take on climate.

00:41:18.400 Don't count him out

00:41:19.640 on that.

00:41:20.440 Just wait and see

00:41:21.080 on that.

00:41:21.840 But you're right,

00:41:22.440 he's not,

00:41:23.460 his game is not

00:41:24.960 where it needs

00:41:25.440 to be on climate.

00:41:27.060 We all agree

00:41:27.820 on that, right?

00:41:28.860 If he wants

00:41:29.560 to get any votes

00:41:30.920 from the right,

00:41:32.060 he's not

00:41:32.560 where he needs

00:41:33.080 to be.

00:41:33.380 But hold on,

00:41:35.560 he might.

00:41:36.640 He might find a way.

00:41:40.900 All right,

00:41:41.560 we'll test your IQ

00:41:42.700 in case you want

00:41:43.540 to see how genius

00:41:44.380 you are

00:41:44.880 about all things

00:41:45.800 political.

00:41:48.100 Rasmussen

00:41:48.540 had a poll

00:41:49.160 and they asked,

00:41:51.740 the question was,

00:41:53.620 likely U.S. voters,

00:41:55.040 and they said,

00:41:55.440 how many people

00:41:55.900 believe the FBI

00:41:57.660 officials involved

00:41:58.640 in promoting

00:41:59.200 the false Russia 0.79

00:42:00.120 Trump claim

00:42:01.820 should be

00:42:02.420 criminally prosecuted?

00:42:03.380 And how many

00:42:04.700 should not?

00:42:06.760 So,

00:42:07.580 our test will be,

00:42:09.000 how many people,

00:42:10.060 how many of the voters

00:42:10.860 think the FBI

00:42:12.620 officials involved

00:42:13.740 in promoting

00:42:14.380 a hoax

00:42:15.000 that tried

00:42:15.980 to overthrow

00:42:16.600 the government?

00:42:18.520 What percentage

00:42:19.580 do you think,

00:42:20.840 just roughly,

00:42:22.060 let's say within

00:42:23.000 two basis points?

00:42:25.200 See if you can

00:42:25.740 get it within two,

00:42:26.680 and then I'll

00:42:27.060 be impressed.

00:42:30.080 27's wrong.

00:42:33.380 27's wrong,

00:42:36.700 but try to get

00:42:37.160 it within two.

00:42:38.940 23.

00:42:40.120 Yes,

00:42:40.700 very,

00:42:41.080 very good estimate.

00:42:42.400 23%

00:42:43.320 of voters

00:42:44.840 think that

00:42:45.680 the FBI

00:42:46.300 should not be

00:42:48.340 criminally prosecuted

00:42:49.460 for trying to

00:42:50.020 overthrow the country

00:42:50.860 with a hoax.

00:42:51.980 if anybody's new,

00:42:57.660 you don't know

00:42:58.160 why we're laughing,

00:42:59.180 sort of an inside

00:43:00.080 joke for this

00:43:00.820 live stream,

00:43:02.020 that roughly

00:43:03.980 a quarter of the

00:43:05.160 public will get

00:43:06.040 every question

00:43:06.760 wrong.

00:43:07.760 It doesn't matter

00:43:08.360 what the question

00:43:08.860 is.

00:43:09.660 Now,

00:43:09.900 I don't think

00:43:10.580 it's the same

00:43:11.120 quarter of the

00:43:11.820 public that gets

00:43:12.420 every question

00:43:13.000 wrong.

00:43:13.620 It's probably

00:43:14.080 like a different

00:43:14.680 quarter for

00:43:15.800 every question,

00:43:16.420 but it's always

00:43:17.720 about a quarter.

00:43:19.160 The regularity

00:43:20.440 with which that

00:43:21.200 one out of four

00:43:22.600 shows up

00:43:23.360 is just crazy.

00:43:25.320 It just doesn't

00:43:25.880 even look like

00:43:26.340 it could be

00:43:26.700 natural.

00:43:28.680 All right.

00:43:30.680 Let's talk

00:43:31.500 about Ukraine.

00:43:34.460 So we know

00:43:35.260 maybe a little

00:43:36.080 bit more about

00:43:36.900 the attacks

00:43:37.480 on Russia

00:43:38.240 proper.

00:43:39.140 So Russia 0.88

00:43:39.600 says that

00:43:40.480 it was Ukraine

00:43:41.860 that was behind

00:43:42.720 sending some

00:43:44.300 drones toward

00:43:45.020 the Kremlin.

00:43:46.780 And you

00:43:47.280 probably believe

00:43:47.920 that, don't

00:43:48.380 you?

00:43:49.100 It was

00:43:49.340 probably

00:43:49.720 Ukraine was 0.87

00:43:51.160 involved,

00:43:51.640 unless it

00:43:52.000 was a total

00:43:52.440 false flag.

00:43:54.380 You know,

00:43:54.620 it might have

00:43:54.960 been all fake.

00:43:56.520 But then we

00:43:57.500 also know

00:43:58.480 that there

00:43:59.180 were some

00:43:59.700 alleged Russian

00:44:02.380 citizens who

00:44:03.460 allegedly were

00:44:04.960 against Russia's 0.90

00:44:06.020 involvement in

00:44:06.660 the war and

00:44:07.720 against Putin,

00:44:08.840 and they

00:44:09.300 allegedly crossed

00:44:11.000 the border from

00:44:11.660 Ukraine into

00:44:12.520 Russia and

00:44:13.960 attacked in a

00:44:14.940 few places in

00:44:15.720 Russia, which

00:44:17.260 would be, you

00:44:18.660 know, an

00:44:18.940 escalation of

00:44:19.660 attacks on

00:44:20.480 Russian homeland.

00:44:22.140 Now, do you

00:44:22.800 think that those

00:44:23.620 minor attacks,

00:44:25.440 you know, it

00:44:26.700 didn't end up

00:44:27.500 conquering any

00:44:28.620 territory that

00:44:29.360 they held, and

00:44:30.200 a few citizens

00:44:31.100 got killed, and

00:44:32.000 it didn't amount

00:44:33.220 to much.

00:44:34.200 But do you

00:44:34.580 think it was a

00:44:35.060 success?

00:44:36.760 Do you think

00:44:37.400 those incursions

00:44:38.400 with the, you

00:44:39.900 know, somewhat

00:44:40.480 sketchy,

00:44:41.700 artificially created 0.98

00:44:42.960 Russian, you 0.96

00:44:45.300 know, revolutionaries,

00:44:46.220 do you think it

00:44:46.900 worked?

00:44:48.540 I think it did if

00:44:49.920 the Russian people

00:44:50.640 heard about it,

00:44:51.520 which I don't

00:44:52.020 know.

00:44:52.560 I'm guessing they

00:44:53.480 did.

00:44:54.240 But it works

00:44:55.380 psychologically.

00:44:57.640 Because if you're a 0.91

00:44:58.740 Russian citizen and,

00:45:00.500 you know, you

00:45:01.440 oppose the war in

00:45:03.020 Ukraine, you're 0.99

00:45:04.400 probably saying to

00:45:05.040 yourself, well, it's

00:45:06.940 over there.

00:45:08.200 It's not affecting

00:45:09.200 me.

00:45:10.120 You know, I still go

00:45:10.880 to work, I'm still

00:45:11.560 buying groceries.

00:45:12.420 It doesn't have an

00:45:12.840 effect.

00:45:13.120 And if you don't

00:45:14.220 know somebody

00:45:14.680 personally who's in

00:45:16.480 that war or got

00:45:17.300 killed or wounded,

00:45:18.740 then you're probably

00:45:19.320 thinking, well, just

00:45:20.360 let Putin do what he

00:45:21.240 does.

00:45:21.620 We'll see how it

00:45:22.100 works out.

00:45:23.180 But as soon as you

00:45:24.140 hear that Ukraine is

00:45:25.260 attacking your

00:45:25.980 homeland, that

00:45:28.080 changes everything,

00:45:29.680 doesn't it?

00:45:31.180 And I was trying to

00:45:32.220 put my head in that

00:45:33.980 place.

00:45:35.580 Imagine the United

00:45:36.580 States gets into

00:45:39.320 some war with Iraq

00:45:40.600 or anybody else.

00:45:43.160 And then imagine

00:45:44.160 that there's a

00:45:45.120 substantial attack on

00:45:47.660 the homeland, where

00:45:48.440 an actual city in

00:45:49.600 America, like, stuff

00:45:53.020 blows up and there's

00:45:54.100 firing and soldiers

00:45:55.600 and it's like fighting

00:45:56.880 in the streets.

00:45:58.460 Could you hold that in

00:45:59.260 your head?

00:46:01.160 Yeah.

00:46:01.660 So it would be like

00:46:02.420 9-11, exactly, or

00:46:03.780 Pearl Harbor is a

00:46:04.660 better example.

00:46:06.240 What did the United

00:46:07.220 States do when Pearl

00:46:08.600 Harbor happened?

00:46:09.200 Now, we may have

00:46:11.060 been, you know, there's

00:46:11.960 theories about we knew

00:46:14.120 more than we knew,

00:46:15.060 et cetera.

00:46:15.880 But when the homeland

00:46:17.780 of the United States

00:46:18.740 is attacked, do we

00:46:20.240 act the same as when

00:46:22.880 our military is attacked

00:46:24.420 in a war that's in a

00:46:25.860 theater?

00:46:26.920 We don't.

00:46:28.200 No.

00:46:28.920 If you attack the

00:46:29.880 homeland, we just drop

00:46:31.920 all the rules.

00:46:33.600 All right, we've got

00:46:34.080 all these rules about

00:46:35.260 what's fair in war and

00:46:36.520 what's not, and we're

00:46:37.860 going to follow the

00:46:38.440 rules because we

00:46:39.180 like to be good

00:46:39.800 rule-following military.

00:46:42.440 We'll try not to do

00:46:43.240 any atrocities.

00:46:44.560 We won't use the

00:46:45.460 really bad weapons

00:46:46.420 unless we have to,

00:46:47.640 you know, follow the

00:46:49.000 rules.

00:46:49.680 And then they attack

00:46:50.440 the homeland.

00:46:51.740 What's the first thing

00:46:52.600 we do when they attack

00:46:53.400 the homeland? 0.83

00:46:55.180 Get rid of all the 0.89

00:46:56.120 rules.

00:46:57.400 Yeah.

00:46:57.820 The rules go away.

00:46:59.720 So you don't act the

00:47:01.020 same when your homeland

00:47:01.800 is attacked.

00:47:02.460 I don't know if it

00:47:03.920 works the same in

00:47:04.580 Russia, but I

00:47:06.880 wouldn't be surprised.

00:47:09.080 You know, people are

00:47:09.860 people, mostly.

00:47:11.940 So I would imagine

00:47:13.240 that the psychology of

00:47:15.100 the Russian people

00:47:16.660 changed.

00:47:17.600 But because of the

00:47:18.700 nature of the war, it's

00:47:19.620 sort of cousin-on-cousin

00:47:20.860 war.

00:47:21.660 I don't know if that

00:47:22.860 makes them want to

00:47:23.580 fight harder.

00:47:25.120 It certainly would in

00:47:26.120 America.

00:47:26.780 If anybody hits

00:47:28.220 American soil, we just

00:47:30.380 open our pocketbooks and

00:47:31.840 say, whatever this

00:47:33.120 costs, hey, military,

00:47:36.540 whatever this costs, go

00:47:39.040 do that.

00:47:40.640 It's going to be really

00:47:41.660 expensive.

00:47:42.660 Yeah, go do that. 0.86

00:47:44.140 Go do that. 0.52

00:47:45.320 We'll probably be 0.87

00:47:46.120 killing a lot of 0.99

00:47:46.680 citizens and innocent

00:47:48.000 people in the process.

00:47:50.380 Okay.

00:47:52.260 Right?

00:47:52.680 Because it's the

00:47:53.200 homeland.

00:47:55.520 All right.

00:47:56.840 So I think that those

00:47:58.080 attacks are successful

00:48:00.060 psychologically.

00:48:01.040 Probably a good idea.

00:48:03.020 I think it's funny that

00:48:04.140 four out of seven of the

00:48:05.280 GOP candidates for

00:48:07.140 president are people of

00:48:08.280 color.

00:48:09.860 Four out of seven.

00:48:13.240 That's pretty good.

00:48:15.320 Right?

00:48:16.520 You got your Tim Scott,

00:48:17.580 your Larry Elder,

00:48:19.820 your...

00:48:20.040 you've got obviously

00:48:24.780 Ramaswamy and who am I

00:48:28.240 forgetting?

00:48:30.040 Nikki Haley.

00:48:31.000 Yeah.

00:48:31.360 And Nikki Haley.

00:48:32.560 So the top, the only three

00:48:35.240 who were announced for

00:48:36.240 Democrats are three white 0.80

00:48:38.500 people.

00:48:39.740 So the Democrats are running

00:48:41.700 three white people and the

00:48:44.700 Republicans, all those big old 0.99

00:48:46.860 racists, four out of seven 0.98

00:48:49.060 candidates for people of

00:48:50.200 color.

00:48:51.340 Four out of seven.

00:48:53.580 But at least the Democrats

00:48:55.160 have more women vote, women 1.00

00:48:56.940 running, right?

00:48:58.540 Nope.

00:48:59.620 It's a tie.

00:49:01.280 It's a tie.

00:49:01.920 They got Marianne Williams and

00:49:03.920 the right has Nikki Haley.

00:49:06.900 So why is it that people vote

00:49:09.180 for Democrats?

00:49:09.940 Is it for increased diversity?

00:49:15.320 Now, I love the look of that

00:49:18.440 because it's so counter-narrative.

00:49:23.560 And if Trump were to select Tim

00:49:27.220 Scott as his running mate, then

00:49:29.560 that's super anti-narrative.

00:49:32.540 Mike Pence, I think, didn't help

00:49:34.040 in terms of the brand.

00:49:36.100 He was a great vice president.

00:49:37.920 Stayed out of trouble.

00:49:38.640 But Tim Scott would actually

00:49:41.040 help.

00:49:42.360 I mean, he would be an

00:49:43.620 addition to the whole brand

00:49:46.420 that would be very substantial,

00:49:48.940 I think.

00:49:49.240 More so than most vice

00:49:50.500 presidents.

00:49:52.880 So, anyway, that's funny.

00:49:56.420 Here's an update on Bud Light.

00:49:58.440 Apparently, they're having so

00:49:59.420 much trouble selling Bud Light

00:50:00.920 now.

00:50:01.900 And some of it's going bad on

00:50:03.720 the shelves.

00:50:04.340 If you wait too long, you can't

00:50:05.560 sell it.

00:50:05.900 You have to throw it away.

00:50:06.580 And so, Anheuser-Busch is

00:50:09.140 offering all these rebates and

00:50:11.580 stuff to the retailers.

00:50:13.640 And some of the rebates are so

00:50:15.020 big that the beer is free.

00:50:17.940 And it actually says so.

00:50:19.300 After rebate, it's free.

00:50:22.440 So, they went from selling beer

00:50:25.560 to having to lower the price of

00:50:28.600 their beer to now lowering the

00:50:31.360 price of the beer to free.

00:50:32.500 What happens if free doesn't

00:50:34.780 work?

00:50:37.460 Well, if history is at a judge,

00:50:40.000 what's going to happen is that if

00:50:42.020 they can't give it away for free,

00:50:44.620 they'll probably team up with Big 0.55

00:50:47.320 Pharma and they'll tell people

00:50:51.740 that Bud Light is rumored to cure

00:50:54.540 COVID as effectively as ivermectin

00:50:57.660 and hydroxychloroquine combined.

00:51:01.440 And then Big Pharma will have to

00:51:04.840 support Bud Light and not only

00:51:07.780 support it, but it might become

00:51:09.540 mandatory.

00:51:11.100 It might become mandatory.

00:51:13.280 So, I can see a place where once

00:51:17.220 Big Pharma realizes that...

00:51:19.660 Anyway, you see where I'm going.

00:51:24.860 I don't have to beat that joke

00:51:27.760 into the ground.

00:51:29.300 Yeah, that's where it's going.

00:51:30.400 It went from you have to buy it to

00:51:32.120 we'll pay you to drink it to

00:51:34.020 it's going to be mandatory.

00:51:36.080 And you have to drink at least a

00:51:38.400 case of Bud Light before you're

00:51:39.760 allowed to operate a motor vehicle

00:51:41.400 because of COVID.

00:51:43.420 All right, I read an interesting

00:51:47.820 article by Helen Andrews in the

00:51:49.760 American Conservative.

00:51:52.040 Apparently there are two very

00:51:54.720 important lawsuits going on.

00:51:56.820 The first one in California where

00:51:59.020 they're trying to get rid of the SAT

00:52:00.640 and the ACT tests for college

00:52:03.720 admissions.

00:52:05.080 Do you know why?

00:52:05.940 It's so that they can get more

00:52:07.440 minority participation because some

00:52:10.400 groups do not do well on those entry

00:52:12.320 exams.

00:52:13.420 In fact, a study in 2013 showed that

00:52:20.440 if Harvard had not used affirmative

00:52:25.360 action, in other words, if they just

00:52:27.380 let people in based on their scores

00:52:29.640 and their objective performance, that

00:52:33.300 Harvard would have had 43% Asian, 38% 0.90

00:52:38.980 white, and 0.7% black.

00:52:43.420 So although there were only 5.6% Asians in

00:52:46.480 America, they would have been 43% of 1.00

00:52:49.640 Harvard.

00:52:54.040 And then blacks would be less than 1%. 0.89

00:52:57.360 So that's what it would be if they used.

00:53:01.580 So they're trying to get rid of the test.

00:53:04.640 But also in Yale, I guess Yale's in trouble.

00:53:08.320 Because Asian Americans and whites have only one-tenth to one-fourth of the 0.94

00:53:16.780 likelihood of admission compared to black American applicants.

00:53:21.600 Imagine that.

00:53:22.380 Imagine being, well, you probably don't have to imagine it if you are.

00:53:25.960 But Asian Americans having a one-tenth the chance of getting into an Ivy League school, one-tenth

00:53:34.620 the chance with higher qualifications.

00:53:38.420 Higher qualifications, but only one-tenth the chance.

00:53:42.480 I don't think that big colleges can survive.

00:53:48.440 This is a really bad look.

00:53:51.100 It's just terrible.

00:53:52.760 Now, one of the things that DeSantis said

00:53:54.940 in his announcement

00:53:58.220 is that he would use the Department of Education

00:54:01.120 to take accreditation away from universities

00:54:06.240 that were woke.

00:54:09.520 So if a university was promoting woke stuff,

00:54:12.660 they wouldn't be accredited.

00:54:13.960 At the moment, it's opposite.

00:54:16.160 At the moment, you have to be woke

00:54:17.940 to get accredited.

00:54:21.920 Now, the problem with this plan,

00:54:24.280 it sounds brilliant on the surface,

00:54:25.760 the problem is that

00:54:26.680 as soon as there's a Democrat president,

00:54:29.640 did they just reverse it back again?

00:54:32.440 Maybe not.

00:54:33.700 Because wherever you're at becomes a little bit sticky.

00:54:36.240 It's hard to change things.

00:54:37.760 Maybe if you change it,

00:54:39.140 it could stay the way DeSantis wants it.

00:54:42.080 Maybe.

00:54:43.100 But I had never heard that idea before.

00:54:46.020 I've only heard that people wanted

00:54:48.600 to get rid of the Department of Education.

00:54:51.260 But DeSantis says,

00:54:52.400 let's keep it and use it as a weapon.

00:54:54.480 And I thought,

00:54:55.040 is that brilliant?

00:54:59.620 Give me a fact check on that.

00:55:01.800 Because, well, when I heard it,

00:55:03.040 it sounded brilliant and innovative

00:55:05.080 and smarter than anything anybody else was doing.

00:55:08.620 But is there a problem with it?

00:55:10.240 That's not obvious.

00:55:15.820 All schools in California would close.

00:55:20.600 Let the states decide.

00:55:22.460 Well, if you let the states decide,

00:55:25.460 well, I guess that makes sense constitutionally,

00:55:27.680 of course.

00:55:28.040 But I wonder how it would fall out.

00:55:31.500 You'd still have a lot of woke universities.

00:55:40.460 Maybe, wouldn't it be interesting

00:55:42.780 if a university marketed itself as non-woke

00:55:47.320 and see what happened?

00:55:48.220 It's probably too early to do that,

00:55:51.540 but I think that's where we're heading.

00:55:54.180 Anyway,

00:55:55.140 how many of you would agree with the fact

00:55:57.320 that wokeness has hit some kind of a peak, 0.99

00:56:00.300 which doesn't say there won't be more of it, right?

00:56:03.540 I'm not talking about an end.

00:56:05.600 I'm talking about a peak.

00:56:07.560 After the peak,

00:56:08.380 there's lots, lots, lots more.

00:56:10.440 But it would be slowly declining

00:56:12.560 in power and relevance.

00:56:14.560 Because here's what I see.

00:56:15.540 I see now that it's now safe

00:56:18.000 to challenge woke ideas directly.

00:56:21.240 And I don't think it was safe before.

00:56:23.740 Would you agree?

00:56:26.080 There's just a little bit more you can say

00:56:28.440 than you could have said even one year ago.

00:56:31.400 And partly that's because of the boycotts.

00:56:33.820 I think the boycotts work.

00:56:36.680 I'm usually anti-boycott,

00:56:38.880 but it seems pretty clear that the Bud Light

00:56:41.360 and now the Target, you know,

00:56:43.040 Target has sold some trans-friendly clothing

00:56:45.840 that people on the right don't like.

00:56:50.500 And by the way,

00:56:51.260 I don't really understand the Target one.

00:56:53.840 Because the Target one,

00:56:54.980 I guess they were accused of selling

00:56:56.600 tuck-friendly swimwear to minors,

00:57:00.840 but they weren't.

00:57:02.460 They only had adult sizes.

00:57:03.720 So do you really care

00:57:05.740 if Target sells clothes to trans?

00:57:10.360 Like, why is that a problem?

00:57:12.900 Adult clothes to adult trans? 1.00

00:57:15.540 How in the world is that a problem?

00:57:19.180 Yes, you have a problem with that.

00:57:20.920 But why?

00:57:22.460 But why do you have a problem

00:57:23.780 if other people want to wear clothes

00:57:25.600 like the store is full of clothes

00:57:28.140 that I don't wear?

00:57:28.900 Do you care that stores carry

00:57:32.500 both men's and women's clothes

00:57:34.180 because you only wear one of them?

00:57:37.940 I don't know how you could be mad about that.

00:57:40.980 But independent of whether

00:57:43.000 the boycott makes sense

00:57:44.680 or doesn't make sense,

00:57:46.180 and I think the boycott was based on

00:57:48.300 people thought it was kids' clothes.

00:57:52.280 Now, the fact check is that

00:57:53.580 it was never kids' clothes.

00:57:54.680 They do have, I think,

00:57:58.380 LGBTQ-friendly clothes,

00:58:01.420 but the tuck one for the trans,

00:58:04.420 that was adult sizes only.

00:58:06.200 That's their defense.

00:58:07.740 I'll just tell you what they're saying.

00:58:09.760 I can't say that they're telling the truth.

00:58:13.880 It was the in-your-face display.

00:58:17.840 I'm telling you the truth.

00:58:19.000 They did sell clothes for LGBTQ children.

00:58:26.460 True.

00:58:27.820 The tuck-it swimsuits,

00:58:29.480 which were the thing that got featured in the news,

00:58:32.320 were only adult sizes.

00:58:34.300 True or false?

00:58:36.440 Michael Scott Howard said,

00:58:37.920 I'm 100% incorrect.

00:58:41.380 What do you say?

00:58:43.320 Now, I think that you're believing

00:58:45.000 your news sources

00:58:46.060 when you say I'm wrong, right?

00:58:47.480 You're saying I'm wrong

00:58:49.060 because you saw a news source

00:58:50.420 that said something else?

00:58:52.700 Did Matt Walsh debunk it?

00:58:57.560 So you're saying that the fact check was wrong.

00:59:03.880 All right.

00:59:08.800 I would say it's...

00:59:11.680 Here's my trick

00:59:15.420 for identifying the fake news.

00:59:19.160 Suppose you had never heard this story.

00:59:21.520 So here's just a way to identify fake news.

00:59:24.160 Suppose you'd never heard the story

00:59:25.500 about the target thing,

00:59:26.540 so you don't know anything.

00:59:28.220 And then somebody came in and said,

00:59:30.200 hey, they're selling tuck swimwear to children.

00:59:35.120 Would you believe it?

00:59:36.640 If you hadn't heard anything about this story

00:59:38.720 and you heard they were selling

00:59:40.540 tuck-friendly swimwear to children,

00:59:42.540 would you believe it?

00:59:43.320 The answer is no.

00:59:45.660 You would not believe it.

00:59:48.100 That's probably what is true.

00:59:51.500 If I told you they were selling

00:59:52.980 LGBTQ-friendly clothing to children,

00:59:56.520 meaning it could have messages

00:59:58.060 and colors and images on it,

01:00:00.000 would you think that sounded impossible

01:00:01.940 or true?

01:00:03.860 Pretty normal.

01:00:05.240 I would think that was true.

01:00:06.280 So the common-sense view of this

01:00:10.480 is that they did, in fact,

01:00:12.920 promote LGBTQ, let's say,

01:00:15.740 lifestyles and fashion.

01:00:18.800 And that's not even that strange

01:00:20.840 or weird or anything.

01:00:23.140 But if you told me

01:00:24.520 that they really sold

01:00:25.840 tuck-friendly swimwear to children,

01:00:29.460 I'm going to say

01:00:30.760 I don't believe that ever was a thing.

01:00:33.380 I don't believe it.

01:00:34.000 Now, can we test this?

01:00:37.680 How about we test it?

01:00:39.720 So I'm going to make

01:00:40.700 just one very narrow claim

01:00:43.400 that you cannot produce

01:00:45.540 a photo of a child's size

01:00:49.760 for a tuck-friendly swimwear.

01:00:53.840 If you can produce that,

01:00:55.460 you know,

01:00:55.720 and it says target on it,

01:00:56.860 and it's obviously a child's size,

01:00:58.500 then I would like to correct myself.

01:01:00.580 So I'm open to being corrected.

01:01:04.240 Will you take that bet?

01:01:06.420 Let's take this as a challenge

01:01:08.060 just to see how the filter works, right?

01:01:11.900 So a number of you

01:01:13.020 are claiming superior information.

01:01:16.960 So when you were fact-checking me here,

01:01:19.200 it's because you believed

01:01:20.300 you had better information than I have,

01:01:22.440 more current information,

01:01:24.000 or more accurate, right?

01:01:25.580 That might be true.

01:01:26.720 So if you'll allow me,

01:01:30.420 I'd like to say that might be true.

01:01:32.700 That could be the whole story.

01:01:34.740 However, it's a good test of my filter.

01:01:37.500 My filter says

01:01:38.400 I'm not even going to look for that story.

01:01:40.320 I wouldn't even fact-check it

01:01:41.740 because I would believe

01:01:43.000 it's so obvious it's not true,

01:01:44.960 I would never even look for the truth of it.

01:01:47.540 I would just assume it wasn't.

01:01:48.840 But you're claiming

01:01:51.800 that I'm wrong with that filter

01:01:53.420 and that it really did happen.

01:01:55.500 So if you can produce for me,

01:01:57.320 maybe on Twitter or somewhere else,

01:01:59.180 a credible picture

01:02:01.580 of a child-size tuck swimwear

01:02:05.260 sold at Target,

01:02:07.300 then you're right.

01:02:09.320 Do you accept the challenge?

01:02:11.620 It's very simple.

01:02:12.960 You just have to show me one example

01:02:14.340 and then you're right.

01:02:15.900 There's nothing else to say.

01:02:17.100 And even if it's just one store, one time,

01:02:20.120 you're 100% right.

01:02:21.500 Can we agree on that?

01:02:22.960 I won't try to weasel out

01:02:24.640 by saying,

01:02:26.180 oh, that was one store.

01:02:28.140 Can we agree?

01:02:29.420 If it was even one store,

01:02:31.020 you're right.

01:02:32.860 My belief is

01:02:33.820 it never happened in any store anywhere.

01:02:38.560 So let's test it.

01:02:40.080 And if I'm wrong, I'm wrong,

01:02:41.500 and then I'll tell you.

01:02:42.880 Simple as that.

01:02:44.300 I'm not going to be the guy

01:02:45.360 who just needs to be right

01:02:47.080 about tucked swimwear.

01:02:49.720 Like, I don't have any...

01:02:50.640 I have no ego invested

01:02:51.920 in that whatsoever.

01:02:53.240 But I'm very curious

01:02:54.440 whether the filter

01:02:55.300 is working this time.

01:02:57.860 It might not be.

01:02:59.140 It might not be.

01:03:00.860 Crazier things have happened,

01:03:02.360 but not often.

01:03:06.060 All right.

01:03:06.660 All right.

01:03:10.020 Are you gaslighting?

01:03:11.400 Target took it down two days ago.

01:03:13.960 So, case.

01:03:15.720 Somebody says,

01:03:16.380 are you gaslighting?

01:03:17.180 Target took it down two days ago.

01:03:20.700 Are you saying that,

01:03:22.800 therefore,

01:03:23.000 it would be hard to get a picture

01:03:24.000 because they already took it away?

01:03:26.240 Oh, well, okay.

01:03:27.680 Maybe.

01:03:28.840 No, I'm not gaslighting you.

01:03:30.720 So I promise you,

01:03:32.600 I'm not gaslighting you.

01:03:34.580 I'm simply using my rule 0.91

01:03:38.200 that if something sounds ridiculous,

01:03:40.880 it probably didn't happen.

01:03:43.000 That's all.

01:03:43.840 That's my entire intellectual approach.

01:03:48.460 If it sounds ridiculous 0.63

01:03:49.820 and it's in the news, 0.72

01:03:51.900 it probably didn't happen.

01:03:56.320 Here it is.

01:03:57.520 Somebody says,

01:03:58.160 well, I can't check it

01:03:59.120 without turning off the thing.

01:04:00.900 I'll look at that yesterday.

01:04:01.640 Yeah, you have to watch out

01:04:11.380 for it being photoshopped. 0.97

01:04:14.620 It sounds ridiculous 0.99

01:04:15.760 to give porn to kids. 0.99

01:04:17.240 Well, if it was porn, 0.99

01:04:19.280 it'd be ridiculous. 0.96

01:04:20.480 If they thought they were 0.91

01:04:21.640 educating them on sex education,

01:04:24.120 we've had debates forever

01:04:26.600 about what is too young

01:04:28.920 and too far.

01:04:29.540 So that's not completely crazy

01:04:33.600 that somebody had a different opinion

01:04:36.600 of how young and how far.

01:04:39.460 That's a discussion

01:04:40.540 that's been going on forever.

01:04:43.620 But the tuck swimwear

01:04:45.240 would be kind of new.

01:04:51.160 All right.

01:04:52.800 Sent me a link.

01:04:53.680 What would you consider

01:04:56.180 a believable link on this?

01:05:00.740 Oh, let me do this.

01:05:02.900 Let me see what Bing says.

01:05:07.000 I know, I know.

01:05:08.600 I'm not saying that Bing is subjective.

01:05:10.700 I'm just curious what they say about it.

01:05:13.320 All right.

01:05:13.740 I'll say,

01:05:14.440 did Target

01:05:16.780 sell

01:05:19.120 trans-tuck

01:05:22.800 friendly

01:05:24.400 swimwear?

01:05:28.200 What do you think

01:05:28.860 it's going to tell me?

01:05:30.800 Swimwear

01:05:31.160 for children.

01:05:38.780 You know it's going to say no, right?

01:05:41.340 No matter what the real answer is,

01:05:42.780 it's going to say no.

01:05:45.500 Snopes.

01:05:47.940 Let's try Snopes. 0.97

01:05:48.700 I know.

01:05:49.940 I know.

01:05:50.480 You don't have to tell me.

01:05:51.420 You don't have to tell me

01:05:52.340 you don't believe Snopes.

01:05:53.300 I'm just telling you what they said.

01:05:56.260 Because if Snopes agreed with you,

01:05:57.880 then I'd say,

01:05:58.640 well, that's

01:05:59.020 pretty...

01:06:01.780 All right.

01:06:08.160 So they say it's false.

01:06:11.020 So Snopes says,

01:06:12.760 Target's 2023 Pride collection

01:06:14.620 includes items labeled in stores

01:06:16.280 as talk-friendly,

01:06:17.560 but none of these are available

01:06:19.140 in kid sizes,

01:06:20.440 designed for children,

01:06:21.380 or marketed to children.

01:06:23.560 But Matt Walsh said,

01:06:24.860 it's a video.

01:06:31.060 A viral video of Matt Walsh's

01:06:34.240 refers to two items

01:06:35.520 with a...

01:06:36.760 All right.

01:06:38.840 So this is probably

01:06:40.040 what you're talking about.

01:06:41.060 If you saw Matt Walsh...

01:06:43.060 So they're talking about

01:06:44.920 what Matt Walsh says.

01:06:46.640 So the viral video

01:06:47.640 is referencing two items

01:06:48.940 with a tag highlighting

01:06:50.340 the bathing suit's

01:06:51.300 tuck-friendly construction,

01:06:52.360 blah, blah, blah.

01:06:58.200 Several viral videos said

01:06:59.780 you will find these

01:07:00.620 in the kids section.

01:07:02.700 Both these products

01:07:03.840 can be found

01:07:04.700 on their website.

01:07:06.580 Neither of them

01:07:07.260 is designed for children.

01:07:09.600 Claims that the products

01:07:10.640 were for kids

01:07:11.320 appears to come from

01:07:12.280 an apparent disbelief

01:07:13.460 in the notion

01:07:14.060 that some adults are small.

01:07:17.760 And the fact that

01:07:18.860 some Pride collections

01:07:19.840 were near

01:07:20.520 a children's clothing section.

01:07:22.360 So Walsh says

01:07:25.920 either those sizes

01:07:26.900 are for kids

01:07:27.800 or for very, very,

01:07:30.360 very small adults.

01:07:37.120 So I was once married

01:07:38.840 to a size zero woman. 1.00

01:07:43.280 And it was so annoying

01:07:45.460 that she could pack

01:07:47.520 all the clothes

01:07:48.720 she would need

01:07:49.160 for a two-week vacation

01:07:50.320 and a carry-on.

01:07:51.520 like 100%

01:07:53.560 of all of her clothes

01:07:54.420 could be squished down

01:07:56.020 to like something

01:07:56.760 you could put

01:07:57.240 in your hand

01:07:57.800 and it would be like

01:07:58.880 three weeks

01:07:59.440 of different outfits.

01:08:05.460 Did she tuck?

01:08:07.780 No.

01:08:09.020 Well,

01:08:09.720 so does it come down

01:08:11.120 to...

01:08:11.520 Oh,

01:08:17.180 I was going to say

01:08:17.800 something terrible.

01:08:19.480 I was going to say

01:08:20.360 something terrible,

01:08:21.760 but I pulled back.

01:08:27.460 Let me think about it

01:08:28.540 for a minute

01:08:29.000 because it's terrible.

01:08:32.020 I can't do it.

01:08:33.220 Can't do it.

01:08:35.960 It was pretty funny

01:08:37.000 in my mind,

01:08:37.680 but I can't do it.

01:08:38.460 All right.

01:08:39.820 I might tell

01:08:40.300 the locals people

01:08:41.080 after I get off

01:08:41.820 of YouTube.

01:08:42.800 All right.

01:08:43.160 I'll make a deal.

01:08:44.320 I'll tell the people

01:08:45.000 and locals

01:08:45.460 because they pay

01:08:46.040 a subscription

01:08:46.640 so they can get

01:08:47.820 the good stuff.

01:08:48.720 I'll also tell you

01:08:49.460 a little bit

01:08:49.920 what I said

01:08:50.660 I wouldn't tell you

01:08:51.340 yesterday

01:08:51.780 because I told

01:08:52.960 some of the people

01:08:53.500 in the man cave

01:08:54.240 live stream yesterday

01:08:55.300 that there was

01:08:56.700 something I couldn't

01:08:57.320 tell them.

01:08:58.120 But I found a way

01:08:59.120 I could tell you

01:08:59.740 without violating

01:09:02.080 any ethical hang-ups.

01:09:05.000 All right.

01:09:05.420 That's all for now.

01:09:08.140 Best live stream

01:09:09.060 you've ever seen.

01:09:10.580 Until tomorrow.

01:09:12.060 Bye, YouTube.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - May 25, 2023

Episode 2119 Scott Adams： DeSantis & Musk, Trans Issues Boycotts, Decoupling, Trump's Meme Game

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript