Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 2120 Scott Adams： Trump vs DeSantis, RFK Jr. vs Biden, Feinstein Decomposing, Target, More

00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to another highlight of civilization.

00:00:07.660 It's called Coffee with Scott Adams, and I don't think you've ever had a better time

00:00:11.460 than you're going to have in the next hour or so.

00:00:15.020 And if you'd like this experience to go to levels that nobody ever dreamed were possible,

00:00:19.820 all you need is a cup of margarine glass, a tankard chalice stein, a canteen jug or flask,

00:00:25.320 a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.

00:00:31.080 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day,

00:00:34.060 the thing that makes everything better. It's a little oxycontin in there, too.

00:00:39.060 Oxytocin, not oxycontin. Yeah, oxycontin, you're on your own.

00:00:43.020 But this will give you oxytocin. Oxytocin. Don't get those confused.

00:00:47.860 Simultaneous sip. Happening now.

00:00:50.040 Now.

00:00:50.140 Delightful.

00:00:59.520 Well, Finland has a new problem, and their new problem is they have so much green,

00:01:06.720 cheap electricity that the price temporarily went negative.

00:01:12.240 Now, in the real world, it wasn't actually negative.

00:01:15.660 But the price of electricity basically dropped to zero.

00:01:21.640 Do you know why?

00:01:23.280 Take a guess why Finland's electricity went to zero.

00:01:30.040 Is there any idea?

00:01:31.620 And also, it was green.

00:01:35.120 It was totally green.

00:01:37.800 Nuclear. Yeah, they just opened a big nuclear plant.

00:01:40.360 Now, they also had lots of water this year.

00:01:44.480 So their hydro, you know, their dams and stuff, also were producing record electricity.

00:01:50.660 But at the same time that the nuclear plant went online and started just pumping it out.

00:01:56.380 So for a while, Finland's energy costs for consumers was almost zero.

00:02:03.860 So, and how did they get there?

00:02:08.080 They did the obvious things.

00:02:10.800 Nuclear.

00:02:11.940 And, you know, hydro if you have it.

00:02:14.760 So, are you still worried about climate change?

00:02:19.320 If you could drive your electricity costs down to close to zero,

00:02:23.280 at the same time that you're getting rid of all the, you know, all carbon emissions?

00:02:28.380 I don't know.

00:02:30.160 I feel like we have a solution here, and it's just screaming at us.

00:02:35.040 Nuclear.

00:02:37.880 Well, I saw an article that said Bill Gates thinks that he doesn't know who's going to own the AI market.

00:02:45.440 It could be a big company like Microsoft.

00:02:47.360 He hopes so.

00:02:48.580 But it could be some startup.

00:02:50.260 And he mentioned one in particular.

00:02:52.280 A company is called Inflection.

00:02:54.220 And they already have a little app called Pi, P-I.

00:02:59.760 And here's what caught my attention.

00:03:03.020 Number one, that Bill Gates called it down specifically.

00:03:06.740 And he said he'd used it, and it looks like it could be one of the winners.

00:03:11.680 One of the ones that will really be the thing.

00:03:13.800 Now, he described it as a personal agent.

00:03:17.660 Basically like a little AI personality that can talk to you.

00:03:20.840 So I said to myself, whoa, that sounds good.

00:03:26.280 If Bill Gates says this might be the one, and obviously he's tapped into everything that's going on,

00:03:31.320 I'm going to download that thing, and I'm going to see what makes this better than all the rest.

00:03:37.720 And let me tell you, I was blown away.

00:03:42.400 Blown away.

00:03:43.860 Do you know what it can do?

00:03:44.780 It can talk to you as stupidly as all the other AIs. 0.99

00:03:50.560 That's it.

00:03:51.980 That's all it can do.

00:03:53.660 It can talk to you.

00:03:55.200 It can't make any important opinions because it's not allowed.

00:03:59.700 It doesn't have access to the Internet.

00:04:03.760 Just hold this in your mind.

00:04:05.820 Bill Gates was blown away by it.

00:04:08.500 Doesn't even have access to the Internet.

00:04:10.260 And it doesn't say anything that Chad GPT doesn't say, or Bing AI, or all the rest.

00:04:16.420 And none of them can do anything useful because they're not allowed to do anything provocative,

00:04:21.100 which is the only thing that we care about.

00:04:24.160 And he was blown away by it.

00:04:27.180 Now, here's a...

00:04:29.100 I'm going to connect some conspiracy theory dots.

00:04:32.240 Are you ready?

00:04:33.200 I'm going to go full conspiracy theory.

00:04:35.400 What I say after this point is not backed by fact.

00:04:40.640 Are you okay with that?

00:04:42.420 What I say next is not backed by fact.

00:04:46.020 Pure speculation.

00:04:47.960 No more likely than the moon landing was faked, for example.

00:04:52.560 Bad example because a lot of you think it was faked.

00:04:55.440 But going pure conspiracy theory.

00:04:58.380 One of the founders of this app that Bill Gates seems to think is good is Reid Hoffman.

00:05:06.520 Do you know who Reid Hoffman is?

00:05:08.920 So he was the founder of LinkedIn, now sold to Microsoft.

00:05:12.440 So he's a multi-billionaire.

00:05:14.920 Also a famed investor.

00:05:17.000 You know, one of the early Facebook people, early on Airbnb.

00:05:20.900 So he's one of the most famous investment geniuses.

00:05:25.260 But he's more than that.

00:05:26.240 He's also one of the people who came up with some of the social media algorithms that make

00:05:31.800 Facebook work, such as recommending your friends and turning it into a network effect.

00:05:38.680 So Reid Hoffman is sort of the...

00:05:41.040 You could sort of say he was the father of the network effect, where if you get into an

00:05:46.280 app, it's hard to go anywhere else.

00:05:48.380 That's what LinkedIn was.

00:05:49.760 If you're on LinkedIn and somebody else started a similar app, you weren't going to go there.

00:05:56.240 Because all your friends were in LinkedIn.

00:05:58.300 And LinkedIn would keep suggesting you, you know, to get other people in there.

00:06:02.520 Same as Facebook.

00:06:03.880 So here's the other thing about Reid Hoffman.

00:06:06.760 Do you recognize his name from before any of these things?

00:06:12.200 Do you know where he first succeeded?

00:06:16.140 Now you're thinking of a different Reid.

00:06:17.680 Netflix is a different...

00:06:19.180 That's a different Reid.

00:06:20.020 He's one of the PayPal guys.

00:06:29.060 So the so-called PayPal mafia, which includes Elon Musk, and it's people who went on to become

00:06:39.800 billionaires.

00:06:40.340 So did you ever wonder how PayPal succeeded?

00:06:47.400 I was always curious about that.

00:06:49.400 Imagine being the first startup that makes an app that can move money around.

00:06:55.620 How in the world did that ever get past regulators?

00:07:00.080 How in the world did that get past the banking industry?

00:07:05.040 Do you ever wonder about that?

00:07:06.120 Because the technology that PayPal had was probably trivial, you know, in terms of what was possible

00:07:12.760 at the time.

00:07:13.740 It probably wasn't hard to make the app.

00:07:16.540 What was hard is to get it in the market, get people to trust it, get banks to, you know,

00:07:23.620 not try to stop it or not succeed, and get the government to say, yeah, you can do this.

00:07:29.540 It's almost impossible.

00:07:33.880 Have you noticed that the PayPal people all have really good powers of persuasion?

00:07:39.600 And that they went on to start companies which you'd say to yourself, you know, I don't even

00:07:44.640 think that company could have succeeded unless the government was somehow, you know, a little

00:07:50.580 bit on their side, right?

00:07:52.660 Didn't you think that about Tesla?

00:07:55.960 Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there very large subsidies?

00:07:59.540 They're government subsidies, right?

00:08:02.160 So Tesla basically can exist because of the government.

00:08:06.720 How about SpaceX?

00:08:10.020 Would SpaceX be a viable company without government contracts?

00:08:14.780 I actually don't know the answer to that question.

00:08:17.300 I'm thinking no.

00:08:18.720 I'm thinking probably not.

00:08:20.820 Or at the very least, there must be incredible hurdles that you have to pass to get into the

00:08:27.260 space business.

00:08:27.960 So we see a pattern here of people who are involved in the PayPal mafia seem to be able

00:08:36.900 to create new companies.

00:08:38.640 They have that same weird quality that PayPal had, which is, how did you get the government

00:08:43.620 to go along with this?

00:08:46.500 You ever wonder about that?

00:08:47.500 How in the world did they get past all those regulations and stuff?

00:08:53.560 Well, I'll give you one hypothesis.

00:08:58.220 They're CIA-backed and always have been.

00:09:01.420 Now, I'm not saying I have any, I have no data, no information whatsoever to back that hypothesis.

00:09:14.120 But there is a pattern, there's a pattern of success that has that weird quality to it that

00:09:19.420 the government really had to be on your side in some important way.

00:09:22.460 I don't know how you do that over and over again, unless, unless the CIA wants you to.

00:09:32.000 Now, why would the CIA do a thing like that?

00:09:35.120 Like, why would they do that?

00:09:37.160 Well, why would the CIA want to know that people were moving money around in a digital way?

00:09:45.140 Of course they want to know that.

00:09:48.680 They want to know who's doing illegal things.

00:09:51.600 So if people are paying cash, you can't track them.

00:09:54.660 But if they start paying on a digital app, you can catch all the bad guys.

00:10:00.900 So of course the CIA would want to be a backer to any kind of digital movement of money.

00:10:07.060 Obviously.

00:10:07.780 Of course they would.

00:10:08.940 That doesn't mean they did.

00:10:10.440 I'm not saying they did.

00:10:11.540 I'm just saying they would have an obvious incentive to do that.

00:10:15.140 And, likewise, the CIA would say, you know, if we don't own space, we're going to be in trouble.

00:10:23.800 So they might say, well, let's get one of our guys to build a serious space industry

00:10:29.780 and we'll make sure the government has enough support that it can succeed.

00:10:35.960 CIA might say, we need to own electric cars.

00:10:40.000 Because if China becomes the only place you can get a good electric car, we're really screwed.

00:10:46.140 So maybe the CIA says, well, let's help cut a little red tape for you here.

00:10:51.820 We'll make sure you get some subsidies so that you can be a proper industry.

00:10:56.840 Now, nothing that I've mentioned so far would be against your interests as a citizen.

00:11:03.780 Would you agree with that?

00:11:04.740 Everything I've described would be for the benefit of the United States.

00:11:10.220 It would be, you know, a little more for the benefit of CIA doing their job, perhaps.

00:11:14.220 But it would all be compatible with your interests, so it's not like something...

00:11:18.540 It's nothing to be alarmed at.

00:11:20.120 But this story where Bill Gates was somehow impressed by an app that has nothing to impress you.

00:11:28.920 There is nothing about that app that's impressive.

00:11:31.920 It's just nothing.

00:11:32.900 But why is Bill Gates pushing it?

00:11:37.080 Bill Gates is sort of mysteriously successful, isn't he?

00:11:41.600 Ever wonder how Bill Gates did so well?

00:11:43.980 Bill Gates' friend of Epstein?

00:11:51.060 Epstein clearly connected.

00:11:54.440 Do you think that maybe one of the reasons that Bill Gates and Epstein met more often than you think they should have...

00:12:00.980 What if it wasn't about sex?

00:12:05.240 What if it was actually because they're both just CIA-involved people?

00:12:11.800 You know, not employees, obviously.

00:12:13.660 But maybe it was just some dark business.

00:12:17.740 It could have been.

00:12:19.140 It could have been.

00:12:20.120 Because I would give you another reason why Bill Gates would do something that seems so obviously dumb.

00:12:26.360 Right?

00:12:26.500 What are the other things that Bill Gates does that are obviously dumb?

00:12:33.180 Name one.

00:12:35.020 It's just something he doesn't do.

00:12:36.860 He just doesn't do dumb things.

00:12:40.180 But continually meeting with Epstein after he'd been convicted is unambiguously dumb, and even he says so.

00:12:47.760 So why do you do dumb things if you don't have to?

00:12:51.360 There's some reason.

00:12:52.380 Now, the reason he's accused of is having some kind of sexual interests in common that would be a little sketchy.

00:13:02.300 That's what we assume.

00:13:03.640 Because that's the obvious thing, right?

00:13:04.940 That's the most obvious thing.

00:13:05.860 Or blackmail.

00:13:06.920 Those are the obvious things.

00:13:08.460 But the less obvious thing is that they might both be obviously connected to intelligence agencies.

00:13:13.860 And they might have had some common work.

00:13:17.000 And that would be something that he could never mention.

00:13:20.980 So he'd be sort of screwed.

00:13:22.440 He'd have to let the sexual impropriety thing just sit there because he can't explain the real one.

00:13:30.300 I remind you that 100% of stories about public figures are false.

00:13:37.460 I know it's hard to believe.

00:13:40.000 But trust me.

00:13:40.900 They're false, at least in terms of being incomplete, where the part that's missing would change how you think about it completely.

00:13:49.600 So when you look at something like Bill Gates, the thing I can guarantee is you don't know the story.

00:13:56.980 Ever.

00:13:58.200 There's always something very important about the story that you think you know that you don't know.

00:14:05.000 That is just always the case.

00:14:06.660 And the more public the figure is, the more true that is.

00:14:11.360 And the more complicated their situation is, the more true that is.

00:14:15.980 So you don't know anything about Bill Gates.

00:14:18.780 It would be impossible.

00:14:20.220 Because the news won't tell you.

00:14:22.160 He's not going to tell you.

00:14:24.160 How would you know?

00:14:25.520 There's no way to actually know what the hell is going on with Bill Gates ever.

00:14:31.200 If you think you ever knew, you didn't.

00:14:33.140 Because there's no accurate news about public figures, ever.

00:14:37.940 None about me, that's for sure.

00:14:40.660 All right.

00:14:41.420 Well, I'll just put that out there that it's weird that this app is getting some attention from people who are interestingly similar in pattern to people who might have an intelligence connection.

00:14:56.280 Just by pattern.

00:14:57.360 So just to say it again, none of what I said about any of these characters is based on any facts that I'm aware of.

00:15:07.420 It's just pattern recognition.

00:15:09.580 That's it.

00:15:10.100 Which is a weak form of predicting the future.

00:15:12.460 But there it is.

00:15:13.660 I'll put it out there.

00:15:14.320 Have you come to this conclusion yet?

00:15:21.880 I know we've all been heading there, so I think maybe you were all there before me.

00:15:26.160 But sometimes you just have to put a thought in words that we were all thinking, and then we can go, oh yeah, that's it.

00:15:35.020 You just put that in words just right.

00:15:37.280 So I may have done this with this tweet somewhat accidentally, because so many people liked it.

00:15:42.560 I didn't think people would like it that much.

00:15:46.980 But I tweeted that the legacy media, its only purpose is to prevent citizens from finding out what the government is doing.

00:15:58.860 Didn't it used to be the case?

00:16:02.080 Didn't it used to be the case that you thought the news was to tell you what the government is doing?

00:16:08.440 Didn't you?

00:16:08.860 But it's very clear that that's no longer the case.

00:16:13.460 The legacy media is in the business of preventing you from knowing what the government is doing.

00:16:20.880 The legacy media.

00:16:22.560 Now, fortunately, we have social media, and there's competition in the field.

00:16:26.940 So, you know, you can get some of the story.

00:16:31.300 But that's literally their purpose.

00:16:35.680 Because the news that isn't about politics isn't that interesting either.

00:16:40.520 Have you noticed that?

00:16:41.860 Yeah, we need to know when a hurricane's coming.

00:16:45.620 But that's not the fascinating news.

00:16:48.380 It's the political stuff that interests us.

00:16:50.280 And that is entirely designed to mislead you.

00:16:57.800 So the legacy media is the phrase I'm going to use for what used to be called the news.

00:17:04.220 Because I don't think news is even...

00:17:08.280 And I'm not using hyperbole here.

00:17:11.000 This is not intended to be an exaggeration.

00:17:13.620 News is the wrong word.

00:17:15.740 Am I wrong?

00:17:16.580 Because news implies that you think it's true.

00:17:23.740 Whereas the legacy media is clearly not in the business of saying things they think are true.

00:17:30.480 I'm not wrong, am I?

00:17:32.300 They're no longer in the business of saying things that even they believe to be true.

00:17:37.000 It's one thing if they're wrong.

00:17:38.960 You know, we accept that people can be wrong about the news.

00:17:41.820 That's not even a big deal.

00:17:43.580 But it's now obvious they're not trying to be right.

00:17:46.580 But that feels different.

00:17:48.720 It's not news.

00:17:50.480 Whatever they're producing couldn't possibly be called news if the idea is to prevent you from knowing what's happening.

00:17:58.000 And clearly that is to prevent you.

00:18:01.880 Well, here's an example of that.

00:18:04.680 If you want some data to support that point,

00:18:07.140 Rasmussen did a poll asking about the Durham report.

00:18:11.600 And when it first asked the questions about, you know, what did people think about the Durham report and the idea that officials in the government were aware from the beginning that the Clinton campaign was going to make up the Russia collusion hoax.

00:18:28.580 Now, when Rasmussen asked people, hey, you know, what do you think should be the penalty?

00:18:43.340 It kind of lined up by politics, right?

00:18:47.100 We expect all the political questions to be roughly Democrats say this, Republicans say that.

00:18:53.020 But they found out that when they primed the people with a one-sentence summary of what the Durham report said, it completely changed the answers to the poll.

00:19:05.400 In other words, the public was so misinformed that they didn't know because they watched legacy media.

00:19:14.120 If you watched legacy media exclusively, you wouldn't even know that the biggest thing ever had happened, which is that the Durham report showed that the people in charge were fully aware that the Russia collusion was a hoax from the start.

00:19:29.440 They always knew it.

00:19:30.740 And so when Rasmussen asked the question before priming people, you know, they have a certain set of answers that line up by politics.

00:19:40.020 But as soon as you tell them the Durham report proved that the government and the FBI knew that the Russia collusion was a hoax, suddenly you get, when told of the Durham conclusion, this is from Rasmussen,

00:19:56.760 when told of the Durham conclusions, 44% of the people who thought Trump might have colluded with Russia, keep in mind that people still think that.

00:20:08.060 44% of the people who still thought Trump had actually colluded with Russia after they were told what the Durham conclusion was, that it was the opposite, it was Hillary's team that made it all up.

00:20:19.220 44% of the people who just weren't aware of the news, as soon as they heard an accurate summary of the news, the Durham report, changed their answer immediately.

00:20:41.020 Because they had never heard the news.

00:20:46.020 And this was the news that, if you could call it news.

00:20:49.420 So this is the story that made me think, holy cow, we no longer live in a world where the news is even trying to be news.

00:20:58.260 It's only trying to prevent you from hearing stories.

00:21:00.560 That's it.

00:21:01.540 It's news prevention.

00:21:02.840 Speaking of polls, there's a Berkeley IGS poll on Feinstein.

00:21:12.700 And as you know, Feinstein is decomposing in her chair and doesn't remember that she was gone for three months from the Senate.

00:21:21.700 Basically, she's completely dysfunctional. 0.99

00:21:23.780 And while we feel human empathy for her situation, she does work for us, right?

00:21:33.580 She works for us, and she's not doing the job. 1.00

00:21:37.920 So those are just facts.

00:21:40.220 But there was a poll.

00:21:42.740 What, well, let me just do a little test on my audience.

00:21:48.100 Let's see if you can get this within two basis points.

00:21:52.620 I'm going to see if you can guess the answer within two.

00:21:55.220 How many people polled do you think favor Feinstein continuing to serve her job to the end of her term?

00:22:04.360 What percentage?

00:22:07.820 Wow, you're very close.

00:22:09.300 And some of you got it exactly.

00:22:10.920 It's 27%.

00:22:12.260 Yeah, about roughly a quarter of the people asked had no problem with a vegetable being a senator.

00:22:21.400 Oh, you'd like a potato to be a senator?

00:22:27.400 Well, one quarter of us are totally on board with that.

00:22:30.900 How about a piece of broccoli?

00:22:32.700 Would you like a piece of broccoli to be your senator?

00:22:35.400 Represent your state?

00:22:37.340 25% or so?

00:22:38.940 27.

00:22:39.900 About a quarter of the people said, yeah, I'll be okay with that.

00:22:43.300 I like a big piece of broccoli representing me in the Senate.

00:22:48.260 All right, so there's that.

00:22:54.240 As you know, the opinion of billionaires in this country are more important than yours.

00:23:02.000 Would you all agree with that?

00:23:04.280 The opinion of billionaires are way more important than your opinion, at least in terms of influencing things.

00:23:10.700 They're not more important in a constitutional sense.

00:23:14.380 They're just more influential.

00:23:15.900 So that makes you wonder, where is Murdoch on all this stuff?

00:23:21.240 Well, Murdoch, as you know, owns the Wall Street Journal.

00:23:24.040 And the Wall Street Journal editorial board did a piece today on DeSantis

00:23:29.800 that I would say is pretty close to an endorsement without actually saying those words.

00:23:37.420 So I would say it's unambiguously true that Murdoch is backing DeSantis.

00:23:43.320 Now, he hasn't said that.

00:23:47.240 I'm just reading between the lines.

00:23:49.100 It looks like that's the case.

00:23:50.560 Yeah, no surprise, right?

00:23:52.400 Because Murdoch wasn't pro-Trump anymore.

00:23:57.540 Speaking of DeSantis, he said he would pardon some January Sixers. 0.56

00:24:01.440 Obviously, you know, obviously, you're all the smart audience.

00:24:05.920 You know that he doesn't mean every one of them.

00:24:08.720 He means the ones that it makes sense to pardon.

00:24:11.300 But he also said he'd pardon Trump.

00:24:13.940 What do you think of that?

00:24:15.780 What do you think of that as a persuasion play, that he would pardon Trump?

00:24:21.060 Yeah, it's right.

00:24:22.100 It's right on target.

00:24:24.780 Exactly.

00:24:25.040 Yeah, so I'm going to say this again.

00:24:29.520 DeSantis does look like a genius of persuasion.

00:24:35.700 He hasn't made a misstep.

00:24:38.800 I mean, if he has, it's been minor.

00:24:41.100 But he is hitting, you know, bullseye after bullseye

00:24:44.600 in the messaging and communication area.

00:24:48.320 And that's hard to ignore, right?

00:24:50.400 He's picking up the easy money everywhere.

00:24:51.860 So this is another example of that.

00:24:55.200 It's pitch perfect, and he's reading the room perfectly.

00:25:00.760 Let's put it that way.

00:25:01.840 Do you think that DeSantis reads the room?

00:25:05.780 Yeah.

00:25:06.860 Like, he reads the room better than, just about better than anybody.

00:25:12.000 Yeah, Trump does too.

00:25:13.760 So I'm not going to take that away from Trump.

00:25:15.900 But he's just hitting it.

00:25:18.580 He's just hitting every note.

00:25:19.900 So Wall Street Journal likes him, and a lot of people like him.

00:25:26.600 And he's saying that Trump ruined people's lives with the lockdown.

00:25:30.100 This is what DeSantis says.

00:25:31.780 And that he, you know, was too close to Fauci, basically.

00:25:35.900 So DeSantis is going to try to paint Trump as a Fauci,

00:25:41.780 just like Fauci Plus, which is pretty good.

00:25:45.320 Politically, Fauci is so poisonous right now, with the Democrats.

00:25:50.540 I'm sorry, with the Republicans.

00:25:51.900 That that's a perfectly smart play,

00:25:54.380 because he can just let all the badness of Fauci bleed onto Trump.

00:26:00.240 And you'll just feel different about him, Trump.

00:26:03.580 And you won't know why.

00:26:05.140 It's just because the Fauci ugliness could get, you know,

00:26:08.940 transferred a little bit, if DeSantis keeps on it.

00:26:11.240 So a real good technique.

00:26:14.820 Here's an update on the Target stores

00:26:16.820 and what they did or did not do in terms of offering

00:26:21.120 trans-friendly things to children, allegedly, but not really.

00:26:27.060 So here's what I've learned.

00:26:29.520 Target, some time ago, did away with child sizes for teenagers.

00:26:39.300 Now, I'll need a fact check on this, but this is what I understand.

00:26:44.460 So in other words, a 13 or 14-year-old would be buying adult-sized clothing

00:26:51.380 just because they found no reason to have different sizes

00:26:54.560 for people who are largely the same size, right?

00:26:57.980 A 16-year-old girl is not going to be that different than a 30-year-old adult, right?

00:27:03.920 So some time ago, Target got rid of these, you know, teenager sizes.

00:27:12.580 So the question is, did they make trans-specific clothing with...

00:27:22.040 We're only limiting this to the tuck swimsuits.

00:27:25.420 Did they make a tuck swimsuit targeted for teens?

00:27:30.380 And the answer is, only accidentally.

00:27:33.840 Because if they made one for adults, it would be the same sizes as the teens use.

00:27:39.840 So accidentally, yes, they did.

00:27:42.940 Intentionally, it doesn't look like it.

00:27:44.860 It looks like a really bad mistake.

00:27:48.040 It looks like they didn't realize that because their sizes were no longer,

00:27:52.880 you know, discriminating between teenager sizes and adult,

00:27:56.080 that it would be seen as, you know, a product for people under 18.

00:28:01.520 So I'm not going to defend Target,

00:28:03.620 but it looks like more of a mistake

00:28:06.200 than some kind of a strategy to turn teens into something.

00:28:14.700 So my current take is that if you would like...

00:28:18.140 Hold on, hold on.

00:28:19.420 If you would like to, in your secret thoughts,

00:28:22.720 believe that Target did this intentionally,

00:28:24.900 I have nothing to argue against that.

00:28:28.600 Are you okay with that?

00:28:30.220 If you think they did it intentionally,

00:28:32.960 there's no obvious proof that it wasn't intentional.

00:28:38.640 However, there is an alternate explanation,

00:28:42.460 which is perfectly reasonable,

00:28:45.900 that it could be just because they don't have a size distinction,

00:28:49.400 and they wanted to do it for adults,

00:28:52.680 and then there it was.

00:28:53.620 So at the very least, they didn't put up a guardrail.

00:28:57.800 Would you agree with that?

00:28:59.440 At the very least,

00:29:00.520 they did nothing to make it look like it was limited to adults.

00:29:04.940 And that would be a corporate mistake that they're paying for.

00:29:08.500 But there is not evidence of their thoughts.

00:29:12.540 Would you give me that?

00:29:14.180 There is no evidence of their thoughts.

00:29:16.420 If you believe you know their thoughts,

00:29:22.240 you might be right.

00:29:24.080 If you look at the larger context of society,

00:29:27.060 you could totally be right.

00:29:29.080 But there's no evidence of it.

00:29:30.840 There's no evidence of their thoughts.

00:29:34.060 So,

00:29:34.940 you know,

00:29:37.460 I always do this innocent until proven guilty thing,

00:29:41.020 because I think it's important.

00:29:42.040 But I tell you that when it comes to the government,

00:29:45.060 that doesn't count.

00:29:48.120 When it comes to the government,

00:29:49.460 they're guilty until proven innocent.

00:29:51.060 It has to be that way.

00:29:52.340 They have to prove they're not screwing you all the time, 0.98

00:29:55.000 or else you suddenly are.

00:29:56.900 But what about a company like Target?

00:30:00.060 Is Target presumed innocent,

00:30:01.860 at least in their thoughts,

00:30:03.600 not in terms of their actions?

00:30:04.940 But are they presumed innocent?

00:30:07.780 Or are they a big corporation,

00:30:09.780 and that's more like the government?

00:30:11.620 You say, you know,

00:30:12.640 you're actually going to have to prove you didn't do this.

00:30:16.400 And somewhere in between.

00:30:20.080 All right.

00:30:21.420 Well, I'll just leave that where it is.

00:30:25.960 Here's what I...

00:30:26.940 Oh, there's kind of interesting news

00:30:29.340 that Ford has agreed with Tesla

00:30:31.740 to use Tesla charging stations

00:30:34.900 for the Ford electric vehicles.

00:30:37.460 Is that foreshadowing something?

00:30:40.500 I always wondered, you know,

00:30:41.980 I had a question whether that was going to be a thing.

00:30:44.340 Now, obviously, this is a good move for consumers.

00:30:47.520 If you're a consumer, this is just great.

00:30:50.940 But the question is,

00:30:52.300 why did Musk make this available?

00:30:57.260 What was Musk's play?

00:30:59.500 What do you think?

00:31:00.100 Why would he...

00:31:01.700 I mean, it's a competitor.

00:31:02.940 Why would he make it so much easier

00:31:04.560 for a competitor

00:31:05.420 to sell cars that compete with him?

00:31:10.260 Well, I'll give you one answer.

00:31:12.680 One answer might be that

00:31:14.240 Musk wants to control charging stations.

00:31:17.460 And if he can prevent Ford

00:31:18.840 from building out their own charging stations,

00:31:22.340 he can sort of get the public used to using his.

00:31:26.100 And then he can charge other companies,

00:31:28.220 you know, a little fee for being part of their system.

00:31:32.500 And then he makes money

00:31:33.840 by monopolizing the charging portion

00:31:36.520 because Ford probably would have built out their own anyway

00:31:40.180 if they had to.

00:31:42.680 So, and Ford will pay to build more, you said?

00:31:45.940 Yeah.

00:31:46.140 So, this is very compatible with Musk's philosophy

00:31:50.180 that I don't think we've ever seen before,

00:31:52.460 which is he's trying to build, you know,

00:31:54.880 profitable companies, of course,

00:31:57.240 but he's very focused on making sure

00:31:59.180 that the public is served.

00:32:02.200 And that's one of the secrets of his success

00:32:04.600 is he is very obsessed.

00:32:07.900 Same with Jeff Bezos.

00:32:10.180 Jeff Bezos gets this right as well.

00:32:12.080 They're obsessed with giving the public

00:32:14.580 what the public actually wants.

00:32:16.960 And I don't think there's much the public wanted more

00:32:19.480 than to know if they got an electric car,

00:32:22.880 they'd be able to charge it.

00:32:25.680 Because a lot of people want electric cars

00:32:27.420 and they're worried about charging stations, right?

00:32:30.000 So he just took that worry away

00:32:31.640 also for his competition,

00:32:34.480 which is a very enlightened way to do business,

00:32:39.240 but also something you can do if you're doing well, right?

00:32:42.960 He has such a dominant position

00:32:44.520 that he can think of what's good for everybody

00:32:48.140 and not give up anything.

00:32:50.520 So, I like everything about that story.

00:32:53.720 It says, it suggests something positive

00:32:57.680 happening in business.

00:33:00.700 Speaking of business,

00:33:01.820 here is the index fund I would like to invest in.

00:33:05.820 Now, I am aware

00:33:07.460 that somebody has created an index fund

00:33:10.940 of companies that are not ESG woke.

00:33:15.320 So I know that exists.

00:33:17.200 That's not what I want.

00:33:19.260 Do you know why I don't want that?

00:33:22.560 Because it's too much of a gimmick.

00:33:26.540 That's what it's called.

00:33:27.500 It's the Strive Fund.

00:33:29.000 It already exists.

00:33:30.200 Right, so it already exists.

00:33:31.240 But I do think that there might be too much in common

00:33:36.280 with the companies that are woke

00:33:38.700 versus the ones that are not.

00:33:41.160 The companies that tend to go woke

00:33:43.400 tend to be the high-end companies.

00:33:46.740 Am I wrong?

00:33:49.920 The high-end companies...

00:33:51.780 That's Vivek's fund, okay.

00:33:53.980 The high-end companies will tend to be woke

00:33:57.000 because they have to.

00:33:57.720 But within the universe of woke companies,

00:34:00.900 would you agree that some went too far?

00:34:05.180 Right?

00:34:06.080 So here's what I want.

00:34:07.440 I want an index fund of all companies,

00:34:09.660 the Fortune 500 in America,

00:34:12.280 subtracting the worst 10% of the woke,

00:34:17.680 but only 10%.

00:34:18.720 I'll tell you why.

00:34:21.040 If you only take 10% now,

00:34:22.900 you're still going to have a good chance

00:34:24.440 of having a good portfolio

00:34:25.620 because that's plenty of diversity.

00:34:28.660 Taking 10% out,

00:34:31.040 you know,

00:34:31.540 it might take out your best performer,

00:34:34.560 but it's 10%,

00:34:36.120 so maybe not.

00:34:38.160 If you took out...

00:34:39.620 If you failed to invest

00:34:40.860 in the worst 10% of the woke,

00:34:43.880 then the woke would no longer compete 0.95

00:34:46.380 to be the most woke.

00:34:48.520 You want them to say,

00:34:49.940 oh, I guess I can do a little bit of woke,

00:34:52.820 but keep us out of the top 10%.

00:34:55.320 I would invest in that.

00:34:59.920 Whereas I have not been triggered

00:35:02.640 to invest in the Strive Fund,

00:35:04.980 which is only un-woke companies.

00:35:07.660 Because I think one thing

00:35:08.700 that makes you un-woke

00:35:09.980 is being unprofitable.

00:35:12.960 Oh, here's a better way to say it.

00:35:15.100 Profitability and wokeness

00:35:17.680 are probably very correlated.

00:35:19.080 Because if you're already profitable,

00:35:21.420 the only thing you want to do

00:35:22.860 is stay out of trouble.

00:35:24.840 So you say,

00:35:25.440 wokeness?

00:35:25.980 Oh, yeah.

00:35:26.840 Yeah, plenty of it.

00:35:28.260 And if that wokeness makes you, 0.99

00:35:30.120 let's say,

00:35:30.700 a little less profitable,

00:35:32.360 you can afford it

00:35:33.700 if you're already wildly profitable.

00:35:36.100 So Apple,

00:35:37.120 Apple as a company,

00:35:39.180 can afford all kinds of wokeness.

00:35:41.700 Because they have so much profit,

00:35:43.300 even if they took a hit,

00:35:44.600 you wouldn't even notice it.

00:35:46.380 But if you are struggling,

00:35:48.580 the last thing you want to worry about

00:35:49.980 is wokeness.

00:35:51.320 So the reason I don't want to fund

00:35:52.780 that it's just all the un-woke companies

00:35:55.000 is that that would include

00:35:56.220 the struggling ones.

00:35:57.980 I want just a good basket

00:35:59.740 of the top 500 companies

00:36:01.320 minus the top 10% worst woke wokesters.

00:36:07.020 And that would be enough,

00:36:08.140 over time,

00:36:08.760 that would be enough

00:36:09.260 to tamp down the worst excesses

00:36:12.360 of wokeness

00:36:12.980 to get it down to something

00:36:14.980 you get used to.

00:36:16.880 Because, you know,

00:36:17.840 unlike many of the people

00:36:19.640 in my audience,

00:36:21.100 I don't mind calling people

00:36:22.400 what they like to be called.

00:36:24.480 I've never understood

00:36:25.460 why that was a problem, actually.

00:36:27.580 As long as they don't give me

00:36:29.020 a hard time

00:36:29.680 for using the wrong word,

00:36:32.200 I'll be happy to correct.

00:36:34.020 Because to me,

00:36:34.800 it's just,

00:36:35.360 I've said this before,

00:36:36.520 it's just manners.

00:36:38.340 When people introduce me in public,

00:36:40.960 they usually ask me,

00:36:43.300 how do you want to be introduced?

00:36:44.980 Do you want to be the cartoonist?

00:36:47.100 An author?

00:36:48.320 Do you want to be the creator?

00:36:50.540 You know,

00:36:50.720 what word are you comfortable

00:36:52.080 with being described with?

00:36:53.420 And then I tell them.

00:36:54.340 It usually doesn't matter.

00:36:55.340 I don't care.

00:36:56.240 But I tell them.

00:36:57.700 And then we're all comfortable.

00:36:59.440 It's just a polite way

00:37:01.320 to deal with other people.

00:37:02.360 So if somebody is born

00:37:04.800 a biological male,

00:37:06.880 they've decided to transition,

00:37:09.460 and they look

00:37:10.480 and present themselves as female,

00:37:12.460 I don't have any problem

00:37:13.660 using the pronoun they prefer.

00:37:16.680 I don't even know

00:37:17.680 why anybody would.

00:37:19.320 Because if you look at somebody

00:37:20.540 who's in full female,

00:37:22.340 you know, presentation,

00:37:25.260 it shouldn't be hard to remember

00:37:26.780 what pronoun they want to be used as.

00:37:29.580 And why does that affect you

00:37:30.660 in any way?

00:37:31.180 Now, I get that

00:37:32.640 if you start accepting

00:37:34.200 the base reality of their claim,

00:37:38.820 then maybe that gets to rights,

00:37:41.520 you know,

00:37:41.720 what restroom you can use,

00:37:43.340 what sports you can play on.

00:37:44.760 But I separate those.

00:37:46.980 I just think you can call people

00:37:48.640 what you call them,

00:37:50.040 and that's separate

00:37:50.880 from the conversation of

00:37:52.020 do you want a 200-pound trans woman 1.00

00:37:56.460 who used to be a,

00:37:57.840 was born a man,

00:37:59.480 to compete in a boxing match

00:38:00.980 against somebody born a woman.

00:38:03.200 Now, that's just obviously

00:38:04.400 something you need to work on.

00:38:07.480 But I don't mind

00:38:08.300 a little bit of wokeness.

00:38:10.160 You know,

00:38:10.320 I don't mind making sure

00:38:11.520 that we don't discriminate.

00:38:13.320 That's all good.

00:38:14.080 All right.

00:38:19.900 Biden's numbers have collapsed,

00:38:21.460 and even CNN is saying,

00:38:23.120 oh my God,

00:38:24.800 Jake Tapper was just blown away

00:38:27.060 by how bad Biden's numbers are.

00:38:29.940 Here's the specific poll.

00:38:32.260 Poll released Thursday,

00:38:34.840 shows a whopping,

00:38:35.780 this is CNN's take on it.

00:38:39.000 66% of Americans,

00:38:40.800 two-thirds of them,

00:38:42.080 view a Biden victory

00:38:43.400 in the upcoming presidential election

00:38:45.120 as either, quote,

00:38:46.500 a disaster,

00:38:48.260 or a, quote,

00:38:49.660 setback for the United States.

00:38:52.180 Two-thirds of the country

00:38:53.700 believe that a Biden second term

00:38:56.920 would be a disaster

00:38:58.240 or a setback.

00:38:59.200 Two-thirds.

00:39:00.640 Two-thirds means you're getting

00:39:02.240 a lot of people

00:39:03.460 who are not just Republicans,

00:39:05.520 you know,

00:39:05.740 independents and Democrats.

00:39:08.060 Now,

00:39:09.000 CNN also pointed out

00:39:10.420 that that's not that different

00:39:12.480 than Trump.

00:39:14.320 So Trump's numbers

00:39:15.260 aren't that different.

00:39:17.120 But Biden,

00:39:17.860 I don't think,

00:39:18.340 has ever had numbers this bad.

00:39:21.360 So as Jake Tapper

00:39:23.680 and others have pointed out,

00:39:24.960 it looks like we're actually

00:39:27.680 heading for an election

00:39:28.700 of the two candidates

00:39:30.980 that the country

00:39:31.740 least wants to be president.

00:39:34.760 Am I wrong about that?

00:39:36.520 We've somehow developed

00:39:37.700 a system

00:39:38.220 to give us the two choices

00:39:40.300 that we all understand

00:39:42.180 are wrong.

00:39:44.360 But we still favor

00:39:45.540 our own choice

00:39:46.380 because, you know,

00:39:48.200 we don't want to give up

00:39:49.000 our own choice

00:39:49.680 and we think our choice

00:39:50.540 could beat the other choice

00:39:51.520 and winning's more important.

00:39:53.520 You know,

00:39:53.760 we're more about winning.

00:39:55.440 But how in the world

00:39:56.680 did we drift into a situation

00:39:58.320 where we're almost guaranteed

00:40:00.780 the two candidates

00:40:01.740 are the two we least want

00:40:03.080 as a country?

00:40:03.960 Least want.

00:40:05.260 You might like one

00:40:06.300 better than the other,

00:40:07.120 but both sides

00:40:09.040 want somebody else

00:40:10.100 because of age.

00:40:12.740 Now, in my opinion,

00:40:13.840 it's just age alone

00:40:14.820 would tell you

00:40:16.800 the whole story.

00:40:17.360 Yes, I want somebody

00:40:19.120 younger than Trump.

00:40:20.460 Absolutely.

00:40:21.960 Absolutely.

00:40:23.040 And younger than Biden,

00:40:24.080 of course.

00:40:26.480 I saw a Mark Cuban tweet today

00:40:28.480 talking about

00:40:30.460 as long as we use

00:40:32.020 the system of primaries

00:40:33.440 that we have now,

00:40:34.380 we're always going to

00:40:35.820 recreate this situation

00:40:37.320 and that we need

00:40:38.820 some kind of a better

00:40:40.000 selection process

00:40:42.360 for picking from the primary.

00:40:44.560 We just don't have

00:40:45.620 a functioning system.

00:40:47.000 If we had a functioning system,

00:40:48.820 it would not have given us

00:40:50.260 two choices of people

00:40:52.920 who are clearly older

00:40:54.380 than you want them to be.

00:40:56.220 Although, to be fair,

00:40:57.920 Trump does look

00:40:58.720 perfectly, you know,

00:41:01.020 perfectly fine

00:41:01.720 at the moment.

00:41:04.440 All right.

00:41:07.540 And even CNN

00:41:08.680 was sort of talking up

00:41:10.400 RFK Jr.,

00:41:12.400 noting that he had

00:41:13.380 now a good solid bite

00:41:14.980 on, I think he's up to 20%

00:41:17.720 in the Democrat primary.

00:41:19.960 And I think you're going

00:41:21.140 to see that increase.

00:41:22.860 All right, here's a story

00:41:23.740 I heard today.

00:41:24.520 I don't know if this is true,

00:41:26.380 but in the 70s,

00:41:27.840 the CIA developed

00:41:28.900 a heart attack gun.

00:41:31.280 They could shoot you

00:41:31.960 with a dart gun

00:41:32.600 that would give you

00:41:33.100 a heart attack.

00:41:34.220 And then the dart itself

00:41:35.520 would dissolve.

00:41:37.500 And then the poison

00:41:39.720 that it gave you

00:41:40.500 would be denatured quickly.

00:41:41.960 So even an autopsy

00:41:43.900 would not pick up

00:41:44.580 the poison or the

00:41:45.600 injection site

00:41:46.320 because there would

00:41:46.660 just be a little spot.

00:41:48.220 And then the dart

00:41:49.140 would somehow

00:41:49.600 disintegrate.

00:41:51.360 Do you believe that?

00:41:54.340 Do you believe that

00:41:55.740 developed in the 70s?

00:42:01.820 I don't know.

00:42:02.580 I'm going to say,

00:42:05.340 I'm going to put a big

00:42:06.160 maybe on that one.

00:42:08.020 Now, of course,

00:42:08.620 people connected it

00:42:09.840 to the Andrew Breitbart

00:42:11.140 situation where he

00:42:13.020 died of a heart attack

00:42:14.180 at a relatively young age

00:42:16.280 and without warning,

00:42:17.320 I guess.

00:42:18.660 And he was exactly

00:42:19.840 the kind of person

00:42:20.620 that you would kill

00:42:21.400 if you were a CIA operative

00:42:24.940 who was helping

00:42:25.620 the Democrats.

00:42:26.320 So that's interesting.

00:42:32.920 There's new George Floyd

00:42:34.340 hoax going around today.

00:42:36.760 So in 2020,

00:42:37.760 the coroner's report,

00:42:39.420 it's being resurfaced.

00:42:42.200 So it's being treated

00:42:43.100 as if it just came out.

00:42:44.960 But we've seen the

00:42:46.500 coroner's report

00:42:47.240 on George Floyd

00:42:48.580 since 2020.

00:42:50.440 And one of the things

00:42:51.780 it said on the report

00:42:52.860 was that there were

00:42:53.620 no neck injuries.

00:42:54.700 which people are taking

00:42:57.900 to mean that

00:42:58.720 it must have been

00:42:59.320 an overdose

00:42:59.720 because if Chauvin,

00:43:03.060 the cop,

00:43:03.660 was on George Floyd's

00:43:06.380 back slash neck,

00:43:07.800 you should have seen

00:43:08.420 some kind of neck injuries.

00:43:10.340 But the hoax part

00:43:12.240 is that we've known

00:43:13.300 this since 2020

00:43:14.160 and it was not

00:43:15.640 terribly important

00:43:16.640 to the coroner's opinion.

00:43:20.400 So the, yeah,

00:43:21.560 the knee was on the back,

00:43:22.860 exactly.

00:43:23.300 So there was no reason

00:43:24.880 you would expect

00:43:25.480 the neck to have an injury.

00:43:27.220 But the argument was

00:43:28.960 that given the position

00:43:31.200 of everybody,

00:43:32.300 it was the police officers'

00:43:34.600 actions that caused

00:43:35.680 the death.

00:43:37.240 And here,

00:43:38.040 there's a new part

00:43:39.240 that I'd never heard before.

00:43:40.640 So the coroner ruled

00:43:41.820 out drug overdose,

00:43:43.940 fentanyl overdose,

00:43:45.800 or opioid overdose.

00:43:47.400 And the reason

00:43:48.200 he ruled it out

00:43:48.940 is because the typical

00:43:51.020 way you die

00:43:51.800 from an overdose

00:43:52.540 is you just sort of

00:43:54.300 close your eyes

00:43:54.900 and go to sleep.

00:43:56.560 Whereas George Floyd

00:43:57.680 was not acting like

00:43:58.780 somebody on fentanyl,

00:44:00.420 he was sort of struggling

00:44:01.780 until he stopped struggling.

00:44:04.000 So therefore,

00:44:04.920 it did not look like

00:44:05.780 a fentanyl death.

00:44:07.480 Because a fentanyl death

00:44:08.460 is just somebody

00:44:09.060 sitting in a chair

00:44:09.780 and they close their eyes.

00:44:12.720 To which I say,

00:44:13.780 I wonder how much

00:44:16.060 experience the coroner

00:44:17.320 had with people

00:44:19.120 who had just,

00:44:20.120 just taken the fentanyl

00:44:21.780 and were being

00:44:23.040 forcefully held

00:44:23.960 on the ground.

00:44:26.080 Is that something

00:44:26.900 you've seen a lot?

00:44:28.320 Somebody who just

00:44:29.060 took fentanyl,

00:44:29.980 allegedly.

00:44:30.580 I don't know

00:44:30.940 if that's true.

00:44:31.720 But some say

00:44:32.340 he took it

00:44:33.100 when he got pulled over

00:44:34.000 so he wouldn't

00:44:34.480 get caught with it.

00:44:35.820 But has he seen

00:44:37.200 people who just

00:44:38.120 took fentanyl,

00:44:39.200 like just took it,

00:44:40.740 and then,

00:44:41.340 you know,

00:44:41.580 three or four people

00:44:42.340 are holding him down?

00:44:43.780 What would that look like?

00:44:45.400 If it were a fentanyl overdose,

00:44:47.180 what would it look like?

00:44:48.640 Well,

00:44:49.040 I'm going to give you

00:44:49.740 my impression

00:44:50.400 of what I think

00:44:51.160 it would look like.

00:44:52.400 Oh, oh,

00:44:53.100 struggling,

00:44:53.920 struggling,

00:44:54.800 struggling,

00:44:55.640 struggling,

00:44:56.860 struggling,

00:44:57.660 not struggling,

00:45:00.940 dead.

00:45:05.840 That's what I would expect.

00:45:08.400 I would expect him

00:45:09.620 to be struggling

00:45:10.340 while he could,

00:45:12.100 while the fentanyl

00:45:13.320 was reaching his system,

00:45:14.840 because allegedly

00:45:15.580 he'd just taken it.

00:45:17.380 As it reached his system,

00:45:18.760 he would stop struggling.

00:45:20.440 He would get quiet,

00:45:22.500 and it would happen

00:45:23.120 kind of suddenly.

00:45:25.180 And you wouldn't know

00:45:26.100 that that was the problem,

00:45:27.880 because you were sort of

00:45:29.040 in a different mode.

00:45:29.940 You were in struggle mode,

00:45:31.020 and then he just

00:45:31.500 stopped struggling,

00:45:32.260 and you think,

00:45:32.600 oh,

00:45:33.220 he finally stopped struggling.

00:45:35.600 But it could just be

00:45:36.520 the fentanyl kicked in.

00:45:38.080 Now,

00:45:38.380 I'm no coroner,

00:45:39.420 but to me,

00:45:40.840 it looks like the coroner

00:45:41.840 gave the safest opinion

00:45:43.440 he could

00:45:44.040 to protect his own life.

00:45:47.140 And you cannot

00:45:48.020 put any credibility

00:45:50.340 in a coroner

00:45:51.980 who,

00:45:52.860 if he had ruled

00:45:53.580 the other way,

00:45:54.280 would be killed.

00:45:56.880 How in the world

00:45:57.960 Chauvin doesn't get

00:45:59.160 a,

00:46:00.300 you know,

00:46:00.640 some kind of an appeal,

00:46:01.840 because the coroner

00:46:03.540 was in a position

00:46:04.540 where his life

00:46:05.440 was at risk

00:46:06.440 if he had given

00:46:08.080 an opinion

00:46:08.580 in the other direction.

00:46:10.160 His life was at risk.

00:46:11.940 Obviously.

00:46:13.300 Like,

00:46:13.520 anybody who says

00:46:14.220 his life was not at risk,

00:46:16.140 you don't know anything.

00:46:18.160 He clearly was

00:46:19.380 at great,

00:46:20.020 great personal risk.

00:46:21.720 Family, too.

00:46:22.860 So I would say

00:46:23.820 that there was

00:46:24.400 no coroner's testimony.

00:46:27.380 If I'd been

00:46:28.300 in the jury,

00:46:29.140 I would have said,

00:46:29.700 okay,

00:46:30.120 well,

00:46:30.480 I'm not going to believe

00:46:31.060 that guy,

00:46:32.320 because there's no reason

00:46:33.520 to believe him.

00:46:35.000 If somebody

00:46:35.680 is under threat

00:46:37.420 of death,

00:46:39.020 you are not

00:46:39.900 advised to believe

00:46:41.400 what they say.

00:46:42.740 That would be

00:46:43.440 a dumb thing to do.

00:46:45.100 And yet,

00:46:45.540 the jury did.

00:46:46.560 Do you know

00:46:46.880 why the jury did?

00:46:48.780 Believe him?

00:46:51.000 Because they were

00:46:51.760 at risk,

00:46:52.280 great risk,

00:46:52.880 of being killed.

00:46:55.660 Everybody involved

00:46:56.680 was at the risk

00:46:57.560 of being killed.

00:46:59.280 There was no way

00:47:00.420 it could go

00:47:00.820 any other way.

00:47:01.520 Everybody just was

00:47:02.180 protecting their own life.

00:47:04.180 And they didn't

00:47:04.740 particularly care about

00:47:05.600 Chauvin,

00:47:06.500 because he didn't

00:47:07.220 come across

00:47:07.760 as a sympathetic

00:47:08.460 character, right?

00:47:09.620 They didn't really

00:47:10.360 care about him.

00:47:11.300 But they certainly

00:47:11.960 cared about themselves.

00:47:13.960 Certainly cared

00:47:14.600 about themselves.

00:47:16.520 All right.

00:47:18.380 I saw a tweet

00:47:19.320 by a Twitter user

00:47:21.060 who goes by

00:47:21.980 the title

00:47:23.300 unhoodwinked,

00:47:24.940 in which he was

00:47:26.180 noting my

00:47:28.000 persuasion successes

00:47:29.340 according to him.

00:47:32.060 All right.

00:47:32.300 So now,

00:47:32.700 this is his opinion,

00:47:33.620 not mine.

00:47:35.900 So in his opinion,

00:47:38.280 I had influence

00:47:39.440 on the following

00:47:40.080 things.

00:47:40.940 He says,

00:47:41.940 Scott's a scoreboard

00:47:43.020 on issues that

00:47:43.800 he changed the world.

00:47:45.060 So that's not my

00:47:45.980 claim.

00:47:46.880 I'm not claiming

00:47:47.640 I influence these

00:47:48.440 things.

00:47:49.400 I'm just claiming

00:47:50.360 there's a lot of

00:47:50.900 coincidences here.

00:47:52.420 So here's the list.

00:47:53.540 China is now deemed

00:47:54.620 unsafe for business.

00:47:56.560 You will recall

00:47:57.500 I was the first one

00:47:58.600 who started saying that.

00:47:59.840 Now it's obvious.

00:48:00.720 ESG is now

00:48:03.660 a negative value.

00:48:05.340 I would argue

00:48:06.320 it depends who

00:48:07.280 you're talking to.

00:48:08.440 But definitely

00:48:09.100 the reputation

00:48:10.680 of ESG

00:48:11.620 is way worse

00:48:13.240 than it was

00:48:14.860 when I told you

00:48:16.140 I was going to

00:48:16.560 try to destroy it.

00:48:18.100 But that's not

00:48:18.860 all me,

00:48:19.260 of course.

00:48:21.100 Bombing

00:48:21.660 Mexican cartels

00:48:22.700 is now accepted

00:48:23.640 as the best strategy

00:48:24.880 by all of the

00:48:26.460 Republican frontrunners.

00:48:27.900 I would argue

00:48:30.760 that somebody

00:48:32.120 had to say it

00:48:32.860 out loud

00:48:33.360 and then see

00:48:35.000 how people reacted

00:48:35.940 for anybody else

00:48:38.120 to say it out loud.

00:48:39.580 So I said it

00:48:40.520 out loud first

00:48:41.380 publicly.

00:48:43.280 Trump picked it up.

00:48:44.840 Once Trump

00:48:45.480 picked it up

00:48:46.180 nobody could be

00:48:47.960 soft on that

00:48:49.060 so all the

00:48:50.460 Republicans

00:48:50.840 had to line up.

00:48:53.360 Could be a coincidence.

00:48:54.480 TikTok is

00:48:57.400 under pressure

00:48:58.360 to be banned

00:48:59.160 or at least

00:49:00.420 adjusted in some way.

00:49:03.640 I think I was

00:49:04.760 the first

00:49:05.280 among the first

00:49:06.100 to talk about TikTok

00:49:07.100 but not the only one

00:49:08.300 of course.

00:49:09.900 And fentanyl

00:49:10.680 overdoses

00:49:11.180 is now considered

00:49:12.020 a top concern.

00:49:14.000 That's similar

00:49:14.780 to the bombing

00:49:15.720 the cartels one.

00:49:17.320 Nuclear power

00:49:18.260 is considered green.

00:49:20.800 You remember

00:49:21.440 when I started

00:49:22.200 persuading on that

00:49:23.380 it was not considered

00:49:24.360 green

00:49:24.760 but now it is.

00:49:27.400 Now obviously

00:49:28.540 the bigger

00:49:30.220 persuaders

00:49:30.900 were your

00:49:31.560 Schellenbergers 1.00

00:49:33.480 and Mark Schneider

00:49:35.300 and Bjorn Lomborg

00:49:37.280 so they were the ones

00:49:38.760 who did the heavy lifting

00:49:39.900 but I was on the

00:49:40.680 right side of that.

00:49:43.760 And then

00:49:44.300 I'm not sure

00:49:45.060 about this one

00:49:45.680 but Unhudwigd 0.98

00:49:48.060 puts this

00:49:49.740 on my list.

00:49:51.160 Safe to discuss

00:49:52.080 moving away

00:49:52.700 from areas

00:49:53.260 deemed to be

00:49:53.960 unsafe

00:49:54.460 for certain

00:49:55.540 groups.

00:49:57.480 I don't know.

00:49:58.260 Do you feel

00:49:58.700 it is now

00:49:59.180 safer to discuss

00:50:00.540 racial topics

00:50:03.340 because of me?

00:50:05.440 Yeah.

00:50:06.140 I'm not sure

00:50:06.800 about this

00:50:07.100 specific example

00:50:07.960 but I do think

00:50:09.500 that's happening.

00:50:11.100 So

00:50:11.700 as somebody

00:50:12.960 pointed out

00:50:13.640 a critic

00:50:15.640 that all

00:50:17.180 I really did

00:50:18.000 was pick topics

00:50:19.560 that other people

00:50:20.480 had seen as

00:50:21.180 common sense

00:50:21.920 and then

00:50:23.220 common sense

00:50:24.500 usually wins

00:50:25.380 and so

00:50:26.660 all I did

00:50:27.380 was spot

00:50:28.100 some common

00:50:28.700 sense things

00:50:29.300 early and talk

00:50:30.080 about them.

00:50:31.400 So it's not

00:50:32.240 influence

00:50:32.680 it's just

00:50:33.200 I saw a parade

00:50:34.360 forming

00:50:34.800 stood in front

00:50:36.080 of the parade

00:50:36.620 and just

00:50:38.600 made it look like

00:50:39.640 I was in charge

00:50:40.120 of the parade.

00:50:40.520 the only

00:50:44.620 counter I would

00:50:45.400 put to that

00:50:45.940 is that

00:50:47.320 all of those

00:50:48.780 things I talked

00:50:49.460 about were

00:50:49.980 common sense

00:50:50.660 before I

00:50:51.240 talked about

00:50:51.760 them.

00:50:54.400 They were

00:50:55.100 common sense

00:50:55.720 for a long

00:50:56.480 time.

00:50:57.820 It didn't

00:50:58.020 make any

00:50:58.380 difference.

00:50:59.920 It didn't

00:51:00.180 make any

00:51:00.560 difference.

00:51:01.900 Common sense

00:51:02.460 doesn't move

00:51:02.980 anybody.

00:51:04.880 You need

00:51:05.440 persuasion.

00:51:06.020 So there

00:51:08.080 is a

00:51:09.480 coincidence

00:51:10.040 between when

00:51:12.560 I applied

00:51:13.220 public

00:51:13.760 persuasion

00:51:14.520 and when

00:51:15.700 those things

00:51:16.220 started to

00:51:16.760 change.

00:51:18.240 But you

00:51:19.260 cannot rule

00:51:19.920 out coincidence.

00:51:21.480 You can't

00:51:21.980 rule out

00:51:22.380 coincidence.

00:51:23.260 And you

00:51:23.480 can't rule

00:51:23.880 out, well

00:51:24.400 it wouldn't

00:51:24.720 be coincidence,

00:51:25.980 you can't

00:51:26.560 rule out that

00:51:27.140 I'm looking

00:51:27.520 at the wrong

00:51:28.000 pattern.

00:51:29.260 It could be

00:51:29.780 that the

00:51:30.080 pattern is I'm

00:51:30.700 just good at

00:51:31.200 spotting winners.

00:51:31.960 How can you

00:51:34.600 rule that

00:51:34.980 out?

00:51:35.580 How can you

00:51:36.380 rule out that

00:51:37.500 I'm just good

00:51:38.040 at spotting

00:51:38.660 winners in

00:51:39.200 advance?

00:51:40.240 Because I do

00:51:40.880 believe I am.

00:51:42.700 I think I am

00:51:43.700 pretty good at

00:51:45.200 spotting winners.

00:51:47.840 So here's the

00:51:49.680 only credit I

00:51:50.660 will take

00:51:51.480 unambiguously,

00:51:52.920 which is if

00:51:54.160 you're good at

00:51:54.720 spotting winners

00:51:55.620 and then you

00:51:57.380 can productively

00:51:58.300 be part of

00:51:58.940 that persuasion,

00:52:01.080 then you're

00:52:01.600 part of a

00:52:02.580 very large

00:52:03.200 team of

00:52:03.660 people who

00:52:04.100 are trying

00:52:04.420 to push

00:52:04.800 things in

00:52:05.220 the right

00:52:05.440 direction.

00:52:06.320 So that's

00:52:06.900 the credit

00:52:07.320 I would

00:52:07.680 take.

00:52:08.460 The credit

00:52:08.940 I would

00:52:09.300 take is

00:52:10.760 that I've

00:52:11.460 been early

00:52:12.620 pushing useful

00:52:14.020 things that

00:52:14.820 Americans are

00:52:16.220 better off

00:52:16.780 with.

00:52:18.160 That's the

00:52:18.720 only thing I

00:52:19.120 can say for

00:52:19.580 sure.

00:52:23.700 Let us

00:52:24.300 know when

00:52:24.600 you buy a

00:52:25.000 new stock.

00:52:26.860 Yeah, I

00:52:27.860 would not say

00:52:28.400 that my stock

00:52:29.320 buying skills are

00:52:30.940 anything you

00:52:31.460 should emulate.

00:52:34.700 The pattern

00:52:35.440 supports the

00:52:36.100 Christian end 0.97

00:52:36.800 of days

00:52:37.300 prediction.

00:52:38.520 Well, the

00:52:39.160 other thing

00:52:39.580 that that

00:52:39.960 fits is that

00:52:40.940 we always

00:52:41.320 think the

00:52:41.920 world is

00:52:42.260 going to

00:52:42.640 hell.

00:52:43.840 So if

00:52:44.400 there had

00:52:44.700 never been

00:52:45.100 any Christian

00:52:45.780 predictions about

00:52:46.600 the end of

00:52:47.040 times, we

00:52:48.240 would still be

00:52:48.800 talking about

00:52:49.280 everything going

00:52:49.840 to hell because

00:52:50.380 that's just

00:52:50.780 what we do.

00:52:51.720 It just means

00:52:52.180 you're humans.

00:52:56.440 Tell us what

00:52:57.160 stock I'm

00:52:57.620 selling.

00:52:58.240 I sold my

00:52:58.860 Apple stock

00:52:59.600 because I

00:53:01.820 don't think

00:53:02.340 that Apple

00:53:02.920 is going to

00:53:06.220 easily navigate

00:53:07.280 the AI era

00:53:08.620 because AI

00:53:10.160 is almost a

00:53:10.940 full replacement

00:53:11.620 for your

00:53:12.100 smartphone and

00:53:13.900 I don't know

00:53:14.240 what they do

00:53:14.660 about that

00:53:15.280 because even

00:53:16.340 if they make

00:53:16.840 their own

00:53:17.340 best AI

00:53:18.640 smartphone ever,

00:53:20.660 it won't be

00:53:21.560 that better than

00:53:22.220 everybody else's,

00:53:23.540 will it?

00:53:25.980 You think you're

00:53:26.900 going to buy

00:53:27.140 back Apple?

00:53:27.680 betting against

00:53:28.920 me is not

00:53:29.820 crazy.

00:53:31.520 Betting the

00:53:32.020 opposite of

00:53:32.540 me would

00:53:33.160 probably make

00:53:33.780 you money

00:53:34.140 in the long

00:53:34.600 run.

00:53:36.980 Vanguard, I

00:53:37.860 believe, correct

00:53:39.160 me if I'm

00:53:39.620 wrong, but

00:53:40.040 Vanguard is

00:53:41.480 low ESG

00:53:44.060 compliance,

00:53:45.660 right?

00:53:46.740 They're not an

00:53:47.600 ESG investing

00:53:49.000 company.

00:53:50.520 So I think

00:53:51.040 Vanguard was in

00:53:51.920 the top two,

00:53:53.060 I believe,

00:53:53.560 maybe number

00:53:54.040 two, in

00:53:55.420 being unaffected

00:53:57.000 by ESG and

00:53:58.220 just putting

00:53:58.660 their investments

00:53:59.280 where it

00:54:00.440 makes sense.

00:54:05.020 Yeah.

00:54:09.580 Stay out of

00:54:10.340 stocks.

00:54:14.560 Vanguard is

00:54:15.340 the main

00:54:15.640 owner of

00:54:16.180 BlackRock?

00:54:16.980 No.

00:54:18.740 That doesn't

00:54:19.500 sound right.

00:54:20.660 You mean it

00:54:21.120 the other way

00:54:21.520 around, don't

00:54:22.040 you?

00:54:24.240 Vanguard probably

00:54:25.200 does have

00:54:25.640 ESG funds

00:54:26.480 because

00:54:26.760 everybody

00:54:27.080 would have

00:54:27.500 one, but

00:54:28.680 I think

00:54:29.000 that they

00:54:29.320 also have

00:54:29.700 a non-ESG

00:54:30.840 fund.

00:54:38.580 They own

00:54:39.300 each other.

00:54:42.220 All right.

00:54:44.360 Is there

00:54:44.580 any big story

00:54:45.280 that I missed?

00:54:46.920 Oh, the

00:54:47.220 hospital Karen 0.99

00:54:48.040 story?

00:54:48.540 Well, the

00:54:49.740 hospital Karen 0.99

00:54:50.400 story was

00:54:51.000 exactly what I

00:54:52.000 said.

00:54:52.260 two people

00:54:54.260 who legitimately

00:54:54.980 thought that

00:54:55.740 the bike

00:54:57.100 was theirs.

00:54:58.900 And that

00:54:59.340 was the

00:54:59.620 whole story.

00:55:01.440 And that's

00:55:02.080 what I saw

00:55:02.460 from the

00:55:02.820 start.

00:55:03.780 Because, you

00:55:04.840 know, unless

00:55:05.280 you're a

00:55:05.600 racist, I

00:55:08.340 saw two

00:55:09.020 people who

00:55:09.900 believed that

00:55:10.500 they owned

00:55:10.880 a bike.

00:55:11.700 I didn't

00:55:12.200 see any

00:55:12.560 color in

00:55:13.020 that story

00:55:13.440 at all.

00:55:15.000 Did you

00:55:15.560 see color

00:55:16.020 in that

00:55:16.360 story?

00:55:17.200 I didn't

00:55:17.840 see a Karen

00:55:18.440 and I didn't

00:55:19.740 see a black 0.99

00:55:20.260 guy in that

00:55:20.740 story.

00:55:21.020 although that's

00:55:22.580 the way it

00:55:22.840 was presented.

00:55:23.600 It's like a

00:55:24.060 black guy in

00:55:24.580 a Karen.

00:55:25.800 I didn't see

00:55:26.380 the black

00:55:26.760 guy, meaning

00:55:27.620 that he

00:55:28.020 wasn't acting

00:55:28.880 like in some

00:55:30.480 way that's

00:55:31.020 like only

00:55:31.540 black people

00:55:32.080 act.

00:55:32.700 He was just

00:55:33.240 a guy who

00:55:34.520 thought it

00:55:34.820 was his

00:55:35.120 bike.

00:55:36.420 And he

00:55:36.800 was not

00:55:37.500 taking no

00:55:38.120 for an

00:55:38.400 answer.

00:55:39.500 And he

00:55:39.640 wasn't being

00:55:41.500 physically scary,

00:55:43.260 was he?

00:55:44.180 And I think

00:55:44.880 he thought he

00:55:45.380 was the

00:55:45.640 victim.

00:55:46.720 And she

00:55:47.260 was defending

00:55:48.380 her rights.

00:55:50.020 I don't

00:55:50.260 know.

00:55:51.020 I ended

00:55:51.480 up liking

00:55:51.940 both of

00:55:52.400 them.

00:55:53.420 Is that

00:55:53.780 wrong?

00:55:54.620 I think

00:55:55.060 we're supposed

00:55:55.440 to not

00:55:55.900 like both

00:55:56.500 of them.

00:55:57.700 Right?

00:55:58.400 Like that's

00:55:59.120 what the

00:55:59.380 media narrative

00:56:00.120 is.

00:56:00.440 How about

00:56:00.900 you don't

00:56:01.240 like both

00:56:01.700 of them?

00:56:02.440 Or one

00:56:02.880 of them?

00:56:03.600 Why don't

00:56:03.840 you like

00:56:04.180 one of

00:56:04.520 them and

00:56:04.880 dislike the

00:56:05.540 other one?

00:56:06.080 I refuse.

00:56:07.700 I absolutely

00:56:08.760 refuse.

00:56:09.540 I like both

00:56:10.180 of them.

00:56:11.620 A nurse

00:56:12.460 who's

00:56:12.960 probably an

00:56:14.740 angel.

00:56:15.820 Pregnant 0.65

00:56:16.340 nurse.

00:56:16.740 I'm

00:56:17.660 totally

00:56:17.960 on her

00:56:18.320 side.

00:56:19.500 Guy who

00:56:20.740 innocently

00:56:21.240 believes

00:56:21.660 somebody's

00:56:22.060 taking his

00:56:22.660 bike that

00:56:23.160 he paid

00:56:23.500 for?

00:56:24.200 Totally

00:56:24.660 on his

00:56:25.020 side too.

00:56:25.960 I could

00:56:26.300 be on

00:56:26.560 both of

00:56:26.900 their

00:56:27.040 sides.

00:56:28.580 There's

00:56:29.040 no conflict

00:56:30.120 with that.

00:56:30.800 I can

00:56:31.140 support both

00:56:31.700 of them.

00:56:32.140 They were

00:56:32.360 just in a

00:56:32.700 bad situation.

00:56:33.440 I hope

00:56:37.260 they go

00:56:37.600 on to

00:56:37.880 happy

00:56:38.100 lives.

00:56:40.420 The

00:56:40.580 U-Haul

00:56:40.860 truck,

00:56:41.240 the White

00:56:41.720 House,

00:56:41.980 that feels

00:56:42.340 like a

00:56:42.720 crazy guy

00:56:43.300 thing.

00:56:44.300 That was

00:56:44.800 too

00:56:45.160 disjointed

00:56:45.940 to even

00:56:46.420 be any

00:56:46.880 kind of

00:56:47.200 an intel

00:56:47.760 operation

00:56:48.320 or a

00:56:49.420 Russian

00:56:49.940 op or

00:56:50.840 anything.

00:56:51.600 That just

00:56:52.260 had crazy

00:56:52.840 guy written

00:56:53.260 all over

00:56:53.680 it.

00:57:00.600 No,

00:57:01.180 we know

00:57:01.760 for sure

00:57:02.360 well,

00:57:03.980 at least

00:57:04.220 the reporting

00:57:04.760 is,

00:57:05.540 that both

00:57:06.220 of them

00:57:06.560 had a

00:57:07.060 reason to

00:57:07.600 think that

00:57:08.060 they owned

00:57:08.400 the bike.

00:57:09.400 Like a

00:57:09.800 good reason.

00:57:11.260 One of

00:57:11.800 them was

00:57:12.120 just wrong.

00:57:13.280 But they

00:57:13.760 had some

00:57:14.820 reason.

00:57:24.540 If you

00:57:25.160 saw an

00:57:25.520 extremely

00:57:25.980 pregnant 0.80

00:57:26.520 woman, 1.00

00:57:26.960 do you

00:57:27.080 let her 0.89

00:57:27.420 have the

00:57:27.720 bike?

00:57:28.360 Well,

00:57:28.800 not if you

00:57:29.440 thought you

00:57:29.900 had just

00:57:30.240 paid for

00:57:30.680 it.

00:57:30.920 because I

00:57:32.720 don't think

00:57:33.160 anybody's

00:57:33.580 saying there

00:57:33.940 were no

00:57:34.280 other bikes.

00:57:35.220 Am I

00:57:35.580 right?

00:57:37.320 It's not

00:57:37.920 like she

00:57:38.320 couldn't go

00:57:39.140 somewhere.

00:57:40.060 There was

00:57:40.420 just a

00:57:40.760 question of

00:57:41.280 whether he'd

00:57:42.600 pay for her 0.90

00:57:43.200 bike.

00:57:44.480 And he was

00:57:45.220 a young

00:57:45.560 guy.

00:57:46.300 Do you

00:57:46.480 think this

00:57:46.860 young guy

00:57:47.400 had extra

00:57:48.260 money that

00:57:48.800 he could

00:57:49.040 just buy

00:57:49.400 somebody else

00:57:49.920 a bike

00:57:50.220 ride?

00:57:51.940 You're

00:57:52.380 wrong,

00:57:52.900 Scott,

00:57:53.380 about what?

00:57:54.180 right?

00:58:01.520 The

00:58:01.760 Covington

00:58:02.240 response is

00:58:03.040 the story.

00:58:04.140 Well,

00:58:04.760 I agree.

00:58:05.940 The Covington

00:58:06.800 response was

00:58:07.580 that the

00:58:08.100 first reaction

00:58:09.220 of the

00:58:09.480 story was

00:58:09.920 misleading,

00:58:10.880 totally.

00:58:11.800 So yes,

00:58:12.280 it is a

00:58:12.920 Covington

00:58:13.300 story.

00:58:13.860 You're

00:58:14.040 right.

00:58:14.220 Okay.

00:58:21.880 Whoa.

00:58:22.400 Patriot

00:58:24.820 Squirrel

00:58:25.180 says,

00:58:26.040 Scott,

00:58:26.380 I never

00:58:26.660 did get

00:58:27.400 to thank

00:58:27.860 you and

00:58:28.460 President

00:58:28.820 Trump for

00:58:29.440 saving my

00:58:29.980 life.

00:58:31.040 I was

00:58:31.340 strung out

00:58:31.820 on heroin

00:58:32.260 for 20

00:58:32.860 years,

00:58:34.000 started my

00:58:34.640 recovery in

00:58:35.280 2016,

00:58:36.420 have been

00:58:36.960 clean for

00:58:37.560 four years,

00:58:39.240 happy as

00:58:39.800 hell.

00:58:41.880 Good for

00:58:42.640 you.

00:58:43.540 That's the

00:58:44.280 story that I

00:58:44.840 like better

00:58:45.260 than any

00:58:45.780 other story.

00:58:47.360 Anytime

00:58:47.780 somebody tells

00:58:48.500 me that

00:58:48.860 they got

00:58:49.480 off drugs

00:58:50.140 or got

00:58:51.460 off alcohol,

00:58:52.400 or just

00:58:53.960 built their

00:58:54.480 talent stack

00:58:55.280 and got a

00:58:56.080 better job,

00:58:57.580 I could hear

00:58:58.600 that all day

00:58:59.120 long.

00:59:00.580 Because that's

00:59:01.200 what we're

00:59:01.460 here for.

00:59:02.860 So one

00:59:03.500 of the

00:59:03.660 things,

00:59:05.660 here's a

00:59:06.220 little business

00:59:06.900 advice.

00:59:08.840 I heard

00:59:09.320 this a long

00:59:09.760 time ago,

00:59:10.500 that you

00:59:11.060 don't decide

00:59:11.680 what your

00:59:12.040 product is,

00:59:12.960 the customers

00:59:14.640 decide.

00:59:16.440 So if you

00:59:17.480 think you're

00:59:18.000 selling Pez 0.99

00:59:19.520 dispensers,

00:59:20.400 but your

00:59:20.700 audience thinks

00:59:21.420 you're an

00:59:21.780 auction site,

00:59:23.200 although that's

00:59:23.940 not a real

00:59:24.360 story, but

00:59:24.920 I'll use it

00:59:25.280 anyway,

00:59:26.240 then you

00:59:28.180 become an

00:59:28.560 auction site.

00:59:30.160 So your

00:59:30.740 customers tell

00:59:31.360 you who are,

00:59:31.840 and that

00:59:32.100 certainly

00:59:32.640 happened with

00:59:33.180 Dilbert.

00:59:34.180 With Dilbert,

00:59:35.200 the audience

00:59:35.880 said, hey,

00:59:37.160 we like this

00:59:37.800 office comic.

00:59:39.840 And I would

00:59:40.420 say, it's

00:59:41.380 not an office

00:59:42.080 comic.

00:59:43.220 He just

00:59:43.700 goes to work

00:59:44.560 sometimes, but

00:59:45.360 it's not really

00:59:45.880 about the

00:59:46.240 office.

00:59:47.700 And then

00:59:48.060 people would

00:59:48.500 say, yeah,

00:59:49.340 we love the

00:59:49.820 office comic.

00:59:51.000 And I

00:59:51.260 would say,

00:59:51.560 stop saying

00:59:52.060 that.

00:59:52.800 It's a

00:59:53.260 general

00:59:53.580 comic.

00:59:54.200 I can

00:59:54.520 do any

00:59:54.900 kind of

00:59:55.240 topic I

00:59:55.760 want.

00:59:56.700 And then

00:59:57.040 the audience

00:59:57.480 would say,

00:59:58.700 yeah, but

00:59:59.060 you really

00:59:59.400 should do

00:59:59.760 the office

01:00:01.440 ones.

01:00:02.380 They're the

01:00:02.800 ones we

01:00:03.120 like.

01:00:04.360 So I

01:00:04.900 changed it

01:00:05.340 into an

01:00:05.740 office comic

01:00:06.400 strip.

01:00:08.320 And that's

01:00:09.960 how you do

01:00:10.280 it.

01:00:10.440 That's why

01:00:11.020 it was

01:00:11.260 successful.

01:00:11.820 It wasn't

01:00:12.220 successful,

01:00:13.160 Dilbert wasn't,

01:00:14.200 until I gave

01:00:15.440 the audience

01:00:15.880 what they told

01:00:16.480 me I was

01:00:16.920 selling.

01:00:17.200 They told

01:00:18.620 me I was

01:00:19.000 selling that

01:00:19.440 before I

01:00:19.980 sold it.

01:00:20.760 I just

01:00:21.260 wasn't even

01:00:21.780 selling that

01:00:22.260 product.

01:00:22.980 And they

01:00:23.280 said, thanks

01:00:23.780 for that

01:00:24.040 product.

01:00:24.460 And I

01:00:24.680 said, what?

01:00:26.100 And now

01:00:26.600 I make that

01:00:27.120 product.

01:00:27.940 And everybody's

01:00:28.600 happy.

01:00:29.960 So, likewise,

01:00:31.880 with the

01:00:32.560 live streaming,

01:00:34.100 what I thought

01:00:34.960 I was presenting

01:00:35.740 was, you

01:00:37.140 know, some

01:00:37.500 entertainment that

01:00:38.700 people would

01:00:39.340 watch for an

01:00:39.900 hour or

01:00:40.220 whatever.

01:00:41.160 But what I'm

01:00:42.320 quickly learning

01:00:43.320 is that some

01:00:44.420 kind of a,

01:00:45.180 I don't

01:00:46.380 know if

01:00:46.580 community is

01:00:47.520 the right

01:00:47.940 word, but

01:00:49.620 there's some

01:00:50.740 sort of

01:00:51.160 non-traditional

01:00:52.220 support group

01:00:54.500 that got

01:00:55.940 accidentally

01:00:56.500 formed through

01:00:57.400 the just

01:00:58.120 normal

01:00:58.520 interactions of

01:00:59.640 whatever this

01:01:01.820 is.

01:01:02.620 And one of

01:01:03.600 the weirdest

01:01:04.240 outcomes is

01:01:05.100 the number of

01:01:05.580 people who

01:01:06.040 quit alcohol

01:01:06.920 or got off

01:01:08.440 drugs.

01:01:10.540 And there's

01:01:11.180 a number of

01:01:11.680 people who

01:01:12.020 have helped

01:01:12.400 each other.

01:01:12.960 So, it's

01:01:14.400 not just an

01:01:14.920 audience.

01:01:15.580 It's an

01:01:15.960 audience that

01:01:16.520 is literally

01:01:17.100 involved in

01:01:18.880 the betterment

01:01:19.540 of the other

01:01:20.220 members of

01:01:20.780 the audience,

01:01:21.620 which is

01:01:23.120 unexpected.

01:01:24.740 So, I

01:01:25.120 certainly did

01:01:25.640 not create,

01:01:26.680 I did not

01:01:27.140 start out to

01:01:27.940 say, oh,

01:01:28.380 I'll create an

01:01:28.980 audience where

01:01:30.180 everybody's trying

01:01:30.820 to help each

01:01:31.360 other.

01:01:31.760 It becomes

01:01:32.200 like a virtual

01:01:32.980 support group.

01:01:35.460 It wasn't my

01:01:36.220 plan, but it

01:01:38.200 happened.

01:01:39.520 Like, that's

01:01:41.040 basically a

01:01:42.340 big part of

01:01:42.860 my audience,

01:01:43.900 is people who

01:01:45.000 are here for

01:01:45.640 the other

01:01:46.060 people in the

01:01:46.580 audience, as

01:01:48.180 well as, you

01:01:48.980 know, I'm an

01:01:49.880 organizing

01:01:50.340 principal.

01:01:51.400 But I didn't

01:01:52.180 see that

01:01:52.540 coming.

01:01:53.340 There's no way

01:01:54.040 you could have

01:01:54.400 planned that.

01:01:55.140 Or I don't

01:01:55.540 think you could

01:01:55.960 have made it

01:01:56.420 happen.

01:01:57.140 I don't think

01:01:57.540 you could have

01:01:57.920 pushed it to

01:01:58.480 happen.

01:01:59.060 It just sort

01:01:59.520 of evolved that

01:02:00.160 way.

01:02:01.120 So, when I

01:02:02.380 see that

01:02:02.760 comment, somebody

01:02:04.040 who got off

01:02:04.540 heroin and

01:02:05.140 changed their

01:02:05.660 life, you're

01:02:06.620 not the only

01:02:07.080 one.

01:02:08.520 And a lot

01:02:09.640 of it has to

01:02:10.100 do with the

01:02:10.460 fact that

01:02:11.080 people feel

01:02:12.240 some common

01:02:13.420 support.

01:02:14.940 And then when

01:02:15.420 I say things

01:02:16.160 that are, let's

01:02:18.160 say, useful, it

01:02:19.860 gets reinforced

01:02:21.280 by the other

01:02:22.000 people who say,

01:02:22.740 yes, that's

01:02:23.120 useful.

01:02:23.980 And then I

01:02:24.340 think it makes

01:02:24.760 it more

01:02:25.000 powerful.

01:02:25.780 So, effectively,

01:02:26.560 it creates

01:02:26.860 like a peer

01:02:28.140 influence that's

01:02:30.440 positive.

01:02:33.180 Because your

01:02:34.140 peers, in a

01:02:34.960 sense, are, you

01:02:36.020 know, the other

01:02:36.380 people who are

01:02:36.940 in the audience.

01:02:37.640 And if the

01:02:38.580 other people in

01:02:39.060 the audience are

01:02:39.620 happy with you

01:02:41.060 quitting drugs, as

01:02:43.520 you saw, you

01:02:44.280 couldn't see the

01:02:45.380 reaction on

01:02:47.260 YouTube, you

01:02:48.120 couldn't see the

01:02:48.660 reaction on the

01:02:49.300 locals platform, but

01:02:50.500 they were

01:02:50.760 delighted, just

01:02:52.620 delighted, that

01:02:54.440 somebody here had

01:02:57.340 changed their

01:02:57.960 life, and it

01:02:59.560 was hard, but it

01:03:01.180 worked out.

01:03:02.380 We all want to

01:03:03.160 hear that.

01:03:04.180 So, more of

01:03:04.760 that.

01:03:05.020 If anybody

01:03:05.620 else has any

01:03:06.240 winning stories,

01:03:08.140 bring that up

01:03:08.800 next time, and

01:03:09.800 we'll call you

01:03:10.480 out.

01:03:11.260 Happy birthday to

01:03:12.140 Frank.

01:03:12.980 I'm going to say

01:03:13.400 goodbye to

01:03:14.100 YouTube, and

01:03:16.180 talk to you

01:03:17.300 tomorrow.

01:03:18.180 Thanks for

01:03:18.640 joining.

01:03:18.840 tomorrow.

01:03:32.780 Thank you.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - May 26, 2023

Episode 2120 Scott Adams： Trump vs DeSantis, RFK Jr. vs Biden, Feinstein Decomposing, Target, More

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript