All Episodes
June 17, 2018 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
20:08
Episode 45 - Watching MSNBC as a Comedy About People Who Don’t Understand Things
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody.
Come on in here. We're going to try a little experiment in which we're going to learn how to watch MSNBC as if it were a comedy involving people who don't understand things.
Alright? So, I won't change The dialogue, or the characters, or the direction, or the casting.
The only thing I'll change is that...
Try to think of this as a TV show.
It's a comedy. And it's about people who don't know things, but they don't know it.
All right? Now, the setup here...
Is that they're going to show a clip.
This is Lawrence O'Donnell's show.
And they're going to show a clip of Rudy Giuliani talking about whether or not Mueller will have a conversation with Ivanka and or Jared.
Now, first we're going to watch Giuliani's response, which is a little awkward, but then we'll watch the comedy program right after it.
I hope you're going to hear this.
I hope you're going to hear this.
Alright, so those of you who have been following me on Periscope and my blog, you know that I talk about persuasion being the third dimension.
And here is an example of Rudy Giuliani talking about persuasion.
And his point was...
His point was that...
That Ivanka is so popular, and it's just one of the things that is true about life.
She's a woman, and the public likes her, sort of in that Lady Diana kind of way.
And if she gets dragged into it, it's going to be bad.
Now, I can't make it any louder, so please stop asking.
Now, of course, Rudy Giuliani's point is that Jared, because he's male and he's not, you know, actually related in blood to the president, if he gets called in, it wouldn't affect the country as much.
You know, the mood of the country wouldn't be much affected by that.
Now, so his proposition is that bringing Ivanka in it would get sort of an emotional reaction in the country, and the country would turn against the process.
A purely reasonable, persuasion-based opinion.
Now, if this were not a comedy about people who don't understand things, you would expect them to understand Rudy's point.
But they don't.
So, they all start, you won't be able to see here, but each of them has a smug little face.
I'll try to do the expression of each of them.
You know, kind of a...
More like this. You know, they're ready to laugh.
Now watch them try to explain what they just saw, and none of them understands what they just saw.
Not a single person here will understand what Rudy Giuliani actually said, which is that Ivanka is just naturally more popular, and people would have a different reaction than if Jared gets pulled into it.
All right, here's them misunderstanding it.
The president's so-called lead lawyer is Well, you know, the president at the end of all this will have a great issue for appeal, inadequate representation.
I mean, because this is the best he has.
I mean, again, so you have to just take this with the knowledge that Rudy Giuliani in some parts of this interview is just not making sense.
It's just totally off the wall.
That said, I have said before, and will say again now, that any competent lawyer, I think, would not ever let President Trump sit down for that interview if they could possibly help it, including throwing themselves bodily between him and Mueller.
And as evidence, look at that train wreck on Fox and Friends last week that we talked about then.
So if he does have an interview, I think he just has to take the fifth.
He can't have an open-ended interview.
He'll confess to three felonies before the first bathroom break.
Three felonies that Nolan didn't even know about.
Jim, we need your reaction to what you...
Now, if he didn't catch that, he's concluded that President Trump is stupid because he didn't understand what Rudy Giuliani just did on that clip.
Okay. What does he mean?
Um...
That Ivanka is more popular than Jared?
I think that's what he means.
Let's watch the rest of the confusion.
Did anybody say anything like that?
She's a woman so she can't be questioned?
What clip were you watching?
There's more. That is the most sexist thing I've heard in recent times.
Sexist? No, it's how lawyers talk.
Because lawyers know that the jury is influenced by irrational things.
Somebody's missing the point.
But I don't think any of us were surprised to hear that sort of thing from Rudy Giuliani.
Jonathan Sheik, Gene Robinson, Jill Weinbanks.
Anyway, so they were all appalled and they couldn't believe that Rudy Giuliani would say something that was both completely true, reasonable, and appropriate to the topic.
Because they couldn't quite understand it.
But man, are they sure that everybody else is dumb.
Why do they think other people are dumb?
Because they can't understand why they do what they do.
Imagine if you couldn't understand why smart people do what they do.
Would you conclude that their success was luck?
Yes. I actually sort of accidentally turned on MSNBC. It's just so hard to watch.
Because of this, they're insanely arrogant, and they don't seem to understand the, I don't know, the base situation.
How are they explaining that?
The North Korea situation.
I think I'm going to watch MSNBC non-stop.
If it looks like we're ready to sign a real good deal for North Korea, that's going to be fun.
What time will I go live tomorrow?
tomorrow?
I don't know.
It just depends when I wake up and what I have to do.
Do you think I'm changing the world?
How many of you think I'm changing the world?
All right.
I'm just looking at your comments.
You know, it's funny that there's literally a good news channel and a bad news channel now.
Yeah.
And of course it changes depending on who's in the White House.
But I've come to the point where, and I think maybe this is a huge business advantage, that Fox has the option of running lots of good news.
Hey, the economy's good, North Korea's going well, you know, ISIS, blah, blah, blah.
So they run pretty much, I would say, I don't know, at least 70% good news, you know, unless there's some kind of a tragedy.
And if you go to MSNBC or CNN, it's non-stop bad news.
Because they're just hammering on the president, and it doesn't matter what he's doing.
Now, of course, they also have an entirely different reality.
In their reality, it's all about the lawyers.
CNN is pretty much lawyers talking about what lawyers are saying to the other lawyers.
I mean, just think about that.
CNN is trying to program around the concept of, all right, we've got to get some lawyers on here.
We're going to sit next to some other lawyers, be interviewed by lawyers, and as the lawyer is interviewing the other two lawyers, we're going to be talking about how some of the lawyers are talking to the other lawyers.
Let's make a show of this.
I think this will excite the people.
Because there's nothing they like better than a lawyer interviewing a panel of lawyers talking about how some lawyers are talking to other lawyers.
That's good stuff. Do you know what the other advantage that the president has over really a lot of people and certainly this situation?
One of the things that Trump has going for him is that it's sort of the lawyers against him.
Doesn't it feel that way?
Doesn't the... The contest, you know, at the highest level in the country, doesn't it feel like lawyers versus President Trump?
And if you were going to script, you know, say like a wrestling match and one team is the lawyers and the other is the president, that is a huge brand advantage.
Nobody roots for the lawyer.
Well, I guess that's wrong.
A lot of people are rooting for the lawyer at the moment.
Somebody says they feel great and they don't know why.
Why?
Alright, how many people on here Feel better now than, you know, meaning around now, than two years ago.
How many of you just generally feel better about life, your own life, than two years ago?
Trump has broken through the simulation.
Yeah, it's fascinating to imagine that President Trump couldn't handle the interviews, because there's this assumption that So here's another one of these classic bad assumptions.
It's bad because you can see the refutation of it right in front of you.
We notice that President Trump changes his personality and his approach for every situation.
When he was dealing with China, with Japan, with world leaders, he goes into his world leader mode.
When he's on Twitter, he's Twitter Trump.
And when he's at a rally, he's rally Trump.
When he meets people in person, I'm sure it's a whole different situation.
When he's working a crowd in a room, it's probably a different situation.
So there's nothing that we've watched more consistently than the fact that he can chameleon into whatever is the most powerful character.
situation in the room.
So he sort of morphs from whatever he is into whatever he needs to be to communicate with whatever crowd he needs to communicate with.
Now this is certainly true of all politicians.
They speak to babies differently than they are going to speak to the voters.
But I think with him there's maybe more of it.
It's more evident.
You see a very different personality and is optimized for each of those conditions.
And then the most stinging thing that people say about him at the moment, about the lawyer stuff, is that he wouldn't be able to get through these interviews without lying and therefore obstructing, well, perjury and going to jail or whatever.
Being impeached, the whole boat.
And it seems to me that we have tons of track record that he has successfully morphed into whatever personality fits the need.
So, does he use insane amount of hyperbole when he's speaking in public?
Yes. Does he, let's say, ignore the fact checkers?
Yes. Does he know he's doing it?
Well, I'm pretty sure he does.
Now, if you think he doesn't know he's doing it, that there's actually no brain process going on, and that somehow, you know, this big hunk of meat with nothing but a brain stem and some, you know, a beating heart had somehow stumbled into billions of dollars, a hit TV show, and the presidency of the United States, and denuclearized the Korean Peninsula.
Now, if you think that's who is president, you would say to yourself, my God, he can't go into that meeting because he's just going to say stuff that will put him in jail.
But if you say to yourself, well, he does have a 70-year track record of being deposed for various things, being on the record, changing for whatever the situation requires, and he certainly knows if he's telling the truth or not.
Now, that's not to say that he should do it, because why would you take any chance?
So even somebody who was good at this, who was just great at avoiding lawyer traps, even they shouldn't do it if they can avoid it.
So if there's any way to avoid it, he should, or minimize it, he should.
That would just be common sense.
But to those who think that he would be some special risk talking to lawyers, I would suggest he's sort of been around a while.
You know, this is one of the few examples where his age is totally an advantage.
Because if you told me, you know, 32-year-old Donald Trump was going into a meeting to talk to lawyers, I would say, oh, 32-year-old Donald Trump?
This could be a little dangerous.
He's not going to see it coming.
70-year-old Donald Trump?
I think he's going to see it coming.
So even though no sane person would do this if they can avoid it, so he should try to do everything he can do to avoid it, I don't think there's a special risk with this president.
I think he knows how to navigate different situations, and we see that as clearly as day.
What act of the movie are we in?
You know, that's a good question.
I don't know that we're in the movie paradigm at the moment.
It feels like we're entering what I call the golden age.
And so it feels like there's just an upside ahead of us, you know, at least for the horizon that is useful.
So, I think it's just good times ahead.
In his last deposition, he lied 36 times, somebody said.
Well, yeah, you've heard what I have to say on that.
Okay. As soon as Iran, yeah, we'll be solving Iran pretty soon.
I've got nothing else to say, so I think I'm going to sign off.
Export Selection