Nov. 2, 2019 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
01:06:47
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| Bum, bum, bum, bum, bum. | |
| Bum, bum. | |
| Bum, bum, bum, bum, bum, bum, bum. | |
| Oh, what a terrific morning it is. | |
| A great one today. | |
| You're all gonna just love the next few moments we spend together. | |
| Like you always do. | |
| Good to see you all. | |
| Michelle, Jordy, Jim, pleasure. | |
| But before we get going, before we get to all the good stuff, let us enjoy a little thing called the Simultaneous Sip. | |
| Doesn't take much to participate. | |
| No, it doesn't. All you need is a cup or a mug or a glass or a snifter, stein, chalice, tank and thermos, flash, canteen, grail, goblet, vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid. | |
| I like coffee. And join me now for the... | |
| Unparalleled pleasure. | |
| The dopamine at the end of the day. | |
| The thing that makes everything better. | |
| The simultaneous sip. | |
| Go! Ah! | |
| It might be my imagination, but I feel my mitochondria getting stronger. | |
| I think it was the sip. | |
| You might be feeling it too. | |
| Alright, let's talk about a few things. | |
| So, lately, and I think yesterday even, I've been saying that I was skeptical about all these stories of China killing people to make transplants available for other people. | |
| The people that they would be allegedly killing were prisoners of some sort, political or otherwise. | |
| And I said to myself, really? | |
| They're keeping people alive and then just taking their parts and giving them to other people? | |
| And my take on that was, that doesn't sound totally right. | |
| And then, as is often the case, and by the way, I talk about this in my book, Loser Think. | |
| One of the tips in this book is if you don't know how to do something right, try doing it wrong in public. | |
| Watch how much free advice you get. | |
| I do this all the time. | |
| You've seen it probably a dozen times if you watch this periscope. | |
| But one of the things that I did wrong in public, apparently, It was my opinion that the Chinese organ transplant story is probably more BS than true. | |
| And that attracted a lot of advice and information. | |
| So here's my current thinking on it. | |
| So, what I'd heard was, and this was the part I was skeptical about, that the reason people believed this was happening, all these killing people just for their organs, is that the schedule for getting an organ over there was so short. | |
| And I thought to myself, that's it? | |
| That's all you know? All you know is that it's easy to get an organ? | |
| Could be other reasons. | |
| One reason could be it's not really that easy. | |
| You just heard it was, or it was easy for some people who paid a lot of money to go to the top of the list. | |
| Maybe you heard it's easy, but it's not really easy. | |
| So that was my assumption, is that probably just the information is wrong. | |
| Because it seemed to me that you would have some kind of direct... | |
| Direct observation, somebody would say, oh yeah, we do it at this hospital, or something like that. | |
| But I heard some stories yesterday, and I'm going to just put them all together for you, and then you can decide whether China has an ongoing massive operation to kill people on demand for organs. | |
| Alright, here's what you need to know. | |
| A few years ago, a friend of mine needed a heart transplant, so I learned a little bit about the system. | |
| If you're on the list to get a heart transplant, you don't necessarily get the heart just because you're at the top of the list and one becomes available. | |
| Because there are other variables. | |
| One of the variables is how far away you are and how quickly you could get to the hospital for the operation. | |
| So my friend, who was not at the top of the list and not really even very close to the top of the list, probably would have been dead in a year or so, got lucky. | |
| And I hate to say that because his luck depended on somebody else dying in just the right place at just the right time. | |
| So he gets a phone call and they say, we got a heart. | |
| Come in, and we'll put you on the table right away. | |
| And he goes, and he was still, he could drive at that point. | |
| You know, his heart was failing, but he was still reasonably functional. | |
| He had his car, and he said, all right, I'll drive right in. | |
| And they said, no. We're going to send an ambulance. | |
| Time is so critical that we don't want you driving your own car here. | |
| It won't be fast enough. We're going to have an ambulance meet you at the restaurant where you're eating, It will take you directly to the hospital, put you right on the table. | |
| All right, now that's not at all unusual, that the timing is so critical that you can actually move to the top of the list just by being in the right place and having the right characteristics that make you ready for the operation. | |
| Here's another fact I learned. | |
| Do you know what you can sell an organ for? | |
| Apparently in China, It could be over $100,000 for an organ, a major organ. | |
| How many parts can you get from one dead guy? | |
| You can get a lot of parts, right? | |
| One dead guy could sell one organ for $100,000. | |
| How much is the entire dead guy worth? | |
| What, a million dollars? | |
| Something like that? Let's cut it in half. | |
| Let's say a dead guy, if you were selling that dead person's organs, maybe half a million dollars. | |
| What is half a million dollars worth in China? | |
| Well, half a million dollars. | |
| It's worth a lot anywhere. Would people do things illegal for half a million dollars? | |
| Remember, that's just one body. | |
| If this is happening the way it's alleged, it's a whole operation. | |
| One of the stories I heard is that somebody who was an Oregon tourist went there to get a kidney but had some kind of compatibility issue and so had to get another operation and another and another and actually had eight kidney transplants, each one with a new kidney, until the eighth one was compatible and worked. | |
| If it's true that China is killing people on demand for organs, That one guy caused eight people to be murdered for their organs. | |
| Maybe they would have been killed anyway. | |
| Never know. But that's the sort of thing that's being alleged. | |
| And again, I'm just going to say alleged. | |
| Until I watch it with my own eyes. | |
| But I'll give you the data. | |
| So, as I often say, I think I said it in Wynn Bigley, when you have a situation where somebody can make a lot of money and they have a low chance of getting caught, you always have bad behavior. | |
| There probably will never be an exception to this rule. | |
| Huge upside potential gain, financial, let's say, And a very low chance of getting in trouble. | |
| How often does that cause bad behavior? | |
| 100% of the time. So we have this set up for it to cause trouble 100% of the time, unless the government was actively cracking down on it. | |
| And all of the evidence suggests there's nothing like that happening. | |
| So, You got that. | |
| So the money is there, the incentive is there, and there apparently is a large supply of prisoners, because there's some suggestion that the military, or maybe the military prisons, or at least some connection to the military, have something to do with it. | |
| The rumors are also that the Flungam religious organization, if you can call it that, they're sort of, I don't know what to call them exactly, cult, religion, Movement. | |
| But the thought is that they're using the people that they're oppressing for political reasons, they're just using them for parts and cutting them up and selling them. | |
| So that's the allegation. | |
| Now, my first thought was, well, are we sure that just because people can get things whenever they want them That that's what that really means. | |
| Because I still think there are two possibilities here. | |
| All right? There's still two possibilities. | |
| One is that they're killing people on demand. | |
| So, hey, we weren't going to kill you anyway. | |
| We weren't going to kill you before, but now we're going to kill you because we need your parts. | |
| So that's one possibility and strongly suggested by all the evidence. | |
| But there is one other possibility. | |
| Okay, let's see if you can guess. | |
| What is the other possibility that would explain the same set of facts, but is not China killing people just for parts? | |
| Prisoners, let's say. There's one other explanation. | |
| Can you think of it? And they can't be already dead. | |
| They have to be basically brain dead and body alive, or... | |
| Or you kill them just for the parts. | |
| Otherwise you can't take a dead person and take their parts and sell them. | |
| The parts are no good if they're already dead. | |
| That is correct. | |
| Somebody guessed accurately. | |
| The other possibility is that they murder so many people. | |
| Not murder, but let's say death sentence. | |
| The other possibility is that they kill so many people routinely that they have an enormous pool of parts. | |
| Because they were going to kill him anyway. | |
| Now, if they were going to kill him anyway, and let's say in China, maybe they don't have any rights if they're a prisoner. | |
| I don't know what the deal is. Maybe they can just say, well, it's wasted parts. | |
| We were going to kill him anyway. | |
| So in that case, the real issue is the genocide. | |
| So there are only two possibilities that I can think of. | |
| There may be other possibilities. | |
| Maybe somebody will come up with one. | |
| But the two I can think of is that they're killing people for parts. | |
| Or there's such a massive genocide that's going on as a routine amount of business that they're just saying, well, we have all these parts sitting around. | |
| Might as well sell them. | |
| And then again, the people who are saying they can get organs on demand are probably rich people. | |
| So it might not be that anybody can get a part on demand. | |
| It could be only rich people because they're paying a lot of money, which would mean if you had tons of people you're executing anyway and you don't have that many rich people, All the rich people could get a part on demand without anything happening that would suggest they're doing it just for the organs. | |
| So, there's still some question about what's going on, but I think there are only two possibilities. | |
| Either China is acting like Hitler or acting worse than Hitler. | |
| If it's a genocide, then they're acting like Hitler. | |
| If it's a genocide in which they're killing them and using their parts and selling them, it's worse than Hitler. | |
| Do you feel me? | |
| If all he's doing is genocide, that's the Holocaust. | |
| That's equal to Hitler. | |
| But if they're also selling the parts and a part of it is financial, it might be a little worse. | |
| So those are the two possibilities. | |
| Why do we do business with China? | |
| Why do we do business with China? | |
| Seriously. Oh, by the way, I said yesterday that somebody reported that Dilbert.com was blocked in China. | |
| And then I got a second report from somebody also in China who said it is not. | |
| A third person said it's possible that both are true. | |
| It may be blocked in some places and not in others. | |
| So we still don't know if Dilbert.com is blocked. | |
| But if I'm not, I'm going to work on getting blocked because... | |
| If you want to ignore a Holocaust, I guess that's on you. | |
| But I'm not going to ignore it. | |
| Given that China killed my son, I think I might mention that they're involved in a Nazi-like Holocaust, and we're just doing business with them like it's nothing. | |
| That's actually happening in your lifetime. | |
| You're part of a system that is doing business with China while they do genocide on their own population. | |
| Or they're selling their population for parts. | |
| One of those two things. | |
| And we're just doing business with them. | |
| While they're killing 50,000 Americans a year with their fentanyl, intentionally, right in front of us. | |
| No doubt about it. | |
| When I say China killed my son, there's somebody asking about this. | |
| My stepson died of a fentanyl overdose a year ago, and that fentanyl comes from China. | |
| Here's a little update. | |
| Do you remember the story about the big shootout between the cartel and And the Mexican police and the cartel won. | |
| The Mexican police had picked up the son of El Chapo. | |
| I guess El Chapo's son was the new head of the cartel. | |
| The police picked him up and the cartel had so much firepower that they brought in immediately, trucks, you know, technicals and trucks with machine guns and stuff, that they actually outgunned the police and the police released him. | |
| And then yesterday I found out that the reason that El Chapo's son was picked up is, wait for it, he was in charge of the fentanyl. | |
| So the main, I think the main, he might have been one in the main or the main, Fentanyl connection. | |
| The Chinese fentanyl goes to Mexican cartels first, and then they ship it into the United States. | |
| But this guy seemed to be one of, if not the main fentanyl guy in China. | |
| So he was picked up because the United States asked for extradition. | |
| So he was whatever the legal process is. | |
| So the Mexicans were picking him up for the United States. | |
| But they got outgunned. | |
| Now let me ask you this. | |
| Given that we just saw amounts of fentanyl in the United States that could wipe out every person in a state, if not the whole country, clearly these are weapons of mass destruction. | |
| Clearly the Mexican government is outgunned. | |
| And clearly, it's killing 50,000 people a year in our country, and we know the name of the guy, and probably we could locate some assets owned by the cartel. | |
| Why are we not going in there militarily? | |
| Now, I assume we're trying other mechanisms, but I would say we are completely clear to send drones in there and take out as much of the cartels as we want. | |
| And in fact, I would love that conversation. | |
| I would love the Mexican government to say to us, damn it, the United States, why are you defying our sovereignty? | |
| Well, I'll tell you. | |
| It's because you lost your sovereignty. | |
| You don't have any sovereignty. | |
| If the cartel can decide who goes to jail and who doesn't, there's no Mexican government. | |
| Why should we please the Mexican government where it doesn't exist? | |
| And in the cartel-held territories, there's no Mexican government. | |
| So if anybody wants to complain about us droning the cartels, it would have to be the cartels. | |
| There it is. So I'm in favor of military action against the cartels. | |
| But I'm sure there's lots more to know that I don't know. | |
| Let's talk about... | |
| I tweeted around a humorous video that appears to be Joe Biden looking in the wrong direction while he's on stage speaking as if he doesn't know which direction he's supposed to be facing. | |
| I deleted it because I was informed that it's misleading because apparently there was an audience on both sides of the stage But the camera was only on one side. | |
| So when Joe had his back to the camera, the implication was he was confused and he didn't know which way it was up, but actually he was just making sure he gave some attention to the people who were off camera below him. | |
| So that was a little misleading, but how easily we believed that Joe Biden didn't know which direction the audience was in. | |
| Let me tell you the... | |
| Oh, darn it. | |
| I think I lost something here I needed. | |
| Oh, here's the worst comment on the Ukraine situation that I've seen. | |
| This was on the internet. | |
| And I like to point this out because when you see really bad opinions, they're somehow entertaining. | |
| So I give you this bad opinion... | |
| For entertainment only. | |
| So somebody said, and it's bad because it uses sort of a mocking, sarcastic tone while being a really dumb comment, which is the perfect combination, you know, because he's acting a little arrogant and really wrong at the same time, which is hilarious. Here it is. | |
| And I'll read it like an arrogant guy. | |
| I'm just kind of curious. | |
| I'm just kind of curious. | |
| Uh-huh. Why don't you explain to me, Scott? | |
| I'm just kind of curious when Ukrainian corruption and potential interference became a top priority for the nation. | |
| It's certainly not one that ever gets talked about or that ever got talked about by this administration until now, right? | |
| Why is it a top priority? | |
| Suddenly, Scott, can you explain that? | |
| Why didn't nobody care about Ukraine before? | |
| But suddenly, Scott, Scott, you're telling me now it's a top priority. | |
| What changed? | |
| Why do we care about Ukrainian corruption now? | |
| Huh? Because Biden is leading in the polls. | |
| And Biden has a connection to Ukraine. | |
| Is that not kind of obvious? | |
| That if Biden were not leading in the polls... | |
| And he did not have an obvious publicly known connection to financial goings-on in Ukraine. | |
| And there were not some information about CrowdStrike having a Ukrainian thing. | |
| I don't know, that's the worst comment about the Ukrainian thing that I've seen is that. | |
| Here's... If you saw this, Steve Bannon had an interview with Anderson Cooper on CNN. And it's really interesting because Bannon does a better job than most people in making his case. | |
| What happens when somebody does a good job of making their case for Trump on CNN? Did you see what happened? | |
| Anderson just talked over him because Bannon was doing such a good job making his case that Anderson wouldn't even let him talk. | |
| Now, I'm going to say... | |
| Now, what Anderson was doing was mocking him for acting as though the real reason for the Ukrainian situation was we were concerned about corruption versus the more obvious interpretation, which Anderson apparently would back, which is it was done for the election, that it was done just to get at Biden. | |
| I believe Steve Bannon came really close to nailing this answer, but missed it. | |
| Because I think Anderson's mocking hit the target, because if you're claiming that the only reason he did it was because of corruption in Ukraine, you're not really being credible. | |
| Because, let's face it, it is 100% obvious to everyone That at least one of the big reasons he was doing it is because he's running for election against Biden. | |
| If you don't acknowledge that one of the purposes of this in the president's head can't read his mind, but we can say that we know what his interests are when running for election. | |
| It's obvious that one of the interests is that he'd like to win an election. | |
| But here's where Bannon got it wrong, and here's where so far every single pundit who's trying to defend the president seems to get it wrong. | |
| It's also the president's job. | |
| It's perfectly allowed that he does something mostly to get elected, if by coincidence it's also one of the nation's biggest priorities, protecting the election, making sure there's no undue interference. | |
| There was public information about it. | |
| You can't ignore public information about a potential conflict of maybe the next president of the United States. | |
| So while you can speculate all you want about what the president was really thinking, it doesn't matter. | |
| It's just not relevant. It absolutely doesn't matter if his secret thoughts were all about himself. | |
| It doesn't matter. As long as it's also his job, that's our system. | |
| Our system is designed so that people can do things that are completely good for getting re-elected, so long as they're also the things that the president is supposed to do, and following the priorities of the job, which he was. | |
| So, Nobody has gotten this right yet. | |
| And I don't know what's going on. | |
| I'm actually kind of confused about it. | |
| Is there something about what I just said that has some obvious counter to it? | |
| Does anybody have... | |
| You've seen me say this a number of times now. | |
| I've never seen anybody push back in any way that was even slightly sensible. | |
| Does anybody have a pushback on that? | |
| Give me an argument against that, that it was, of course, good for his re-election, and I'll even accept that that was his primary motivation. | |
| Doesn't matter. It was also his job, and a top priority of his job. | |
| And he was acting on public information with an ally, using a process that's well-established for this. | |
| Somebody says, I hear this daily. | |
| I've never heard anybody say it as a defender on TV or in the media. | |
| Tucker said it. I missed him saying that. | |
| I did see him do a great piece. | |
| Tucker did a great piece on AOC, which I tweeted around yesterday. | |
| You should see that. I was impressed by the writing. | |
| I assume he wrote it. And it was really well written and performed. | |
| All right, so the president has floated this idea. | |
| He says, quote, at some point, I'm going to sit down, perhaps as a fireside chat on live television, and I'll read the transcript of the call, because people have to hear it, he said. | |
| When you read it, it's a straight call. | |
| Straight meaning there's nothing suspicious going on. | |
| Now, what do all the experts say? | |
| It doesn't matter if you're pro-Trump or anti-Trump. | |
| All the experts say, don't do that. | |
| That's a terrible idea. | |
| That's the worst idea ever. | |
| What do I say? | |
| I like it. Kind of like it. | |
| Here's what's good about it. | |
| Are you ready? You and I believe, because we're normal, it's the normal way people think, is that other people think at least a little bit like you do. | |
| In other words, you think that because you understand this Ukrainian phone call situation, because you're at least interested enough that you're on this Periscope, you probably follow the news, you're probably into politics, you're in this very thin band of people Who are paying attention to something as technical as the Ukraine thing and impeachment. | |
| Very few people are paying attention at a detail level. | |
| It's things they've just heard of. | |
| If the president goes on TV and reads his live letter as a defense, obviously the whole context of it would be, here, let me show you as clearly as I can that there was no problem here. | |
| And then let's say he reads the letter. | |
| Judge Napolitano says that The letter and the context are completely impeachable. | |
| It's obvious when you see the letter or when you see the transcript. | |
| Not letter, transcript. | |
| Transcripty thing. I know it's not technically a transcript. | |
| But some would say, no, that transcript is totally damning. | |
| Because in the context of it, you're saying, oh, you know, you should be good to us, so we'll be good to you, whatever the wording is. | |
| And that it's obvious that if he reads that, he will be convicting himself because the letter is so damning. | |
| And other people say, well, the letter is pretty innocent. | |
| Why not read it on TV? I think maybe nobody says that, actually, except Trump. | |
| Here's my take. The same thing that causes, let's say, 99% of the public to not understand the details of this impeachment Ukraine thing won't change if he reads it on TV. They still won't understand the details. | |
| They won't understand why it matters. | |
| They won't be able to connect the dots. | |
| But here's what they will do. | |
| They'll say to themselves, if the president is reading it on television, It can't be bad. | |
| So, here's what... | |
| I swear, I will go to my grave claiming that this president is a genius. | |
| And I know that I will never be believed. | |
| So, you know, maybe on some level, if you gave him a physics test or something, he wouldn't score in the top 30% or whatever. | |
| I don't know. Maybe he would. | |
| But when it comes to this stuff... | |
| Man, does he understand the human mind. | |
| He understands how people think like nobody ever did. | |
| And I guarantee that if he did a fireside chat, here are the things that would come out of it. | |
| Number one, everybody would watch. | |
| And he would bring in people who didn't care anything about watching the news, but they might watch the fireside chat because it's not exactly the news. | |
| And so he would reach all the people who were not paying attention, and he would reach them before the news gets to him. | |
| Because remember, they're not following the news. | |
| So if the first thing you saw was the president getting on TV and saying, people are real concerned about this phone call, so much so that they won't impeach me. | |
| I'll tell you what, I'm going to sit next to my fireplace, and I'm just going to read you the transcript, and you decide. | |
| Now, when he reads it, are people smart enough to make a decision based on the transcript and their detailed knowledge of the Constitution and impeachment laws? | |
| No. No. | |
| But they're not going to see a crime. | |
| If you're a regular person and you hear him read the transcript, are you going to hear any criminal activities there? | |
| Nothing. You're not going to hear anything that even sounds a little bit wrong if you're just a person. | |
| You're not into politics that much. | |
| You're just a citizen. So, because he knows that people understand the scene, the show, how they feel, the fireside chat is brilliant. | |
| Because he can pull that off like nobody's ever pulled it off. | |
| Alright, here's an idiot who's coming in to say that I'm an apologist. | |
| These are the dumbest people. | |
| And blocked. Because if you spend even just a little bit of time watching my content, you'll know that even in this conversation, I said that the President and all of his people are totally blowing the Ukraine phone call persuasion. | |
| The whole context here is that so far they've failed on one of the most important things they're doing. | |
| I'm talking about the President's failure to persuade well so far, On this Ukrainian stuff. | |
| So that's the context. | |
| Does that sound like an apologist? | |
| Now, telling them, explaining how he could do it better is just a description of talent, really. | |
| So, I like that idea. | |
| Newt Gingrich says that Pelosi made a huge strategic error By having the vote on the impeachment rules, not impeachment itself, but just a vote on the rules, because the vote went along party lines, but even worse, two Democrats defected over to the Republicans. | |
| And it's generally considered good form that you don't move forward with impeachment unless you've got some buy-in from the other side. | |
| That's really basic to the system. | |
| It's the thing the framers of the Constitution worried about, that it would just become a political process. | |
| So they tried to make it hard for it to be a political process. | |
| You have to have such bad behavior that even the other team would say, oh, that's so bad, we can't even support our own president anymore. | |
| And we're not there. | |
| So by having the vote, they have proven to the public that it's not legitimate. | |
| Because if it were even a little bit legitimate, have we not seen that the Republicans are willing to break ranks with the President? | |
| Have we not seen in lots of different cases that not all Republicans, but there are plenty of Republicans who are willing to publicly disagree with this President? | |
| A lot of different stuff. | |
| And if you can't get one Republican to say this is legitimate, and indeed two Democrats have agreed it's not... | |
| You've already lost. | |
| So Pelosi has already lost the politics of it. | |
| And she lost hard. | |
| And I think Newt is one of the smartest observers of any of this stuff. | |
| And I think he nailed it. | |
| I think she took whatever credibility she was trying to put together for this and just squandered it all on that vote in the hope that the public would think Something's happening. | |
| And something did happen. | |
| It was the end of Pelosi's credibility. | |
| That's what happened. All right. | |
| The president, in his rally, I guess it was last night, is using mockery to reframe this Ukraine thing. | |
| And I thought it was pretty clever. | |
| All right. So he was talking about how easily he's beaten Putin. | |
| Other competitors. | |
| And the president said this, quote, Clinton, she was easy, meaning beating her was easy. | |
| Obama was easy. | |
| I have no idea what he meant by that. | |
| The Bush dynasty was easy. | |
| But Sleepy Joe, I'm worried about? | |
| He asked. So then I say to myself, gee, I guess there's only one way. | |
| Let's call up Ukraine for help. | |
| So he's actually mocking Ukraine. | |
| The media and his critics for imagining that after he's beaten the Bush dynasty, the Clinton dynasty, he's wiped out Obama's legacy, he defeated ISIS, and he's somehow whipped up the entire Republican Party to have his highest approval of a Republican, going from the lowest approval. | |
| He's done all of that, and oh, by the way, Moody's just came out with a new prediction that he's going to win in a landslide. | |
| So Moody's has a prediction that based on economic criteria, forget about policies because they don't predict, but based on economic criteria, the president's heading for a landslide no matter who he runs against. | |
| No matter who he runs against, Moody's, one of the best predictors of political stuff, says it's going to be a landslide. | |
| It's only a question of how big. | |
| And the president is basically mocking the people saying, yeah, I was so afraid of Joe Biden that I had to get the Ukraine involved. | |
| It was the only way I could win. | |
| Now, I do think that one of his motives was, of course, the election. | |
| But I also think it's pretty clever to point out that Joe is so inconsequential, he would not be worth cheating for. | |
| It's not maybe technically as accurate as it could be, but persuasion-wise, it's very good. | |
| So, let's see. | |
| I had one more point here. | |
| I don't know what it was. | |
| But... Oh, it was about Slow Joe. | |
| So somebody sent me a video clip in which the president is introducing a new adjective for Sleepy Joe, calling him Slow Joe. | |
| And he said that Joe is just getting slower and slower. | |
| And I think to myself... | |
| I think that's more effective. | |
| Now, on Twitter, people are giving me credit for saying it should be slow Joe. | |
| I think I probably did say that at one point, but I'm not taking credit for the president using those words. | |
| I don't think there's any connection between me saying it and him saying it, in this case. | |
| I think it just rhymes with Joe, and he does look slow, and sooner or later that word was going to come out. | |
| But here's the thing. | |
| Slow is really devastating. | |
| There aren't too many... | |
| Sleepy is pretty devastating. | |
| But slow is kind of a kill shot. | |
| The other ones would maybe wound him. | |
| Sleepy, yeah, that's a good attempt. | |
| But I think the word slow... | |
| I think that removes all doubt. | |
| Because anybody who's watching them is worrying to themselves. | |
| Here's the genius of it. | |
| They worry to themselves, is he getting slower? | |
| Even his supporters are thinking to themselves, I think he's slowing down. | |
| So the fact that slow fits so well with what people are already worrying about or thinking about, that makes it devastating. | |
| Yeah. But slow is also one of the worst insults you could say, short of actually saying somebody has a diagnosable mental disability. | |
| He's slow. It's provocative. | |
| Because when you hear that, one of the first things you think is, wait a minute, is this an ordinary insult where you say, oh, my competitor is dumb? | |
| We're just used to that. | |
| It doesn't mean much. Oh, my competitor is dumb. | |
| Or is he actually saying that there's an organic, mental, physical, you know, part of his brain is not working up to scale at the moment, and he's slow? | |
| Because that's pretty deep insult for somebody. | |
| So it's provocative. | |
| It's ambiguous. | |
| People can fill it in with what they think it means in their own mind. | |
| That's always good technique. And if it's what they're already thinking, it's devastating. | |
| Slow Joe? Let me put it this way. | |
| When he was called Sleepy Joe, there was a small chance that Biden could have won. | |
| If he becomes Slow Joe, no chance. | |
| That would be the end of the game. | |
| In fact... That nickname, Slow Joe, would take Biden out of the leadership on all the polls, I think. | |
| I think he would drop like a rock if Slow Joe became his name. | |
| Now, Sleepy, it turns out that Sleepy wasn't such a good fit, because when you watch Biden, does he ever seem sleepy? | |
| No, because he's in the candidate protection program where he doesn't do many events. | |
| He actually, for his age, or even not for his age, but he seems like he has plenty of energy and he doesn't seem sleepy at all. | |
| So if you watch him and you think sleepy Joe, it doesn't fit because he's got a lot of energy on stage. | |
| He just doesn't spend a lot of time on stage so he can focus on his energy. | |
| But when you say slow Joe... | |
| You see that every time. | |
| You can't wipe that off. | |
| That's just always there. | |
| Much better. All right. | |
| Let's see what else we got here. | |
| Bear with me. Let's talk about the Democrats. | |
| So, give an update. | |
| So, you all heard that Beto dropped out. | |
| Nobody was surprised that Beto dropped out of the race. | |
| Then the question is, who would get all of his supporters? | |
| Where would they go? I think Dana Perino said this. | |
| What supporters? He wouldn't have dropped out if he had supporters. | |
| But he might have a few. | |
| So, where do you think they would go? | |
| Who is the closest to Beto? | |
| I don't know. My best guess is they just get distributed somehow, and probably we're never going to notice. | |
| I agree with Dana on that. | |
| But there's also news on Kamala Harris. | |
| Kamala Harris has substantially cut her staff, but unlike Beto, she's decided to stay in. | |
| At least her numbers are in the, I don't know, 4% or 5%, whatever she is. | |
| But let me say this. | |
| Is there any historical example? | |
| Help me in the fact-checking, will you? | |
| Fact-checkers, jump to it. | |
| This is the fact you must check for me right now. | |
| Has anybody who is running for president ever substantially scaled back the size of their campaign for financial reasons and then gone on to win? | |
| And I would say win either the primary or win in the general. | |
| But no, let's just say primary. | |
| So forget about the general election. | |
| Nobody ever scales back their campaign in the general. | |
| But in the primary, is there any case of anybody ever scaling back a campaign And then going on to win? | |
| I see a couple of maybes here and a bunch of no's. | |
| Well, okay, so it's... | |
| Somebody says McCain. | |
| Did McCain ever scale back his operation and then go on to win the... | |
| Oh, a lot of people are saying McCain. | |
| Okay, so that would be a good fact check. | |
| I would love for the news to provide that context for us. | |
| My take on Kamala is, now, let me remind you that I had a prediction over a year ago that she would be the nominee and then go on to lose in the general election. | |
| Here's what I did not take into account. | |
| And in my defense, in my defense, would you agree, it was hard to see this coming? | |
| I would never have guessed that she would be the worst campaigner in the history of politicians. | |
| That wasn't predictable. | |
| And I was trying to think, how did I get so fooled? | |
| Because the very brief... | |
| Exposure to her didn't look incompetent at all. | |
| And I was thinking about that. | |
| And the places that I've seen her the most before she was deeply into the campaign was I would see her doing her senator job where she'd be sitting at a desk. | |
| And number one, she looks better sitting. | |
| For some reason, she's not a good standing president. | |
| I mean, her posture isn't good or something. | |
| There's something about when she stands, she's diminished, but when she's sitting, she's more powerful. | |
| And she's also asking questions she's prepared in advance, and her domain that she has to navigate is very narrow, and it's more in her strike zone. | |
| You know, she's more lawyerly, and she can just get tough. | |
| She only needs one mode, tough, lawyerly, sit here, look tough, and look like a senator. | |
| In that mode, which is very narrow, she nails it. | |
| And so I would see her in that mode and I'd say, well, look at her in that mode. | |
| She looks pretty capable. | |
| What I did wrong, because I didn't know anything about her, even though she's a senator from my state, I didn't know anything about her. | |
| I thought to myself, well, how likely is it that she could be so good in these settings, but then she would be terrible in another setting? | |
| It didn't even occur to me. Honestly, never once did I imagine that those brief snippets of her where she looked very capable were misleading. | |
| But wow, were they misleading. | |
| Because as soon as you take her out of her senator-lawyer mode, cross-examining, where she's really good, and she tries to show personality and connect with people and do all the things that a charismatic politician would do, she has less of that than anybody I've ever seen. | |
| Literally, she's the worst I've ever seen. | |
| Now, let me take my lumps... | |
| This is the worst prediction I've ever made. | |
| I don't think I've ever made a worse prediction than this. | |
| Now, you might come up with some examples of where I've made worse predictions, but I don't think so. | |
| I don't think so. | |
| This might be my worst one. | |
| Now, it also caused me to sort of replay my prediction record to see if I can figure out why I'm sometimes right and sometimes wrong. | |
| And I'm trying to look for a pattern. | |
| Is there a pattern to the times I'm wrong versus the times I'm right? | |
| And here's what I think. | |
| When the biggest variable is persuasion, I'm pretty good. | |
| So the biggest variable with Trump, I think, was persuasion, and so I got that right. | |
| With Kamala, the biggest variable was unknown to me. | |
| Until now, which is that she didn't have any skill. | |
| I never would have guessed she could be a California senator and have no skill. | |
| I mean, who would have saw... | |
| Let's be honest. | |
| Did anybody see that coming if you didn't already know her? | |
| It was hard to see coming. | |
| So completely blindsided by that. | |
| So here's the thing. | |
| When there are variables that... | |
| Are not strictly persuasion, I'm not so good. | |
| Let me give you an example where I'm better. | |
| In the case of the secret sonic weapon in the embassies, that was a case that to me, if you have a knowledge of mass hysteria and stuff, looked every bit like a psychological event. | |
| So I got that one right, I think. | |
| Maybe we'll never know exactly what happened in those embassies, but it does look more and more clear as time goes by that it was not a secret sonic weapon. | |
| And that was my first impression, based on what I know about psychology, humans, persuasion, mass hysteria, etc. | |
| When there was the Vegas shooter... | |
| I said before anybody that he wasn't ISIS, even when ISIS claimed credit for him. | |
| I still said, yes, I know ISIS doesn't typically claim credit for somebody who's not theirs, but this time they are. | |
| And I was right. No ISIS connection. | |
| Now I did that again, based on basically FBI profile, that the way he was doing it was so un-ISIS that he was unlikely to be ISIS. So I was right about that. | |
| Where I've been wrong is when I was trying to predict who Trump would pick for a vice president, for example. | |
| Because there's a persuasion element to that, but it also has a lot to do with vetting the people and do they want the job, things I wouldn't know about. | |
| And then a lot of details about what state they might bring along and all that things. | |
| So guessing a vice president is really hard. | |
| Very hard. All right, let's talk about some other candidates. | |
| I watched Warren's speech in this latest whatever event all the Democrats were at. | |
| Excuse me. Do you see this when she talks? | |
| She seems shaky and old and bleating. | |
| Bleating like a sheep. | |
| She doesn't have leader voice. | |
| She has a voice like this. | |
| We've got to get some health care. | |
| You don't know. We've got to be bold and get some health care. | |
| There's something in her voice that betrays her age and doesn't sound leaderly. | |
| And voices are really important for leadership. | |
| You have to have a good voice. | |
| You don't have to have a male voice, but you need a confident voice. | |
| And she sounds... | |
| She sounds like an elderly woman who's complaining about her prescription. | |
| I mean, she sounds like she's at the CVS counter, and she can't understand why she ordered one thing, but they're giving her another thing, and that's not what her doctor said, and she's getting worked up about it. | |
| So, between that and the fact that her policies are kind of whack, I don't see her being the candidate. | |
| Well, let me back up to another point I want to say. | |
| Rather than saying she won't be the candidate, let me say the conditions upon which one could become the candidate. | |
| Have you ever wondered why Joe Biden is leading in the polls when he's so obviously the worst candidate in the field? | |
| Have you ever wondered that? | |
| Now, the answer that you hear in the news is, well, it's name recognition and The public isn't paying attention. | |
| They've heard his name. | |
| They haven't heard other people's name. | |
| Maybe. Maybe. | |
| But don't you think you would meet somebody who supported Biden by now? | |
| Let me ask you in the comments. | |
| Have you ever met one person in real life, not on television, but in real life, one person who supports Biden to be president? | |
| And as you're thinking about it, consider your view of the world. | |
| Somebody said yes, surprisingly. | |
| Okay? I think most of you are having the same experience I did when I first realized this, which was leading in all the polls, and I've never met... | |
| I don't even think I've seen anybody... | |
| I'll make it even funnier. | |
| You want it to be funnier? I've never seen anybody on Twitter support Biden. | |
| Have you? Have you seen anybody who is not part of the actual campaign or, you know, part of the pundit class? | |
| But just people. Just people who are commenting on Twitter. | |
| Have you ever seen one person support Biden on Twitter? | |
| Anybody? But think about it. | |
| What are the odds that he would be the leading candidate and you've never seen one person who supports him? | |
| Does that sound unusual to you? | |
| Let me throw out a conspiracy theory. | |
| Want to hear a conspiracy theory? | |
| Let me say in advance, I'm not saying this is true. | |
| I'll just say it's compatible with the facts. | |
| You can put the conspiracy theory on it yourself. | |
| Let's say there's a deep state. | |
| Hypothetically. Let's say there's a deep state. | |
| You can fill in the names of who the head of the deep state is. | |
| You probably all would use the same name. | |
| But let's say there's a deep state and it's a little bit organized. | |
| What would be their ideal situation for a president? | |
| Would it be Pete Buttigieg. | |
| Would he be the ideal choice of the deep state? | |
| I'm going to say no. | |
| Here's why. Pete Buttigieg has his own opinions. | |
| And I don't think he could be manipulated by the deep state so easily. | |
| What are you going to do? | |
| Say, hey, Pete Buttigieg, if you don't play along with us, we'll out you for being gay. | |
| Good luck. Good luck. | |
| Here's the conspiracy theory. | |
| And again, I'm not saying this is true. | |
| It is, however, compatible with the evidence. | |
| And the evidence would be that Biden is the obvious choice of the deep state because they can control him. | |
| Do you remember that there was a thought that Bush, Jr., Wasn't a real president and, you know, that Dick Cheney was really the president? | |
| Doesn't this remind you a little of that situation where the people who are pushing for Joe Biden must be the money people, right? | |
| There must be people with money, must be people behind the stage. | |
| It almost feels like somebody wants him to be president because he's not competent, right? | |
| And they can control them. | |
| Maybe they have some compromise on them. | |
| Now, this, of course, conspiracy would require that they could also control the polls. | |
| Do you think that's possible? | |
| Do you think the deep state could control, like, all the polls? | |
| Because they all say the same thing. | |
| Well, that would be a leap. | |
| I don't see how the deep state could control all the polls. | |
| But I certainly can't understand why I don't meet any Biden supporters. | |
| They do seem kind of invisible. | |
| All right. So I think Biden can't win. | |
| I think Harris can't win. | |
| I think Bernie keeps defying all the odds by staying alive and continuing to have the most vitality in his campaign. | |
| If Bernie gets elected... | |
| Or gets nominated. | |
| I feel as though the real thing behind that would be that they've given up. | |
| So if either Bernie or Harris or Biden, if any of the top three actually get the nomination, I would take that as a sign that the Democrats have decided to take a bye year. | |
| A buy in sports means you don't really play a real game. | |
| You just say, okay, you won this time. | |
| Let's move on to the other part of the tournament. | |
| And I feel like they might be getting ready to just let Trump win. | |
| Because first of all, the odds of a recession in the following four years are much better than a recession before Election Day. | |
| So if they can get a Republican president to be in office when some bad stuff happens, Maybe that helps them for next time. | |
| But let's say the Democrats as a group, or at least whoever funds them the most and has the most influence, let's say they decided to try to win. | |
| Who could they try to win with? | |
| Because the top three in the polls don't really have any chance of winning in the general. | |
| Let's take Buttigieg, who I think is number four now, at least in some of the polls. | |
| Could Buttigieg... | |
| Should he get nominated? | |
| Give the president a good fight. | |
| What do you think? | |
| Do you think Pete Buttigieg could give President Trump a good fight in a general election? | |
| I kinda do. | |
| I kinda do. | |
| I think, first of all, he's getting better and better. | |
| And he's super smart, and he's refining his message. | |
| He would have, of course, the gay vote. | |
| Imagine, if you will, that the vote is really close, except that Buttigieg siphons off gay Republicans and gets most of the gay Republican votes. | |
| That's a little bit of an edge. | |
| Now, I don't know if he would get the African American vote. | |
| So I don't see any of these candidates beating Trump, but I'm feeling as though Buttigieg would get really close. | |
| He could put up a fight. | |
| Yang, I believe, has not shown us enough beyond his personality and his common sense and his signature universal basic income thing. | |
| I think Yang doesn't have the... | |
| He's not rounded enough. | |
| I don't see him making a dent. | |
| Let's talk about... We talked about Harris. | |
| I would say it would be a miracle for her to get nominated at this point. | |
| Just for fun, I'm going to keep my original prediction in place so you can see how wrong it is when she doesn't get there. | |
| But if the top three were to get out of the race suddenly... | |
| People would start looking at her. | |
| Now let's talk about Tulsi Gabbard. | |
| Could Tulsi put up a good fight? | |
| Probably. Probably. | |
| Here's the problem. | |
| And I'm going to confess something to you that I feel actually bad about confessing. | |
| All right? So here's my confession. | |
| You know how I've avoided talking about Tulsi Gabbard and so many of you have been just bugging the heck out of me. | |
| Why don't you mention her? | |
| Why don't you mention her? And I've been saying it's because she's low in the polls and not relevant and I don't want to spend a lot of time about something that's not terribly relevant. | |
| But her poll numbers are going up and now we have to say, okay, let's put her in the conversation. | |
| And Honestly, one of the reasons that I didn't want to talk about her is that I don't want to accidentally make her president. | |
| Because she does have the goods. | |
| And she would by far put up the best fight, as far as I can tell. | |
| Now, maybe we learn more about her, blah, blah, blah. | |
| But at this point, here's the argument for why she would be the strongest candidate. | |
| First of all, she's got a military background. | |
| Second of all, she's charismatic. | |
| She's pleasant. | |
| People like her. | |
| She's just a likability thing like crazy, which a lot of the candidates don't have. | |
| They don't have likability. But let me ask you this. | |
| When you hear it, you're going to be mad. | |
| And maybe frightened. Alright? | |
| People... This is a truth about human beings. | |
| People like to solve the last problem. | |
| They like to solve, you know, whatever's the thing that's bugging them at the moment. | |
| President Trump... | |
| President Trump has solved so many problems... | |
| That you end up moving down the priority list because he's kind of taking care of ISIS and he's negotiating with China. | |
| The economy is screaming. | |
| That's our big stuff. | |
| Even AIDS is being eradicated in this country. | |
| I mean, big, big, big stuff. | |
| There was news today that the opioid crisis is actually... | |
| The deaths have gone down for the first time recently. | |
| So the Trump administration is even making progress on opioids. | |
| Big, big stuff. | |
| If all of the big stuff is taken care of, so much so that whoever comes in after Trump is going to be inheriting a good situation, what do you start worrying about once all the big stuff is taken care of? | |
| Personality. Division in the country. | |
| How people feel about the country, how they feel about each other, how we feel as Americans, our soul, our basic goodness to each other. | |
| Those are the things that people are obsessing about because President Trump is by far the best president of all time, and he's solved so many problems. | |
| Hate to say it. It's true. | |
| He solved so many problems, he kind of doesn't need a second term. | |
| All right. Having said that, so this is the pendulum theory. | |
| The pendulum theory is that we've spent so much time arguing about Trump's personality that we all want to break from it. | |
| So it would suggest that even some Republicans Maybe many, want a break from the one thing that they're just so sick of, which is talking about his provocations, his tweets, his personality. | |
| Who is the candidate who is the least like Trump's acerbic personality? | |
| Is Bernie the least like Trump? | |
| No, Bernie is red and screamy and angry. | |
| How about Warren? No. | |
| She's yelly, screamy, and angry. | |
| How about Biden? | |
| He's slow. | |
| We don't need to worry about him. | |
| How about Buttigieg? | |
| Buttigieg is serious and angry. | |
| That's not really quite the antidote to Trump. | |
| Harris is sort of a hard-nosed prosecutor, doesn't connect with people. | |
| It's not really the solution to Trump's personality. | |
| You see where I'm going, right? | |
| Assuming Yang is not quite the public's choice, Tulsi Gabbard becomes the one person in the race Who, personality-wise, feels like the solution. | |
| She feels like the antidote for however many years of Trump. | |
| It's like, can we just get along? | |
| How about a little bit of aloha? | |
| Are you exhausted yet? How about we just be nice to each other for a while? | |
| How about we work it out? | |
| So, that's the thing you don't see coming. | |
| The thing you don't see coming is people try to solve the thing that's bugging them. | |
| And what's bugging them is no longer ISIS. What's bugging them is no longer the economy. | |
| What's bugging them is no longer a lot of stuff, because Trump took care of it. | |
| But what is left is the fighting, the people getting beat up on the streets, the Antifa, the Make America Great Again, the people who are just tired of it all. | |
| The antidote Is the person who's the most unlike that, and that happens to be Tulsi. | |
| Now, she could also peel off some Republicans, which most of the Democrats could not do. | |
| A Democrat in the race will get all of the Democrats. | |
| I don't even think it matters who it is. | |
| You know, whoever the Democrats run, for the most part, they'll get almost all of the Democrats. | |
| So the only person you should have to worry about is somebody who could get a few from the other team. | |
| And Tulsi's the only one who could do that. | |
| Now, could she beat Trump in the general? | |
| I doubt it. I don't think so. | |
| But she would be the strongest candidate. | |
| Now, here's the question. | |
| Think about this. | |
| Who are the big money people giving money to? | |
| Or who are most people giving money to? | |
| The top three in the polls. | |
| Who have the least chance of beating Trump? | |
| And the people lower in the polls... | |
| Tulsi and Buttigieg probably could put up the best fight, I think. | |
| All right. So, that's what I think. | |
| Um... That's all I got today. | |
| I'm going to be doing a little travel this week because my book, Loser Think, drops on Tuesday. | |
| You can pre-order it now, which would help me a lot. | |
| I had heard a lot of reports from people saying that Amazon was canceling their pre-orders because it was unavailable. | |
| It's not unavailable. | |
| We made a lot of them. | |
| There's plenty of books. | |
| And Amazon has all they need. | |
| So we don't know why. | |
| Amazon has apparently canceled the number of pre-orders. | |
| There's probably some story to it, but there's plenty of supply. | |
| And if you were to buy it this week, it would help me the most. | |
| Because that's what gets it on bestseller lists. | |
| So I would certainly hope that you do that. | |
| Everybody's going to be talking about it in the next week. | |
| I'll make sure that I should be on a few Fox News shows. | |
| Hope to be on the Greg Guffield show, so look for me there. | |
| And some other shows, to be determined. | |
| I'll be on Fox and Friends as well. | |
| So look for me there. | |
| And my Periscopes this coming week might be Unpredictable. | |
| So my timing for the coming periscopes might be off a little bit, but I'll try to do at least one a day. | |
| Somebody says, I don't believe this, Scott. | |
| You said Tulsi is a non-contender. | |
| In the past, when her polling was 1%, I said she was not a contender. | |
| At the moment... Because everybody else is so bad, that situation has changed. | |
| So when the situation changes, sometimes I change my mind. |
Export Selection