Episode 1176 Scott Adams: Even the Looters Don't Know What to do Now. Get in Here.
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Fraud and the search for it
Massive pollster inaccuracy
Many possible events pending
Irregularities aplenty...maybe
Oregon legalizes all drugs
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Because we've got some interesting stuff developing.
Oh, very interesting.
Very interesting. And before we get going, just to prepare ourselves, what do we need?
Yes, we need a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or chalice or a stein, a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee. And join me now for the dopamine hit of the day.
The thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
And you need it. You need it bad.
and you need it now.
Go.
I can feel some ballots being disqualified with one sip.
That's all it took. All right, so I couldn't stop thinking about last night.
Last night I was thinking about last night.
What would it be like to be Joe Biden Or Trump.
But more importantly, what would it be like to be Joe Biden?
And you figure he's probably exhausted, right?
And he's got to go to sleep at some point.
He probably didn't stay up all night.
How would you like to be Joe Biden and know that when you go to sleep last night, in all likelihood, when you wake up, you're either the most important person in the world, the President of the United States, or Or, did YouTube just stop?
Somebody's saying YouTube isn't working, but I see the comments going by, so it looks like it's working.
Yeah, I've got 2,000 people on YouTube, so YouTube's working.
So imagine Joe Biden.
He doesn't know if he's retired or the President of the United States.
What would that do to your head?
Because you and I have usually just two choices in life.
You know, you apply for a job, and if you don't get it, you're unhappy.
But it's not that big a difference between being unemployed and having that specific job versus being the President of the United States or retired.
So at the moment, and things are changing quickly, But at the moment, it looks like Joe Biden has a stranglehold on the vote, at least what we'll call phase one of the election.
Do you think it's going to be all over when they're done counting the votes?
No, no, this is 2020.
In 2020, things don't happen the way they happen in other years.
So let's just run down all the stuff.
So I've declared that this is the first Schrodinger's cat election, meaning that there is a winner, we just don't know who it is.
Now maybe someday we'll be able to look inside the proverbial box and we'll know if the cat is alive or the cat is dead, but we can't do it yet.
There's not quite enough transparency.
There's some small chance, I guess, That Trump could pull Arizona out and then, who knows, if he holds Pennsylvania, anything could happen.
But at the moment, the odds are looking like Biden is going to have an electoral, tiny, tiny advantage when the votes are counted.
We'll see. Now, what did we learn last night?
Number one, how were the professional pollsters?
Well, I would say Rasmussen was pretty close.
Rasmussen, once again, proves that they're one of the more accurate ones.
But all the pollsters who said that Biden had this gigantic double-digit advantage, were they lying?
Or were they wrong?
Or, my hypothesis, that it was the world's greatest dad joke.
Now, it would be a better dad joke if Trump had won, but I think we can conclude that there was something wrong with those polls, and unless you assume that they were all colluding and lying or incompetent, I suppose, the only other possibility that I can think of that's likely is that Trump supporters were lying like crazy to pollsters.
So, are we ready to admit that that was real, or is it too soon?
If you had the...
Now that we know the polls were wildly inaccurate, we didn't know that for sure.
But now that we know that for sure, what's the explanation?
Incompetence, collusion, meaning they were trying to influence the vote by faking it or showing Biden was ahead so he gets more fundraising or something.
So some kind of mischief.
Incompetence... Or Trump supporters lying?
Which one do you think is the most likely explanation?
Like most things, we'll probably never agree.
I'm feeling pretty good about that prediction.
The other prediction I made is that we would, at some point, not permanently, but at some point, I predicted we would have two presidents.
Now, we're not there.
We're not there. I would not call this situation that prediction.
But we're not done when the votes are counted.
You know that, right? There will be legal challenges and things discovered.
And let me ask you this, just for context.
Let's say the IRS took a dart and they just threw it at a bunch of names of companies.
And the dart randomly hits the name of one company, and the IRS says, all right, we're going to audit you, top to bottom.
We're going to look at everything you've done.
What are the odds that randomly throwing a dart, the IRS would find a company that had tax violations?
Do you know the answer to that question?
Because the answer is pretty close to 100%.
Now, it doesn't mean these companies are all crooks.
But taxes are complicated.
Things happen. Judgments are made.
And if you have a big, rich, target-rich environment with complexity, I'm seeing in the comments you're saying 100%.
Anybody with experience knows that's the case.
Big company, 100% chance the IRS could find something, something they didn't like.
Now, what are the odds That the Trump administration will look at the outcome of this election, and they'll look at all the reports that people are saying of there was this irregularity and this irregularity.
What are the odds that the Trump campaign will not be able to find something that's real, you know, not just something they made up, but something that has some substance, That they can complain about to maybe potentially, possibly overthrow the result of the election.
What are the chances that such an opportunity exists?
100%. So if you're saying to yourself, are we done once the votes are counted?
I doubt it. The same way, you know, if the IRS wanted you, they're going to find something.
And I'm sure the Trump administration can find something.
To make an argument about, and of course they do have the Supreme Court on their side, but we don't know if any of it goes to the Supreme Court.
Might it end up at the House of Representatives, as our Constitution seems to prefer?
That anything could happen.
Here's another one.
What happens If Joe Biden is deemed mentally incompetent before the electoral college voters vote, what happens then?
If they can't cast their vote for the person who won the most votes as far as they know, If they can't do that, because let's say hypothetically he's just not capable at that point, or maybe there's some legal problem by that point.
You can imagine two scenarios in which something happens.
By the way, there's no evidence that I'm aware of of Biden himself being involved in any crimes.
I'm just saying anything could happen.
In a big, complicated world, you can accuse anybody of anything.
And... What happens then?
Does Kamala get the electoral college votes?
How does that work?
Does the House get involved?
So if you think that we're done, or near done, because you think you know what the end of vote will be, I don't know.
It's 2020. Anything could happen.
Let me ask you this.
What are the odds that China tried to interfere with the election?
Now, that's separate from the odds that we would catch them.
But just what are the odds that they tried?
What do you think? What are the odds that they tried?
100%? I don't know.
I don't know how to put odds on that.
But aren't we trying to interfere in other elections fairly routinely?
Don't countries somewhat routinely interfere with other elections?
So suppose China was just routinely interfering, perhaps like they have in the past, perhaps like Russia is doing, perhaps as other countries are doing.
Who knows? And suppose we find something.
What then? Because it would be so obvious that China prefers Biden, what happens if we find even a little bit of China influence on the election?
What then? There are a lot of wild cards here, aren't there?
If you're a Biden supporter, even if you get the win, I don't know if you can be completely comfortable, because who knows what's going to happen.
So, President Trump decided to declare that, in his opinion, frankly, he did win the election.
That's when he was ahead in the vote count.
And wanted future votes, I guess, not to be counted or something.
But Biden had said, a little bit more reserved, he said he believed he was going to win.
Now those are different.
Saying you believe you're going to win is just always fair.
That's always fair for a politician to say, right?
So nobody gets in trouble for saying, I believe I will win.
But if you say I did win, and they're still counting votes, That's kind of a stretch.
But did it give Trump a strategic advantage in claiming that he had won?
Maybe. Maybe it would get his base on his side if he wants to fight it on some technicality.
So it might give him some advantage.
What kind of irregularities are we seeing?
So this is the point in the process.
Where you shouldn't believe anything, you see?
The fake news that you're going to see in the next few days will be probably record-setting.
And so one of the things we're seeing is that there was something that happened in Michigan where a whole bunch of votes were added to Biden sort of suddenly toward the end.
Now, I don't know the details of that, and I would not assume that it means something untoward happened.
Or that anything happened, because we're so early in the fog of war that I don't even know if it's true that a bunch of votes got added for Biden at the end.
Who knows if even the basic facts are true at this point.
But that's, you know, one question.
There's another question about Arizona voters who were Trump supporters getting Sharpies to use on their ballots, and that would invalidate them somehow.
I don't know if there's anything to that.
Who knows? Does the Sharpie invalidate your ballot?
I don't know. Of course, there will be multiple reports of fake ballots and ballot harvesting.
Ballot harvesting is legal depending on the state.
So there's going to be all kinds of stuff to look into.
But let me ask you this.
Let's say it came down to Michigan.
Let's say the vote came down to whoever won Michigan would be president.
And let's say Michigan...
Came down to Detroit.
It could, right?
Or the Detroit County or something.
Suppose it came down to really just one metropolitan area.
Do you think the Trump administration could find real evidence that that one metropolitan area, no matter what it is, had some bad ballots and irregularities?
Probably, right?
Because again, everything big and complicated...
It has a little bit of corruption or a little bit of mistake or a little bit of incompetence.
So if you just said, randomly, throw your dart at the map of the United States, hit a city, and then really do a deep dive on that city, are you going to find any problems?
Probably, right?
It's a big world.
There's lots of opportunities for that stuff.
So 59% of my followers on an unscientific Twitter poll say they think the election has been unfair.
50%.
59%. Now, it's unscientific, and most of my followers are Trump supporters, so you'd expect that they would be Trump-supporting in their answering of the poll.
But that's a lot of people, even unscientific.
So what would happen if Trump supporters think that the election was not fair?
If it goes through the right process, they will accept it.
In other words, if the House is involved, or somebody checks the votes and checks for the irregularities, or the Supreme Court makes the decision, if there's something that looks like a constitutional process, I think Trump supporters are going to Grudgingly accept the result, even while doubting that it was legitimate, as long as the process looks like it was followed.
So I don't think there's going to be civil war in that specific sense.
Now, the weirdest thing about where we are right now is that even the looters don't know what to do.
You know, I tweeted that.
It's a joke, but not really a joke.
Because what are all the protesters and the people who have assembled in the streets, what do they do if Biden wins?
Do you know?
I don't really know.
I don't know. Do they go home if Biden wins?
Because that's one possibility.
They'll just go home. But if Biden wins, don't you still have a problem with Black Lives Matter and police brutality, according to them?
There shouldn't be any difference, right?
Because the issues that BLM and Antifa had don't really change if you change the president.
I don't think so.
So are we going to watch Antifa become the ally of Republicans?
Because you know the enemy of my enemy situation?
Antifa is going to turn on Biden.
Right? Because Antifa is not Democrats.
They're Antifa.
They don't have a party, per se.
So they should turn on Biden pretty quickly.
You expect the squad to turn on Biden.
They've already done that.
So they're going to start demanding stuff.
Now here's my question to you.
Let's say the Senate...
Holds Republican.
It looks like it will barely, right?
Maybe by one vote or something like that.
Maybe it's just Pence who's the tiebreaker, or one vote plus Pence, something like that.
Is that enough to stop Biden, or let's say stop the squad, from going full socialist?
Would a Republican Senate be enough to stop that stuff from happening if you only have a One vote advantage?
I don't know if that's enough, but it might be.
It could be that the thing that would surprise me the least, and indeed I've predicted this in the past, is that a regular Democrat president would have to govern like Trump did, policy-wise.
So my assumption is that Trump proved enough things to work In other words, he tried different things and they worked, such that whoever is president next kind of has to do that because it worked.
For example, do you think that a President Biden would just stop all work on border security?
Probably not, right?
Because it's not really good for Biden if things get out of control at the border.
That means that Democrats lose the next election.
So even Democrats can't really open the border because they would never get elected again.
So what about, say, North Korea?
Is Biden going to get tough with Kim Jong-un?
Probably not. He'll probably take something close to a Trump approach, which is, well, we won't threaten you if you don't threaten us.
Something like that.
Do you think that a Biden would just stop negotiating a trade deal with China?
So if he says, in all caps, Trump tweeted, it must be a good one.
So let's go look at that.
Let's see what Trump is tweeting, if it's so good that you just had to tell me.
All right. So he says, three minutes ago, Trump says, how come every time they count mail-in ballot dumps, they are so devastating in their percentage and power of destruction?
That's sort of a generic thing to say.
Sixteen minutes ago, he said, Last night I was leading, often solidly, in many key states.
In almost all instances, Democrat-run and controlled.
Then, one by one, they started to magically disappear as surprise ballot dumps were counted.
Very strange.
And the, quote, pollsters got it completely and historically wrong.
So it looks like he's setting it up for the mail-in ballots to be the fraudulent thing that cost him the election.
What do you think?
Do you think that's real?
Is your opinion, if you were not just being a team player, if you were not just backing your candidate, if you stepped away and And said to yourself, okay, if I'm being objective, I'm a space alien, I'm just looking at this situation, do you think that the election was stolen by mail-in ballots?
What do you think? Now, I do believe that fraud is somewhat universal, meaning that probably every state, every county had a little bit of irregularity, and that probably it's like that every time.
But do you think the mail-in ballots really were, like, legitimately, they had a bunch of them waiting, and they just waited to see what their vote was, and then they said, all right, we don't need all of them, but let's use half of the fake ones we had and dump them out there.
Do you think that happened?
Because it would only have to happen in, like I said, Maybe you only needed to do it in Detroit or, you know, one or two places.
So you wouldn't have to do it everywhere all over.
You would just need a few places.
That's it. So looking at your comments, I'm seeing some yeses, some nos, etc.
Now I think the real issue is going to come down to how many of them Can be rejected because there's some signature problem or something else.
And I don't know how you ever solve that.
So it looks like Trump supporters believe that there was major fraud involved.
It looks like the president is very persuasive or who he's following.
I don't know if he's leading or following in this case.
But he does seem to match his base.
That the majority think that something illegal or fraudulent happened.
I don't know how to handicap that.
Somebody says, do you still think Trump will win?
Well, my most recent...
Prediction is that at least for a time we would have two presidents.
And that CNN would say, we have a President Biden, and Fox News would say, they're not saying that now, but that they will at some point say, we have a President Trump re-election.
And that would happen if Trump managed to wage a, let's say, a legal attack against the result that had some teeth.
So if Trump comes up with some kind of a fraudulent accusation or accusation of fraud, and there's actually some evidence, you never know.
But if the vote goes the way it's just being counted straight up, it looks like Biden would win at the moment.
It looks like that. I'm just saying what the news is telling you.
So here's a question.
If you thought that, let's say you had a theory that Israel secretly controls all the big decisions in this country, did you believe that?
Did you think that Israel was really running the show?
Because Israel wanted Trump to win.
So if Israel was behind any mischief, either they didn't do anything or Or they did something that wasn't as big as the mischief from the other side.
So can you rule out that Israel has that much power over the political process of this country?
I feel like if this holds, it would be a pretty good example of how they didn't get what they wanted.
What would Biden do with all these peace deals that are happening in the Middle East?
Would he reverse them and go pro-Iran?
Probably not. It's sort of too late for that, isn't it?
So, the one thing you should wonder about is if Biden could do any of the things that he says he wants, or would he be forced by circumstance to simply do something very close to what Trump was doing, but, you know, put a new name on it and try to pretend it's different?
Somebody says, does Israel really want Trump to win?
I think, yeah, I think you could say that with some confidence.
Yes. Yes. Arizona has 2% left to count, so that wouldn't get it done.
So we have to assume that that goes to Biden.
So, let's say Biden gets inaugurated and he becomes the president.
What will we say was the reason?
Some of you will say fraud, and you'll say that forever.
I think you also have to look at the social media companies.
Because at this point, I don't know if humans can overcome the algorithms.
You know, I call the algorithms artificial intelligence.
And I had said that whether Trump wins or loses, that he'll be the last human president.
Meaning that AI, if AI and the algorithms are what caused Biden to win, and of course they did, Of course they did, right?
Because the stories that get promoted are the ones that influence.
So the algorithms probably picked the president.
So one filter you could look at this is that the human activity was somewhat irrelevant because AI caused us to do what we did.
So it was really in charge.
That's one way to look at it.
The other way is that the Democrats just did a good job on everything.
They did a good job getting in more people who would vote their way into the country, did a better job at campaigning, controlled the media better.
That's another way to look at it.
Some people say the AI is made by humans, Scott.
There is where you are completely misled.
So yes, it is true that the AI is designed by humans, but do you believe that any humans know what the AI will do?
Nope. They don't.
Now, they do have the power to force the AI or the algorithm to do a certain thing.
They have the power, but do you think that's how they designed it?
Do you think they designed it so they know exactly what it's going to do?
I don't. I think it has so many variables That nobody who is human knows exactly what the algorithm is going to do.
They know what they programmed, but they don't know what it's going to do.
And under that condition, would you say that the human is in charge if they don't know what their creation is going to do?
Suppose you built a Frankenstein monster.
You're in charge of the monster, right?
So then do you control the monster after it leaves your laboratory and starts destroying the town?
Could you say, hey, Dr.
Frankenstein, Stop your monster.
I mean, you're the human.
You made it, so you're in control, right?
Doesn't work that way.
Once the Frankenstein leaves the laboratory, which is what the algorithms are, they're Frankenstein outside the laboratory, the coder or Dr.
Frankenstein can't control it anymore.
So when you say humans make the AI, true.
But a human makes Dr.
Frankenstein's human, and he made the Frankenstein monster, but he doesn't control it after it leaves the laboratory.
All right.
Can't there be overfitting...
Somebody says the media stole the election.
I would say that's true.
If you were to look at Biden voters and ask them, you know, what do they think is true, they would just say hoax after hoax after hoax.
So Biden is elected on a hoax, basically.
And I would say that, you know, people ask me, Scott, why did you try so hard to debunk the fine people hoax?
And the answer was that it's the tentpole hoax.
All the other hoaxes Depend on you thinking that one really happened.
Because if you think, well, that one's proven, if you think it happened, it didn't.
But if you think it did, then you start thinking, well, the other unproven one's probably true, because this one was proven, so that kind of makes me think the other ones are true.
And I think Biden, with the help of the media, sold it as true enough that I'm sure it changed the result.
I mean, there was a reason that he led with it all the time in his campaign.
I would imagine that they do research on that stuff, right?
Don't you think that Biden's campaign stump speech was a whole bunch of poll-tested points, so they knew that the Charlottesville thing had an impact?
I don't think he would have led with it consistently if they hadn't tested it to know that it made a difference.
So probably the fine people hoax made him president.
I mean, that's an irrational thing to say because in these situations that are complicated and there are so many variables, if you change any of them, you get a different result.
So you could say it was foreign interference, Because that was 1% of the difference.
You could say it was the fine people hoax, because that was 1% of the difference, and it was only a 1% kind of vote.
So you could always say that there was something that was the difference, but really everything had to be the way it is, or you wouldn't get this result.
All right. Somebody says, Biden's not elected yet.
Yeah, I suppose in the category of anything could happen.
Yeah, the fine people hoax is still a lie, that's true.
You know, so here's the real question.
Will Biden getting elected, will it cause less violence in the streets?
What do you think? Do you think that the riots will just stop?
And I'm wondering if this isn't the very best situation for Republicans and they don't realize it.
Because the rioters really needed a solid Trump victory in order to be activated.
But what if they just think, well, I don't know what's happening yet.
I feel like looting, but the trigger wasn't there.
So do I take the day off?
I don't know what to do.
And quite literally, I don't think they know what to do.
So somebody says that Biden president means more violence in the streets.
Well, do you think that Democratic mayors could get tougher with the protesters if they had a Democratic president?
Maybe. Maybe it's a Nixon goes to China situation and suddenly all the Democratic mayors could get tough.
Because, hey, they're not trying to show that Trump is orange band bad.
We shall see. So I'm seeing some people say the riots will stop immediately.
If they do, you really got to wonder about stuff.
Yeah, I don't see any energy whatsoever for Republicans to take over.
Now, what do you think about Trump leaving office if, let's say, he goes through his legal challenges and they don't work?
Or he uses the system as well as he can, but he can't get a different result.
Do you think there's any chance that Trump would try to stay in office if he had exhausted his appeals?
I don't think so.
I think the odds of that are zero.
Not even, you know, one percent.
I think it's zero. But what if it's Inauguration Day and there's still an open question of massive fraud?
What then? What then indeed?
Well, I think that with the help of the media, the media can simply sell a Biden victory, no matter how much fraud was involved, and enough of the public will accept it.
So that looks like the direction we're going.
Now, because it's 2020, you cannot rule out another surprise.
And the other surprise would be some easy-to-prove fraud.
So what do you think are the odds that the Trump administration will be able to point to something specific?
You know, not just a general, hey, I don't like these mail-in ballots, but something like that has a video or a witness or something you could just look at and you know it's fraud.
What are the odds of something like that We'll emerge in the next, I don't know, 48 hours or a week or whatever.
Pretty high, right?
Pretty high. Because when you need a fraud, you can always find one.
I feel like it doesn't take much work to find a fraud in any of these situations.
Yeah, according to the Constitution, somebody's saying Pelosi is third in line.
So even Pelosi could get into the work here.
All right. Let's see.
And Pelosi actually lost Democrats in the House.
So if you're looking at how bad the polling was, look at how bad...
Well, I mean, they got everything wrong, right?
So the polls thought that the House would pick up Democrats.
It didn't. It thought that the Senate would flip.
It didn't. And certainly thought that the presidential election would be, you know, an overwhelming Biden victory, but it wasn't.
So the polls were quite, quite off in everything that mattered.
So, in a little side story, Oregon became the first state to decriminalize hard drugs.
It's like a little side story that is sort of big.
So they decriminalized heroin, cocaine, and meth.
Wow. And by a pretty solid vote, people really wanted that.
And I guess they're replacing that with some kind of humane, cost-effective health approach.
I am very much in favor of this.
It would have been a mistake for the entire country to do this all at the same time.
But remember what I tell you about anything that you can test locally or small, you should.
If you think it might work, give it a test.
But test is small, so you don't ruin the whole country.
So now Oregon...
It's going to give us some data that will be really useful.
And I would say that addiction is maybe the biggest problem in the country right now.
So if they can get any kind of progress on that, that would be a big deal.
By the way, if Trump did lose and does lose, it's going to be because of healthcare and coronavirus, don't you think?
I mean, those will kind of be the reasons.
Here is a...
Oh, so here's a phrase that you might hear.
This is from Ross Garber on Twitter, who's got some credentials, and he says, unless the vote is close enough, there's no chance for the lawyers to kick a legal field goal.
Unless it's close enough?
So far, too many uncounted ballots in too many key places.
Keep an eye on what he calls the margin of litigation.
So I think maybe he said something wrong in his tweet, but what I take as his meaning is that if the distance, if the final count between Biden and Trump is small, it might be a small enough distance to That a successful litigation of something specific, say one state or one metropolitan area, might be enough to overturn it.
But if the Biden gap is bigger, then even if you have a successful litigation of some sort, you might not change anything enough to close that gap.
So you might hear this phrase, the margin of litigation.
Is he close enough that a legal challenge could make a difference?
Don't you think you would find some pleasure if you're a Trump supporter, and it turns out Biden is the winner, would you find some pleasure in watching the squad tear him apart?
Because he's going to get, I mean, he'll just, he'll be ripped down to the bone, I think, by the progressives.
So watching that will sort of be fun.
And it looks like if Biden is president, all of the Russia collusion coup people will go free.
Will stay free, I guess.
So it looks like crime pays so far.
So far, I would say we have strong evidence that crime pays.
And that the coup attempt with the Russia collusion hoax looks like nobody's going to get punished for that.
Looks like that was just a free slap.
And it will actually be part of what causes Biden to win.
So I would say that that just sort of worked.
It just didn't work the year that they wanted it to work.
But it had a spillover effect into this election, for sure.
Somebody says Trump tweets are being filtered by Twitter again.
Well, anything where he claims victory is going to get filtered.
Will Trump's crimes pay?
Well, I don't know of any Trump crimes.
All right. The hardest part about this will be all of the gloating Democrats.
So I might have to take a social media holiday just until they get less excited.
Somebody's telling me to look at Trump's newest tweets.
I don't know if those are the ones I just looked at, but let's see.
Oh, there's one that's being filtered.
Oh, so Matt Walsh has tweeted something that Twitter is trying very hard for me not to see.
So I'm at my second level of warning here.
And so Matt Walsh says, this is reason enough to go to court.
No honest person can look at this and say it's normal and unconcerning.
And the way he's talking about Is this idea that Michigan went up 128,000 votes for Biden with no extra votes for Trump at the same time.
So I believe that's the claim that the key state of Michigan had an unexpected surge in votes and conservatives are pointing it out and Trump is saying, what is this all about in caps?
Now remember I told you That the odds of finding something irregular is kind of 100%.
Now, suppose this is fraud.
Now, I think the greater odds are always that it's not.
If you were going to bet on it, you'd probably bet that it's not.
But you certainly have to ask the question, why does it look like that?
I think if you dig down, you'll find out that there's more to it, and maybe it's not what it looks like.
But it could be. It could be.
I'm not saying it's not fraud.
It certainly has all of the telltale sides of fraud.
If you were going to do fraud, it would look sort of like this.
So the question has to be asked and answered, but that doesn't mean it's what you think it is.
And then what else has he got here?
Let's see. Yeah, and then the president retweeted someone else talking about this 128,000 votes in Michigan.
You know, one way this could go quite easily, what if he challenges just that and it's enough?
So already you can see the wisdom of Ross Garber's Comment about the margin of litigation.
So somebody tell me, because I don't know, if Trump challenged just that 128,000 votes that look sort of suspicious, because 100% of them went to Biden, if he challenged just that and he succeeded, would it change the result?
Is he within the margin of litigation, as Ross Garber says?
I don't know. I don't know if this could be more interesting or more frustrating if you tried.
How in the world did this simple process that has worked for hundreds of years become this complicated?
And could you ever be convinced that it wasn't fraud if it turns out that the basic facts being alleged are true?
Let's say it's true That 128,000 votes appeared suddenly, and 100% of them were Biden, and that's the story.
If that was the final story, and we never got any deeper explanation, would you accept this election as valid?
I don't know. To me, it would depend a little bit about whether that one change would change the result.
If it would, well, if it would, you've got some real questions there.
Somebody says, please don't have a defeatist attitude about this.
Well, it's not defeatist.
I would say that the odds of a challenge that's got some meat to it is pretty good.
I don't know if that wins the day, but there's a pretty good chance the president has a...
As a case. And if he could find a way to get that case to the Supreme Court, does he have an advantage because of his conservative judges?
Maybe. Somebody says kudos on keeping going today.
Well, let me ask you people, how do you feel?
How do you feel today?
Now of course you feel uncertainty and stomach aches and all that, but is your life ruined?
Will your food taste differently today?
Will your job change?
For most of you, We're good to go.
Has proposed is confiscatory.
I think that's a word, right?
Confiscatory? Meaning that I made my money under a certain set of rules.
In other words, capitalism and the government said, here are your rules.
If you follow these rules and make some money, you get to keep it.
That's what I thought were the rules.
If I follow all of your constitutional rules and your laws, and I make a bunch of money, and I live in the United States, I get to keep it.
I thought that was the deal.
Now, if I had been told from the beginning, you know, you can make as much money as you want, but you're going to have to give 65% of it to the government.
And by the way, that's low.
The 65% of it is just your regular taxes, if you're in a high tax zone.
I would also be paying property tax.
I would also be paying sales tax.
So my effective tax rate, if you take all of my taxes, under Biden might be 75%.
I might get to keep 25% of every dollar I earn.
That's enough to make you look at another country.
But it isn't that easy to just move to another country and avoid taxes.
You've got to give up your citizenship.
It's not easy.
So it's no easy deal just to move somewhere else.
It's not something you can do.
Plus, you want to live in the country with the biggest military.
You know, you don't want to live in the little island that can be conquered by just about anybody who wants to.
I don't want to live on a little island that can be destroyed by a hurricane either.
So it's hard to move out of the United States.
It's a little bit of a network effect, if you know what I mean.
Somebody says they won't let you go.
Oh, somebody says the market is up.
Is it? Let's see.
So markets like certainty.
So Amazon is way up.
Oh, that's interesting. Bitcoin has been having a run, so that's staying solid.
The broader market is up solidly.
Apple's way up.
Israel's up. I've got a fund of stocks in Israel, and that's way up.
Interesting. What the hell?
Okay. I'm just looking at a comment.
Did you notice they changed the way we voted at the last minute?
Just looking at your comments.
and Somebody says, it's stupid to leave.
Stay and fight. Yeah.
I don't think taxes will go the direction of the Biden tax plan.
I think that if there's a Republican Senate and the Democrats want to stay in power for a while, that they probably can't do that.
The yuan is tanking again.
Interesting. The betting market has gone Biden, right?
The betting market has gone completely Biden.
So somebody asked me about simulation theory.
So let me put this in a frame you've heard before.
If this is a simulation, and as I've said, there's a tendency for life To follow the path of the best movie.
What would be the best movie?
Think about it. If this were a movie, and everything that had happened up to this point is what happened in the movie, what would be the movie ending?
Do you know what it would be?
The movie ending would be finding out that those Michigan votes were fraudulent.
And this is the third act.
Because the point of the third act is that you're supposed to feel as if it's over.
Like you're actually supposed to think, okay, seriously, no joking aside, it's done now.
It's a little bit how you might have felt the day the Access Hollywood tape came out, right before the 2016 election.
When I heard that, My feeling was, the first time I heard it, I came out of it.
But the first time I heard that, I said, that's it.
There isn't any way anybody in the world can recover from this excess Hollywood tape.
Now, it took me a few days to realize that wasn't the case and came back to predicting Trump would win.
But that was the third act, in my opinion.
That was the point where even the biggest believer...
The biggest optimist capitulates and says, alright, alright, there's just no hope.
There's no hope left. And then the hero pulls out a victory in a way that was completely unexpected.
And the obvious way that would happen would be to find out that there was some fraud that changed the election and find out in time to reverse the outcome.
So this will be a good test of the simulation slash movie hypothesis.
The movie simulation theory suggests that Trump will reverse some of the votes.
Now, if I said to you there's a presidential candidate and he's going to challenge the votes and he's going to have them reversed and it will be enough of them that it changes the election, what would you say in general?
In general, you'd say, I don't think so.
I don't know of any president who's ever done that.
But it's Trump.
Trump consistently does things you didn't think were possible.
I don't have to do the list.
You've seen the list. But, you know, he's finding peace in the Middle East.
He consistently does the thing you think, I don't think anybody could do.
Oh, he just did it. So, if you say to me the only way he could win is to do this highly unlikely play of getting a bunch of votes tossed down, very unlikely that anybody could succeed at that.
But it's 2020.
And it's Trump.
He could. I'm not going to predict it.
I'm going to say that if the movie filter holds, this was the third act.
And I have to say that there was nothing that happened before this that felt completely third-acty.
The other things that have happened before this seem big, but they didn't quite seem like a crushing final blow.
Today's vote count feels like a crushing final blow, doesn't it?
So that's either real or it's a third act.
We'll find out. Somebody says Trump should pardon Hunter.
I don't know what good that is.
Somebody says they prefer the low-budget movie where Nevada turns red in a few hours somehow.
Yeah, maybe. So the slaughter meter?
At least in terms of the vote, I would say is pretty close to zero.
So in terms of winning it on the first count, I would say the odds of Trump winning it just because the votes came in his way is pretty close to zero at this point.
The odds of prevailing in the long run still exist, meaning that when he digs into this Michigan vote count, there might be something there.
