Episode 1184 Scott Adams: I Tell You How You Have Been Brainwashed and Take Questions
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Every "credible" source has been wrong this year
How social media and the news are brainwashing the public
You can SMELL the election fraud
USPS Postal employee whistleblower reports election fraud
News sources acting like crime scene cleaners
Lincoln Project's list for career destruction
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
For coffee with Scott Adams, the best part of the day.
There will be other good parts today.
Don't worry. This won't be the only good part.
But let me tell you, this part, pretty darn good.
And all you need is a cup or mug or glass, a tank or chalice or stein, a candy, jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I'm partial to coffee.
And join me now for the dopamine of the day.
The unparalleled pleasure, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
And if you're prepared, it's going to happen to you right now.
Go. Thanks for asking.
Yes, I believe that today's broadcast will feature me wearing a shirt the right way out for the first time.
Yeah, I'll try anything once.
And there are lots of things happening, including I asked on Twitter, if you didn't see it, to give me some questions.
And why in the world do those questions...
Oh, there we go. So I've already got 645 questions.
We might be here for a while.
You'd like to hear them all answered, wouldn't you?
Alright, well, let me talk about some fun things first.
Number one, there is some talk that if, and it's a very big if, President Trump decides to concede that he would run again in 2024.
Now, here's the funny part.
If you were worried about Donald Trump before, and you were a Democrat, and you said, man, I can't think of anything that was worse than 2016 to 2020, when President Trump was the leader of the country, what could be worse than that, say the Democrats?
Well, how would you like the resurrection version of Trump?
After he's politically dead for four years and he returns, I think he's going to be stronger.
So I just find it funny to think that anybody would think that if he doesn't win this time, you're out of the woods.
You're so not out of the woods.
And of course there's still the recount to go.
My state continues To excel.
I don't like to brag.
I know you live in different places.
You probably think your state is pretty good too.
But I live in California.
And let me tell you, this state does one thing better than I've ever seen it done.
And that one thing that California does better than any other state, and I'm serious about this, is that we can act like stupid fucking idiots Better than any state.
Have you ever seen like, pick some small state, Rhode Island.
Have you ever seen Rhode Island try to act stupid?
It's just kind of cute, right?
It's a little Rhode Island.
They try to act stupid, but they can't do it.
They can't really pull it off. They're just too cute.
New Hampshire? Try to be stupid, New Hampshire.
You could try. Good luck.
You can't do it.
Top this. This is what my state did.
This is my state.
We, California, or actually San Francisco, banned natural gas and new construction.
Bam! Come on, Rhode Island, Vermont.
Do you think you can do something stupider than that?
I don't think you can. Try it.
Try it. We're number one.
We're number one. Nobody can be as dumb as San Francisco first, and then possibly, fingers crossed, this will sweep the rest of the state.
And pretty soon, you won't have anything in your energy portfolio that is good for global warming.
Okay, I guess they think they have a plan there.
But as all of you know, the reason that we've done better than the Paris Peace Accords had even told us we should do is because of...
What? What was it?
Fracking. Fracking is what gives you natural gas.
Natural gas is what gives you energy that's cleaner than coal.
And that's the one that gets replaced.
So you don't replace your clean versions of energy.
Just because you have natural gas, you're not going to get rid of your solar power and your hydropower.
Those will stay. The only thing you're going to replace is coal, because it's the dirty one-ish, relatively speaking.
And so, as all of my followers know, getting rid of natural gas is exactly the opposite of what the people doing it want to achieve.
Because it will make the climate warmer, as far as we know, because we don't have something that's cleaner than natural gas that's also as plentiful.
Alright. I'm having a good time with this transition period, far more than I thought I would enjoy it.
Somebody says, this is the dumbest scope ever.
Well, it might be, but it's your last one.
There. Put you out of your pain.
You'll never have to worry again about the dumbness of this periscope.
Problem solved.
Problem solved. Alright, so here's what I'm enjoying about this transition period.
Make no mistake about it, my first choice was for President Trump to win outright in the original vote for re-election.
That didn't happen.
I, unlike some of you, have already congratulated publicly, alleged, unverified, presumptive, possibly, who knows what, President-elect Biden.
And I was very sincere about it.
But nonetheless, nonetheless, we do have this lingering doubt that every single thing has been examined, to be sure.
100% sure that we have the right outcome and we're going to get the right president-elect.
And I didn't think that this weird gray area period, possibly a period of great chaos, I didn't think I would enjoy it as much as I am.
And here's the part that I'm enjoying.
And I can't feel good about this.
I mean, I really can't feel good about this.
But I keep imagining in my head that Democrats are having two thoughts simultaneously.
The first thought they're having, and correct me if I'm wrong, don't you think Democrats are having this thought?
They're thinking that there's no way the election had enough fraud to overturn the results.
Don't you think that basically...
Every Democrat is having that thought.
Because they've been told that. The media has told them unambiguously.
They said, yeah, you know, there might be some little thing here, some little thing there.
But there's no way.
There's no way there's enough of it that it's going to reverse the decision.
And we're talking about tens of thousands of votes in some of these states.
There's nothing so big in terms of possible...
Election mischief and crime and fraud.
There's no way it could be that big.
Now, would you agree with me, first of all, that that is pretty close to probably the universal thought among the Democrats right now?
Are we on the same page?
That they all pretty much think nothing's going to be found that's big enough.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, you're going to find some little stuff.
But nothing big enough to reverse the decision.
So keep that in your head that they're definitely thinking that.
Here's the second thing that, in my opinion, I can't know what anybody's thinking, but in my opinion there's a second thing they're thinking simultaneously, and it goes like this.
Wait. Republicans are actually checking?
Oh, shit.
Tell me I'm wrong.
Tell me that the Democrats are not simultaneously thinking there's no way they're going to find enough tens of thousands of illegal votes or some kind of shenanigans.
There's no way.
You Trump supporters are silly.
I laugh at you.
I can't even get the smile off my face.
I laugh at you because you're so dumb.
You're so conspiratorial.
You're so crazy that you think if you look into this, you're going to find tens of thousands of votes that aren't legitimate.
The other thought I'm having...
Oh, shit.
Are they actually checking?
And I would like to put one additional thought into your head.
If you're a Democrat who's still suffering from PTSD... And I believe you will be.
If you're suffering from PTSD, and this is no joke, are you rational?
No. That's what the PTSD is doing to you.
It's making you a little less rational.
So, if they're already a little jumpy, but their rational brain is saying, look, rational brain, Come on, rational brain.
The election's over.
There are way too many votes.
Every recount in the past got a few hundred.
Biden's ahead by thousands and thousands.
There's no risk.
There's no risk here.
And then the PTSD part of their brains is saying, I know there's no risk, and every credible source has told me that's true, but...
It's also true that every credible source has been wrong this year.
Every one of them.
Name a credible source that has been accurate and honest this year.
Let's say within the last 12 months.
FBI? How about the FBI? Credible?
Not so much anymore, right?
How about the news?
The news business? Credible?
No, no, not credible.
But wait, our election system?
That's credible. Sure, you don't trust the FBI, so maybe there's some stuff going on there.
And you don't trust the Department of Justice.
I get that. I get that.
There was some trouble over there.
But, you know, you can trust the election.
And surely, Just because the entire news business is corrupt, that's the news business.
That's not the elections.
The elections are separate.
So they're fine.
Yeah, the FBI is corrupt and we can't trust them.
The Department of Justice is a little iffy.
Politics, of course.
We've never trusted our politicians.
But, you know, again, these are different.
We're talking about different things.
Now, of course, you have your colleges and your universities.
You can trust them, right?
Because your colleges and your universities would not use that opportunity to simply brainwash students who are paying to be there, would they?
Oh, that's right.
They do. They actually take your money in college, give you a terrible product, and brainwash you while you're there.
Okay, so you can't really trust your colleges and your universities.
I get that. But, you know, Isolated with the FBI and the Department of Justice and politics and fake news.
So there are a few institutions which have not been ideal citizens, wouldn't you say?
But still, at least you have a private industry that you can trust.
What? Okay, okay, you don't trust big private industry, but at least you have the military-industrial complex you can trust.
Oh, wait a minute. That name only exists to describe how you can't trust the military or industry, because they collude.
Okay, so you can't exactly trust the military-industrial complex.
You can't trust politicians.
You can't trust the news, Department of Justice, FBI. But you know what you can trust?
The election. Because unlike every other institution, It seems to be the only one you can trust.
Well, that's not true.
There's one other you can trust.
For example, you could trust the Supreme Court.
Couldn't you? Oh, wait, sorry.
The Supreme Court only votes the way it has been packed.
So if it's packed with conservatives, you expect it to just give you what you want if you're conservative.
If it happened to be packed with liberals...
You would just expect it to give you what liberals want.
That's not really a court at all, is it?
What kind of a court is it if you know what the answer is before you give them the question?
So, alright, so you don't trust the court or politics or the news or the military-industrial complex or the Department of Justice or the FBI because they've all let you down this year.
But at least, God help us, we can trust Our major medical professionals.
Take, for example, the CDC and the World Health Organization.
At least you can trust...
Okay, so they kind of let us down in the last 12 months.
But there are exceptions.
There are just a few smattering exceptions of large institutions that have let us down.
So, you know, medical community, okay, let us down a little bit.
Our entire... Political, news, military, industrial, Department of Justice, and if you're a member of the black community, I don't think you think the police are acting entirely legitimately.
That's why Black Lives Matter exists.
But you trust Black Lives Matter, right?
Because Black Lives Matter is an organization that exists to condemn and change another institution, the police, which it believes are corrupt and racist.
So at least you can trust Black Lives Matter.
You can't? Alright, so here, circling back to my original point, you're the Democrats and you believe these two things.
Number one, that Biden won, the election's over, and there's nothing that could happen that would change it.
There's too much of a win margin there.
And the other thing is that 100% of the institutions and systems that you thought were trustworthy a year ago, every single one of them showed you that you can't trust them.
Every one. So, you've got some PTSD, you've been burned before, And everything that you're holding on to, your mental health, if you're a Democrat in this situation, your mental health depends on the election system waiting for it.
Wait for it. Your mental health depends completely on the election system being the only system in the entire fucking United States that isn't screwing you right now.
Do you believe it?
If you're a Democrat, are you really sure that there's only one system, one organization in the entire United States, there's one that gets it right?
And aren't we lucky that it happened to be the election system?
What are the odds?
What are the fucking odds that the election system is the one fucking thing that works the way it's supposed to?
There isn't one other fucking thing in our whole fucking country that worked the way it was fucking supposed to.
And if you're a Democrat, your entire mental health depends on the biggest fucking coincidence in the world that there was one thing you trusted And it worked out just the way you hoped it would.
So, this is what I find funny.
Because you know that whatever Democrats are saying publicly about how confident and happy they are, and they're picking out their people for the cabinet, etc., you know that they're not totally comfortable, are they? They are not completely comfortable.
Should they be? God, no.
Are you kidding me?
God, no. I hope that's not using the Lord's name in vain.
I can do that, right? I'm not using the damn word if I say God, no.
That's still appropriate, isn't it?
I have to check on these things once in a while.
Alright, so let me show you what happened in your life in the past year.
This is my filter on the world, acknowledging that there are other filters on the world that could also be accurate.
So sometimes the same set of facts can be described by more than one interpretation.
I'll give you mine, and the trick here is that the interpretation that predicts the best is the one probably you should adhere to because if it predicts the best, it's going to keep you the safest.
So we're subjective creatures and we walk around in our little imaginary bubbles all the time.
But if you can find a worldview that predicts pretty well, pay attention to that one.
Here's what I saw happen in the last, say, 18 months or so.
We saw an election in which the, I think you would agree, That the social platforms had great sway.
We don't know exactly how to measure it in a way that we would be comfortable, but is there anybody here who would disagree with the statement that the social media platform changed the outcome of the election?
Anybody? Is there anybody who would say that didn't happen?
Because we have unambiguous information that That the right was throttled, the right was disenfranchised a little bit on social media.
You'd all agree with that statement, right?
So I think we could say that the social media platforms influenced the election.
I think we could say that the news has been fake, both on the left and the right.
If you're not willing to say A lot of the news, not every single story you see, of course, but if you're not willing to say that there's lots of fake news on the right and lots of fake news on the left, you're not quite there.
There's another level of red pill-ness you need to get if you think the lying is all happening on one side.
That's not happening.
Because to believe that only the other side is lying, in terms of the news, That would violate everything I just talked about.
We've seen every one of our institutions and our systems break down in the past year.
Why would that be the one exception?
Oh yeah, the right-leaning news business gets everything right?
What are the odds of that?
Nothing. All right, how about the fake polls?
There does seem to be Pretty solid indication that the polls were designed for fundraising.
So you've got fake news that's laying this, let's say, air support cover, saying that the great orange menace is bad in a hundred different ways.
And most of it is based on hoaxes, as you know, but the people on the left do not.
They believe it's real news.
But, you know, there's the fine people hoax, the drinking bleach hoax, the losers hoax, the...
I could just go down the list.
It's all hoaxes. Which is not to say that the President never did anything that can't be criticized, but the dominant narrative from the left-leaning media about Trump, I would say that it was based on fake news, wouldn't you?
Don't you think that's a completely fair statement and supportable?
So you got your social platforms are brainwashing you, literally.
They're literally brainwashing you.
That word is not being used hyperbolically.
You are actually being brainwashed by social media.
You are being brainwashed and you get a little bit brainwashed by your preferred sources of news.
But the fake news is a brainwashing operation at this point.
I don't know if it was ever different.
I just know it's obvious now.
Maybe in the past it was a mixed bag.
I always think the news was a little bit of brainwashing because the government probably always had a little sway there, but at this point it's really obvious.
Then you've got maybe a fake election.
We'll see. It does look to me, if I had to bat, and I will tell you that I've seen a little bit more than you've seen, so there's some stuff coming that is different from the stuff you've seen.
But you're noticing that the news is already disappearing the stories that suggest the election was not pristine.
So if you look at the headlines today in the Washington Post and the New York Times and CNN, you'll see that there's a coordinated, and I'll use the word coordinated very deliberately, and I don't mean they necessarily had phone calls or meetings.
I mean that they all know what to do.
They're watching what the others are doing, and they're saying, okay, They debunked this thing, so we're going to go debunk this one.
We'll try to do a real debunk, in most cases I think they're real, or a fake debunk on anything that's real.
Because if you debunk, let's say, five things in a row, and your debunking is better than the original, what are people going to believe when you say the sixth thing is also fake?
They're going to believe your debunk, right?
Because if you debunk five things in a row and they look at your debunk and they go, oh, I did believe this, but now the debunk makes more sense.
Are you going to believe that sixth one?
Nope. So that's how the brainwashing is done.
The brainwashers are going to pick off all of the least credible claims of election fraud, the small ones.
So they'll make you think it's all small by looking at all the small ones, first of all.
Then they'll debunk them because they're not true.
It won't be hard to debunk most of them because they're not true.
It's just the nature of this thing that confirmation bias Will always overwhelm the real news.
So you know that there'll be more fake ones than real ones, no matter how much real one there is.
So finding a hundred fake ones in a row does not prove that the real one doesn't exist.
But isn't the news telling you that?
Watch the news and see if you're not being told this irrational story.
We checked a bunch of these allegations and they were found to not be true.
Therefore, all of the future allegations that we haven't heard of and the ones that we haven't looked into are probably also fake.
That's what they're selling you.
Does that make sense?
No. It's completely reversed.
What is completely reversed is if There are real ones, almost certainly the fact that you can smell them.
Do you know what I mean? Can't you smell the fraud?
And what I mean by that is it's a situation in which fraud is guaranteed to happen.
If you can't see it specifically, that doesn't mean it's not there, right?
Take the stock market.
Do you think that today anybody will do any insider trading?
Any. Just anywhere in the world, do you believe anyone will make an insider trade which would be illegal?
Of course. Of course.
You don't have to see any specific example.
The reason you know it's dirty, the financial market, is because there's nothing that would stop it.
That's why it happens all the time.
Insider trading is universally...
Just a crime that's happening in the baseline all the time.
The election is like the financial market.
You don't have to see the detail of a specific crime to know it's happening, right?
Because it can happen, the payoff could be gigantic, and there are lots of people involved.
This is one of the rules that I teach you all the time.
If you have those three conditions, fraud happens every time.
No exception. Here are the three again.
It's easy to do, right?
And I would say fixing an election, there probably are a whole variety, there are probably 25 things you could do, of which, you know, maybe 20 of them you get caught, but 5 you don't.
So it's easy enough, right?
It's easy enough to fix it.
The upside gain is huge, gigantic, so of course there's an incentive.
So it's possible, the incentive is off the chart, The odds of getting caught are vanishing.
Do you know anybody who went to jail for election fraud?
Apparently, if it's happening, people are getting away with it most of the time.
You do hear little cases of people getting caught.
So under those conditions, you smell it.
You don't see the examples, but you can smell it.
And so if the fake news which is brainwashing you, and I would say at this point it's really It's just so obvious that you can't interpret it any other way.
They are trying to brainwash you into believing that if they can debunk enough of these ones that are legitimately not real, that you will also believe that the next ones are not real, because you're going to see the pattern.
You're like, ah, it's just more of these debunked stuff.
My best example is that Project Veritas got a whistleblower, a postal employee who claims that The boss told the employees to backdate some of the ballots, which would make them valid instead of invalid.
Now, that was the claim.
And then he was interrogated by law enforcement, and the Washington Post ran an article that says he recanted his claim.
And you say to yourself, Whoa!
Wow! So he made a claim that's a pretty big claim, that the post office was backdating ballots.
That's a big claim. And...
Stop crying.
I'm going to talk about you in a while, but...
I'm going to block you first.
So anyway...
This is another part of the phenomenon, the brainwashing phenomenon.
So a weird part of the brainwashing phenomenon is that people are imagining a version of me that isn't happening.
Have you seen me look unhappy yet?
Because I'm not unhappy on the inside either.
I'm just not unhappy.
I kind of thought I might be.
I suspected that if Trump lost, I might be unhappy.
But it didn't happen. Now, partly because there's more to this game.
We could be in the third act, not at the end.
But I believe that Democrats have decided that I am unhappy because in their minds I must have to be unhappy because they make the flaw in thinking that I'm like them.
And if they were unhappy when they lost and they remember how bad that felt...
It makes sense to them that if I'm in the same situation, I would have the same mental feeling.
I don't.
Not even close.
I'm having just good days, like I normally do.
They're not that different. My baseline happiness didn't even take a flutter, basically.
But people are imagining that they're seeing me crying and struggling with the outcome.
Have you seen this yet? If you see my Twitter feed, you'll see it every now and then.
People will be quite sure that I'm having some kind of a breakdown.
And I don't know if I could be further from it.
My mental health is, in my own self-assessment, would be the best that it's been in years.
Because, I don't know, I feel pretty good.
I just don't have a lot to worry about at the moment.
Somebody says, remind them you're married to Christina.
Yes, Christina's got her pilot license and she's working on her IFR designation.
She'll have that pretty soon. She's very impressive.
So what was I talking about?
Oh yeah. So they're disappearing the news story of the election potential fraud and it's really amazing.
So let's put this all together.
So you had the social media platforms brainwashing you.
That's not too strong a word.
That word is right down the middle of what's happening.
Now they may have good intentions, and I suspect they do.
But it is still brainwashing, because they are determining what you will think and feel by their algorithms, and they're doing it intentionally, and they're making you feel a certain way, because they think that's the better world, or better for them, or something.
So you've got the social media platforms, you've got the fake news, you've got the fake polls.
I don't think anybody would disagree that these were intentionally fake polls, and it's obvious now that the reason was it's good for fundraising, and it also depresses the polls.
So if you didn't know this, there is science, I'm told, I haven't checked it myself, but I'm told there's science that says that the polls can affect turnout.
So if you've got the social media affecting turnout, The fake news affecting turnout.
The fake polls affecting turnout.
And on top of that, a questionable election.
What exactly happened here?
And then on top of all that bad behavior, the news can now clean it up.
So you're seeing CNN act like the crime scene cleaner.
Like they're scrubbing all the blood off of everything.
And they're just trying to clean up the crime scene so that the crime is lost in history.
And as somebody who's a trained hypnotist, I have probably a more direct, let's see, view of what's happening than some of you don't.
If you haven't put it all together into a package like I just did, it's an entire package of brainwashing That all works together.
You have to have them all. You have to have the social media, the fake news, the fake polls.
You have to have a fake election.
That helps. And then you have to disappear it all with the fake news and the social platforms.
And you're watching it happen right in front of you.
I find, although this is evil in the deepest possible sense of the word evil, I'm kind of exhilarated by it because watching it happen right in front of you is like a dream come true, if you're me. To see all of these things happen in real time and see them work is like having a ticket to the greatest show on earth if you study persuasion.
Now, what's happening to the world?
Not so good, maybe.
Your opinion may differ.
But the technique...
The skill that's going into this level of manipulation is mind-boggling.
It is really, really good.
And so the fake news is saying there's no stories of dead people voting despite what you hear.
There's nothing in the post office going on.
There was that rumor that Real Clear Politics reversed its call for Arizona, but that never happened.
They had never called it in the first place.
And do you think we're closer to the weirdest prediction anybody ever made, which was mine, that we would have two presidents at the same time?
One declared by CNN, and one later, hasn't happened yet, declared by Fox News.
Do you see that happening?
Because here's how I think we're going.
Based on the information I have, which is a little bit more than you have, okay?
So if your opinion disagrees with me, Just keep in mind, I might have a little more information that you will have eventually.
And it goes like this.
We will find enough fraud to reverse the outcome of the election.
So, everything you've seen so far, the allegations of fraud, none of them would add up.
I don't think they would add up even if they were true.
But you haven't seen the good stuff yet.
And the good stuff would reverse the outcome if it could be found to be true.
Here's the setup we're heading toward.
And it will be the weirdest outcome.
You would say to yourself, this isn't even possible, and I'm going to predict it right now.
President Trump will prove that the election was false and that he won on votes.
The mainstream media and social media are now so strong they can make it go away.
In other words, he can prove beyond a shadow of anybody's doubt who, let's say, was a supporter, to the point where Fox News is going to say, uh, you make a really good point there.
And if we're just going to count the votes, I guess we're going to have to declare President Trump the president-elect, and possibly the president.
Meanwhile, CNN, should this happen, just as a mental experiment, imagine, if you will, that Trump and his lawyers prove to the public, in really good evidence, not anything you've seen so far,
which has not been that conclusive, not really persuasive, but suppose, just hypothetically, there's something coming in the next week that's so big and so clearly true Just easy to check, clearly true.
That Fox is going to be able to say that Trump won the election, and CNN is going to say, and here's the freaky part.
No, he didn't.
None of that happened.
Or what you're looking at, you're misinterpreting.
Or what you're looking at just doesn't exist.
That's happening right in front of you.
Now, did anybody else predict that we would have two presidents at some point?
I don't think so.
I believe I'm the only one who predict that.
Now, I see in the comments, and this is a good comment, you're saying that you believe that Fox News has flipped and become sort of, you know, CNN lite or something?
I think that what you've observed is suggestive of that.
Meaning that they're simply...
I would say it is true that Fox News is just in the foxhole with Trump, and no matter what he says, they're going to agree with.
That's not the case anymore.
If you ever thought it was the case.
I'm not sure I thought that was completely the case, but it's definitely not the case now.
I would say that unambiguously, at least the news portion of Fox News, is reporting things that the president would not want to hear on the news.
The opinion people are still a little friendlier, of course.
But Fox News is not so gone That they wouldn't know that their business model would be best supported by a real strong story that Trump really won.
Right? So somebody says, you've raised expectations now, you better hit it.
Well, suppose I don't.
Suppose I don't.
Suppose in the end, this evidence does not rise to the level of even where you're convinced.
Would it ruin your life?
Because if you think it would, I feel like you need to work on yourself a little bit.
There's nothing happening, none of these potential paths, because I'm not predicting we're going to have civil war.
I don't think that one's even any possibility.
But none of these paths are going to kill you.
They really won't.
You'll be fine. You might even get, you know, a 2024 election with President Trump back in the mix.
Anything could happen.
If you ask me, the most likely outcome looks like this.
Are you ready for it? This will be the weirdest prediction.
The prediction will be that Trump will prove his case, that he actually won, but the media will be so strong between the Democrats have the House, they've got the news, they've got social media, collectively that will be so strong that they will put Biden in office anyway.
Because there's always an argument, right?
They'll argue, well, yeah, I see your evidence, but it doesn't count because legal technicality X, Y, Z. Fox News will say, you're misinterpreting those legal technicalities.
Really, this is the truth.
You're going to have two complete truths that are whole, and both of them will be opposites.
One is a President Biden, one is a President Trump, and here's what I think will happen.
President Trump will concede.
And he will concede, but here's the trick, and my prediction requires this part.
So if later you say, Scott, you said President Trump would concede.
It requires this part, or it doesn't count.
And the part is that he proves his case first.
Because he could prove that he won, and then concede, And then run for 2024.
If that happened, bear with me, what would be the outcome of letting a Biden administration show its stuff for four years while you knew that the election was stolen?
Let's say you knew it was stolen, and then for four years you watch them flail around while the political right beats them with a hammer, because you know Mitch McConnell's not going to make it easy, and they haven't Done much.
What would happen?
Are you ahead of me yet?
Are you thinking ahead yet?
Think to 2024 and you've had four years of a Biden administration not killing it at the same time that the right-wing media is hammering them and making them look like clowns, because they will.
And then Trump is running for president against an allegation that they actually stole the election and he shows his evidence and you believe it.
What happens in 2024?
Republicans sweep everything.
It puts the Republicans in charge of the House, the Senate, and the presidency.
Maybe for a long time.
So, have you ever heard the statement, beware of what you wish for?
What the Democrats wish for is for Biden to be declared the winner and to take office.
If it happens, They might lose everything in 2024.
Because the one thing that can make you fail is being in power.
If you're not in power, you can't do anything wrong.
So Trump had the disadvantage that he fixed a bunch of stuff that he fixed so early you forgot about it.
Right? When you voted in 2020, were you worried about Kim Jong-un?
Nope. Were you worried about ISIS? Nope.
Were you worried that if we could get the coronavirus under control, that a President Trump could bring the economy back?
Nope. President Trump took a whole bunch of things you used to worry about and just got rid of them.
So all you had to think about was what was happening recently.
That put him at quite a big disadvantage.
And then, plus the election had a lot of brainwashers involved.
Alright. Somebody says he'll be 78.
Isn't that what Biden is? Now, I'm not saying that it is my opinion that he should run for president in 2024.
I said, if anybody remembers, that when he won his first term, I said, that's kind of old.
And maybe you should be a one-term president and just, like, kill it.
Just kill it in one term and walk off the stage.
That didn't happen.
Maybe it would have been best.
We don't know. And now the mainstream press is worried that he's going to get the military on his side.
I wouldn't worry about that.
And then the people were making lists.
Here's the funniest one.
I guess Rick Wilson and the Lincoln Project, you know, they're the so-called Republicans who are anti-Trump and ran a big campaign against them.
And now they're putting together a TV, social media campaign Targeting Jones Day for their role in enabling Trump's effort to overturn the election.
So they're actually going after a law firm that is doing just what a law firm does, which is a client hires them.
The client might be in the right, the client might be in the wrong, but it's the legal profession's job to let everybody's case be heard.
And these idiots in the Lincoln Project are going after a law firm simply for taking a job.
What about going after the people who provide electricity to Mar-a-Lago?
Don't you think the Lincoln Project should be working against the public utility that gives electricity to President Trump's home?
Because those fuckers got, you know, they're just enabling this president, right?
I mean, so it's the dumbest thing ever.
But here's the, that's the drink, here's the chaser.
Jennifer Rubin, also anti-Trumper, she doesn't like what the Lincoln Project, Project Lincoln, is doing.
And she says, I agree and implore my friends at Project Lincoln, they're friends, to knock this off.
There are bar authorities and proper means to do this.
Do not start a frenzy in an atmosphere in which death threats, unhinged behavior and verbal assaults are the norm.
Stop. So Jennifer Rubin, who I believe is one of the people who wants to make the list of Trump supporters, doesn't she?
Do I have that wrong? And so I've decided to make a list of anti-Trumpers because you need mutually assured destruction to stop some things.
Some things just can't be fixed without mutually assured destruction.
And so the left has decided that they will target for elimination, at least career elimination, of anybody who's supported Trump.
And I say, well, let's start a list.
Let's start our own list.
Don't you think you could start a list of people that should not have jobs because they're on the other side of you politically?
How useful would that be?
Well, I don't think any of that is a good idea, but probably it doesn't stop without some kind of pushback.
All right, let's see what questions we've got.
Oh, did you notice that President Trump retweeted me yesterday?
It's the weirdest world.
You know, my world is super small most of the time, and then it just flashes big, and then it goes back to super small again.
So, for example, my day yesterday would be cleaning up my dog's Knickers poop, washing the dishes, or putting them in the dishwasher, brushing my teeth.
You know, that's my normal day.
Most of what I do is not this, 98% of it is just doing little stuff.
And then President Trump retweets me.
And then suddenly I go from the smallest life in the world.
It's like, I'm just eating a banana in my kitchen all by myself.
Just paying no attention to the rest of the world.
And the most powerful person in the universe, the President of the United States, is retweeting me.
And the thing he retweeted was a tweet I said to the public.
I said, you're being brainwashed to accept the results of the election as fair.
You will be told that only bad people are skeptical in this situation and that you will be held to account for doubting.
And the one that I tweeted had 22,000 retweets, which would be my record by far.
So apparently this is hitting home.
And the president retweeted it yesterday, which is weird.
All right. You never really get used to that.
Most of you have not had this experience, of course, that you're just minding your own business and then the president of the United States is tweeting about you.
It's the weirdest thing.
And it makes me think I'm living in a simulation.
But let's look at some of your questions.
And for reasons that are unclear to me, That tweet is not showing up, but I know I can find it.
How is this possible?
That that tweet can... There we go.
Alright, here are some of your questions.
If Trump isn't in the news, will I still be doing this?
Yes. Right.
So, with or without Trump, I will continue with the live streams.
We'll see where it goes. I never...
I didn't have any plan...
To be where this ended up.
I don't know if you've noticed, but the live streams have just went through the roof.
So I'm getting hundreds of thousands of views on these now.
I don't know if that lasts after inauguration, but I'll keep doing this and see.
If the audience wants it, I'll keep doing it.
Let's put it that way. I would only do it if there's a demand and we're all having fun.
So as long as we are, I'll do it.
Raul Davis says, why does the universe feel like it's going to fold inside out?
Well, I think what's happened, if you recall my biggest, weirdest prediction in 2016, or 15, I forget, might have been 15, when I said that President Trump would change more than politics, he would change how reality looked.
That happened, right? Wouldn't you agree that your view of reality itself, specifically the credibility of our systems, how easily people are brainwashed, how we make decisions, just the way things work, wouldn't you say that's all turned inside out?
And I think that's the Trump effect, and it's what I had predicted in 2015, and you're feeling it now.
Based Immigrant says, how do we move forward if Trump loses?
Same way you do anything.
One day at a time.
You wake up, you have breakfast.
It's not going to be that hard.
And there will always be a resistance.
So if you're not on the Trump supporting team, there will be something to be against.
And being against things is fun too, as Democrats found out.
It's not easy after four years of vitriol.
What can we do? You know, I think people adjust faster than you think.
I've always thought that our impulse for normality or our impulse to return to the mean is so strong that you can have all kinds of trouble in this country and then you just fast forward six months and it reverted to the mean.
I don't know why, but that is very strong in this country and it always makes me feel confident.
Ian Martezus Can you ask people if anyone has a comprehensive election data set?
I can answer that question for you.
The answer is, it exists.
It does not exist in the hands of anybody who can give it to you, because apparently some of it has to be accessed through the legal system.
In other words, if you don't have a judge who's on your side saying, yeah, you need to give me that data, you're probably not going to get it.
So I don't believe there's one massive place where somebody has all of the data that can be had in any way that you could get to it.
I do believe that there are individuals who are collecting, you know, one at a time through the legal system, through whatever means they can find as much data as they can about the election.
So no, that doesn't exist except with a few people who went out and found some way to get it one way or the other And I don't know how complete it is.
Probably it's focused on the few states that matter.
What is an update on the likely path to Trump proving malfeasance and overturning the states?
Well, the update is we're a few days away from finding out what he has.
I would say to you, if two weeks from now you have not heard some big, shocking, incredible news about the election, you probably won't.
So let me put a little bit of certainty on this.
If two weeks from today, you're still wondering if there's more coming?
Probably not. But is there more coming right now?
Almost certainly. Nothing's 100% in this world, so it's sort of a thing I'm doing lately.
I'm trying to avoid using certainty words and try to use odds.
I'm seeing in the comments many of you asking about Dr.
Shiva. Apparently Dr.
Shiva has done some analysis which would indicate the election was not entirely honest.
Now I haven't seen what he has, but I've seen a lot of other people's analyses of that nature.
I would say Let me give you this general way to look at it.
If you're looking at any one person's analysis, it's probably wrong.
Now, I'm not talking about Dr.
Shiva in particular. I just mean in general.
If you're looking at all this noise of people looking at little things and this state did that and here's this anomaly, anything you're looking at from one person About one analysis they did on one anomaly is almost probably certainly wrong.
Which is completely different from whether or not there is something there to be seen.
I think that there is something there.
I would say that at this point you can smell it.
Like you don't even have to see it.
At this point you can smell it.
But whether Dr.
Shiva's analysis is exactly the You know, the magic knife that cuts us open or it comes from some other source?
I do not know. So I can't give you any specific credibility of any of these analyses because I am not as smart as Dr.
Shiva. Let me put it this way.
If this, those of you listening on audio only will not see this wonderful demonstration, but I'm holding my hand up in front of my face and saying, if this is how smart you have to be, Just to function in America.
Let's say that's an IQ of 100 and that's good enough to get by in America.
You have to be a little bit smarter to perpetuate an election fraud.
So you gotta outsmart the average people.
So you gotta be a little bit smarter than them to do an election fraud.
The people who are looking for alleged fraud are up here.
I'm now holding my hand outside of the frame of the video.
So the thing that's the wild card is that when you say, hey, Dr.
Shiva says X, Y, or Z is true, what do you think, Scott?
I have a little bit of a disadvantage because my intelligence is pretty good.
I'm proud of it.
But Dr. Shiva is sort of a higher level.
Stating the obvious.
He has many more degrees than I have.
And in this particular field of, you know, math and science, I would certainly not, I would not pretend that I could critique his work.
So, he's a brilliant guy.
He has access to probably some good information.
I would take him seriously.
So the only thing I can tell you is, you should take him seriously.
But, keep in mind, it doesn't matter who it is, Doesn't matter how many MIT degrees he has, as in the case of Dr.
Shiva. Every individual claim you hear, probably false.
Which has nothing to do with whether or not there's something there.
It's just the individual claims tend to be not so credible.
All right. And a lot of people are putting faith in Benford's law, but I hear...
I'm seeing in the comments that Nassim Taleb is skeptical about Benfur's Law.
That's all you need to know about Benfur's Law.
I just told you everything you need to know.
So Benfur's Law is that some numbers don't occur naturally.
So if you see an unnatural vote count, that tells you there's some mischief.
But if Nassim Taleb, who I don't have the highest opinion of, to be honest.
I'm not going to knock him in public.
But he and I, let's say, we are not intellectually aligned.
We will not be having lunch.
I'll just say that.
So we disagree on some stuff.
But it is nonetheless true.
If you're in a statistics contest, you want him on your team.
You can disagree with him all you want, but if you're having a statistics fight, you want to get Nassim, tell him on your side.
And if he's skeptical about it, I take that as meaningful.
I'm being asked if Donald Trump should hire Joshua Lissick to write his presidential memoirs.
Well, let me tell you this, Joshua, if you're listening.
I I'm not going to ask anybody in the Trump family, what are you doing after the election?
Not the time.
It's not the time to be approaching President Trump about his alternative paths should he not be president in 2021.
So I won't be asking that question, but there's a time for it to be asked.
We don't know when.
Let's see. Will Dr.
Shiva's analysis make it to the Supreme Court?
I don't think you have to worry about that.
Meaning that there are enough people looking at similar things that if there's something there, let me put it this way, if there's something in the numbers that's big enough that Dr.
Shiva sought, it's also big enough.
In other words, if it's big enough to matter, and Dr.
Shiva saw it, you could be quite certain that the other people looking for also saw it.
Remember I did the hand thing about how smart Dr.
Shiva is and how I can't possibly critique his math or statistics or science.
I wouldn't even try. The other people who are also looking into this with even better data sets than Dr.
Shiva would have access to They are as smart as Dr.
Jiva, which is a pretty high standard, right?
But I guarantee you, the smartest people in the world are looking into this, and I don't think Democrats quite expected that.
All right, some more questions.
Will Trump run in 2024?
I can guarantee you that he's flirting with the idea.
That's all I know. You can guarantee that he's flirting with it.
If it needs to be happened.
What's the likely future of the woke people saying...
I don't understand that question.
Odds of a major false flag over the next four years to discredit a MAGA comeback.
A false flag, in other words, blaming Trump supporters for some big crime or something like that.
Well, I would say the odds of something like that are 100%.
But not necessarily a planned false flag.
Rather, Trump supporters just being blamed for stuff that wasn't necessarily indicative of being a Trump supporter.
So, you'll have lots of fake news in that direction.
Probably nothing that's like some big mass psyop.
Let's see... What are your thoughts on the resurrection story?
Well, that's what I said. Resurrected Trump would be the funniest Trump because he would come back stronger like Jesus.
If Trump started a media platform for real news, would many be interested?
Of course. Can you imagine President Trump starting his own news platform or social media platform?
If I were the president, all he'd have to do is buy Parler and OAN and put them together and have a social media platform and a news platform and it would immediately be the number one property on the right.
If I were Fox News, I'd be worried about that right now.
All right. Let's see.
Did I know, somebody asked, Carl S., that in 2004, exit polling, the way international observers grade the legitimacy of foreign elections...
ceased being accurate and has now been discontinued in the U.S. Alright, I have to dig into that so I can't answer that without knowing the details.
But that's scary if they change the standard for what looks like a fair election.
Why doesn't my Twitter see your periscopes for the last two days?
Alright, this is a question that I get all the time.
So people will say your tweets or your periscopes used to show up in my feed and now they don't.
I know it's been happening for a long time, and I know that recently people have been mentioning it, but it could be there's more people mentioning it because there's more people watching.
Because my traffic on the live streams, like I said, is up by four or five times compared to normal.
So I don't know if anything's different, but I can tell you that I get this a lot.
And in fact, Ethan says right below the comment, me too.
And I'll bet if I click on this, other people are saying me too.
Me three, yeah. So other people are agreeing.
Same here. I don't see it either anymore.
I don't know the answer to the question, but I don't know that it's mischief.
Okay? I don't know that it's mischief.
What I do know is that people report it, and I don't know the explanation.
It could be something about the algorithm and settings, and it could be completely natural.
It could be that you didn't always ever see me there, but you thought you did.
I don't know. So I don't know the answer to that question, but I know it's reported frequently.
Somebody says, Ben says, judges are equally afraid of enabling Hitler, so are very likely to throw out cases, no?
So the question is, if the judges think that Trump is Hitler, aren't they likely to rule against him even if he has a good case?
And I think there are enough conservative judges now that you don't have to worry about that, right?
Certainly if you get to the Supreme Court, you don't have to worry about that.
I don't think the Supreme Court judges think that Trump is Hillary.
Will any state legislatures elect the Electoral College electors?
Well, I think what you're asking is, will there be faithless Electoral College electors?
And the answer to that depends on how good The evidence of fraud is from Trump.
And what you can be guaranteed is that the right will think it's good evidence and the left will say it doesn't exist.
So will that be enough for some faithless electors?
I feel as though people are going to hold their powder to 2024.
So my prediction is going to be this.
That Trump will make his case and he will prove to a reasonable person's standard Which is not a political standard, because in politics nobody's being reasonable.
Everybody's just taking his side.
But if you could imagine just in your mind that there could be such a person as a reasonable person, I believe Trump will prove his case to the reasonable person's standard, but not to the political standard.
In other words, he won't be able to take the office even after having proved the case.
I think that's where we're heading.
Which makes 2024 the fun thing.
What's my favorite coffee bean?
So I should mention this now.
I know a number of you have sent me coffee.
So there are some people who grind their own or make their own coffee, etc.
And so every now and then I'll go out to the mail and somebody will send me some coffee.
I appreciate it. But I don't want to start mentioning it every time somebody sends me something because I really don't want people sending me things at home.
My house will just be full of things and then I have to throw them away.
But I'll feel bad if I throw them away, but there's no place to store them.
So I'm trying to discourage you while thanking you sincerely.
So those who have sent me stuff, and I just got some coffee the other day and some other things the other day.
I appreciate your thoughts, but Please don't, because my house will be full if I start taking stuff.
So I just drink Starbucks.
I'm not really a coffee guy.
In other words, I'm not a coffee snob.
I like any kind of coffee, basically.
Outside of politics, Daniel S. What important truth do very few people agree with you on?
Oh, I love this question, Daniel Segundo.
So outside of politics, what important truth do very few people agree with me on?
Well, it's hard to know what other people think, but I think the hardest one to accept, certainly this simulation would be the hardest one, but the hardest one to accept is that your opinions are assigned to you.
Nobody believes their opinions are assigned to them.
You might believe You might believe that the people on the other side are getting their opinions from CNN, but not you.
Not you, right?
You're not getting your opinions from the media because you're a free thinker.
So I think most people are under the illusion that they're the exception, that they're looking at all the news and they're making reasonable decisions, but man, those other people, what is wrong with them?
What is wrong with those other people?
So until you get to that point, you're not...
What happens if the Electoral College picks Kamala as president?
I don't think we have to worry about that being likely.
But isn't it funny that it could happen?
That could happen, right?
There's nothing that would prevent them from just picking Kamala Harris as the president.
What is the name of the Winbigli Well, I haven't decided to write another book yet.
My process is that after writing a book, I have to take a couple years off lately, if it's a non-Dilber book, because it really ruins your whole year to write a book.
If you've never written a book while having a full-time job at the same time, you don't know how hard it is.
It's really hard to write a book.
And I don't think I ever would have written the first one if I knew how hard it was.
It's like having a baby.
Or at least I'm told.
I wouldn't know personally. But you give birth and it's the most painful experience.
But then you love your baby and you're all happy and it's joy and everything.
And you kind of get amnesia for how bad the birth part was.
And if you didn't get that amnesia, maybe you wouldn't have any more babies.
So it's probably important that you don't remember bad stuff.
All right. Prediction of what a former President Trump would do back in the private sphere.
Well, he won't go quietly.
We know that.
So I would expect him to be one of the major names in news, whether he owns the news channel or he's just part of it.
I don't know. So it's obvious that President Trump likes the life.
So I think he would just continue it.
Olga asks, what time is Periscope?
Well, Olga, I hope you're here, because that means you've made it in time.
Have you ever noticed that when I promote my live streams, I often don't tell you where to find them or what time it will be or what the URL will be?
Has anybody wondered why I do that?
Do you think it's a mistake?
Do you think that it didn't ever occur to me that if I tell you I'm going to be live on a live stream, it would be better to give you the URL? No, I do it intentionally, of course.
Sometimes I give you the time, but other times I know it would be convenient and I don't do it anyway because I like making people work.
And the reason is it offers a little bit of friction to joining us.
And if you can overcome the friction, you're more likely to want to stay because you worked to get here.
If you come in here and it's too easy, the way brains are organized, anything that seems free, your brain will interpret to not worth anything.
That's very well understood.
And in fact, if you're a hypnotist, one of the things you will do is even if you don't need to charge somebody to do some hypnosis, you should charge them.
Because charging somebody to hypnotize them makes the hypnosis work better because they kind of talk themselves into it must be worth something because they paid for it.
Our brains are so tied to if I paid money for it, it has value.
If I didn't pay money for it, It probably doesn't have that much value.
Now, I'm not talking about things like love that you can't buy, right?
But just services or anything.
So, generally speaking, you don't want to make something too easy because it will make it look worthless.
Does that make sense? If anybody could find this easily without having to work a little and Google and find out, ah, do I watch it on Periscope or On the podcast, it's three different ways.
Which one has the thing where I can speed it up?
This is all intentional.
Because I didn't want to grow in terms of an audience unless the audience really wanted me to.
And so I make it a little bit hard for you so you can feel a little bit special and that anybody who does the work to find us here will feel like they paid something.
It'll feel like they worked to get here and then they'll stay.
Best places for expatriates.
I tell you, I've been thinking about that a lot.
The trouble with moving out of the United States, if you wanted to say, oh, screw it, my taxes are too high, or whatever, is that I don't want to go to a country that has bad emergency recovery response.
Because it seems like the story of every country is emergencies.
You've got your hurricanes, you've got your floods, you've got your earthquakes, you've got your civil wars.
You know, those are the things that will take you out.
So when I'm thinking about what would be a better place than the United States, I have to think, where would I least likely be killed or taken out by a natural disaster?
And it's tough to beat California if you're not on the coast.
If you're on the coast, maybe the earthquakes get you and the tsunamis and God knows what.
But I'm inland, enough, and my house is earthquake-proofed.
And I also like to live where if you lose electricity, you won't die.
I've thought about moving to Las Vegas, but if you have a home in Las Vegas and the electricity goes out and it's 120 degrees, I don't know, do you die?
How does that work?
If you move to someplace where it's, you know, zero degrees out and your electricity goes out, do you die?
I don't want to live somewhere where I'll die because my electricity went out.
All right, so I don't have an answer to that, but I've been thinking about it too.
Talking about Kash Patel, well, I would just say, see that movie, what's the name of the movie?
The plot to...
Plot to defeat the president?
What's the name of the movie?
Somebody will say it in the comments.
Any advice on writing sales emails?
I don't. That's sort of a specialized field.
You can just Google that and you'll get all the advice you want.
Are roadside political signs of any value?
I've been thinking about this for years.
When I was a kid, I used to say to myself, what is the point of putting a sign in your lawn?
Is there somebody who doesn't know who to vote for?
Is it going to be driving along in their car, and they're going to see a Biden sign in their lawn, and they're like, oh, finally, I know who to vote for.
Because this stranger guy has a sign in his lawn.
And when I was a kid, that didn't make any sense.
And probably to most of you, you're thinking, well, this makes no sense.
But as an adult, you get a richer understanding of psychology, and you realize that if you think you're Your neighbors are doing something, you're more likely to do it.
So, yeah, there's a herd mentality.
If you think everybody around you was voting for the same person, it would make it really easy for you to vote for that same person if you didn't have...
Let's say you weren't really deeply committed to the other person.
Let's say you were genuinely undecided and just the signs were all one way.
It would make a difference.
Yeah, it's a social proof.
So I would say yes. I don't think anybody's ever tried to measure it.
How does the Dominion software work?
I don't know the answer to that, but it is part of a larger system in which there would be multiple components, so it's not like one module of software.
It's a system for getting the votes and tabulating them and moving them to the right place and putting them in the right database, etc.
So there are lots, probably, I would guess, lots of places for vulnerability.
When and how will Kamala Harris become president?
Well, if Biden becomes president, big if, just the odds of him still being healthy for the whole four years are, what, 50%?
Tops? And I would think that they would want her to take the top job before she even runs for president.
So they could say she's an incumbent running for re-election, which is much stronger than a vice president running for election for the first time.
Much stronger. So I would think if I were the Democrats, somewhere around the Second or third year, I would start saying, you know, Joe's got this little thing he needs to go to the doctors for on a regular basis.
And well, it's looking a little bit worse.
And well, Joe is perfectly fine, but he's concerned that it might change soon.
And so for an abundance of caution, while Joe Biden is still perfectly fine, but we don't know it will stay this way, we're just going to be careful because we're Democrats and we care.
So we're going to Put Kamal up to the top spot, and it would be purely an election move to make her a stronger candidate.
All right. Can we do a simultaneous bong rip one day?
You know, I can't tell you how many times I've considered doing that spontaneously.
I just want to turn on the live stream and do a couple of bong hits with the people who care.
But one of the bad parts about getting a big audience...
which at this point is pretty big is you feel a certain responsibility in other words you know I've told you this before but you don't tell the audience who you are the audience tells you so if the audience told me that's who I am I'd probably do it but right now I'm not sure that the audience wants that it feels like it feels like that wouldn't be on brand at this point and again brand It's determined by you.
I'm not really determining my own brand.
People are deciding who I am based on a lot of stuff.
Alright. So, maybe, but probably not.
Alright. I just use a regular coffee machine.
Somebody's asking me that. But it does that crema stuff.
What are the chances of an eventual AOC presidency?
Pretty good. If you factor in her age, and then you factor in her talent, the odds of an AOC presidency someday, pretty good.
If I had to put the odds on it, at least 20%.
If you're looking at someday, 40 years in the future.
What is the best path to learning or mastering persuasion?
Well, I took a course in hypnosis, but you'd have to Google and talk to references and see if you could do that too.
That's the best base.
Everything you learn on top of hypnosis will connect to something you learned in hypnosis, either directly or indirectly.
So if you have that base, and what you learn by actually learning to hypnotize people is the thing that you can't get out of a book.
The thing you can't get out of a book is believing it.
You just can't.
There are some things you just have to see with your own eyes to know it's even possible.
And when you see people under hypnosis acting a certain way in person, and you know that the people involved are not playing a trick on you, because they're the people you brought into the room, and you see it over and over, and it's reproducible, etc., your understanding of the The limitations of the human mind for rationality completely disappears.
And you understand people as being little meat robots that just respond to inputs irrationally.
And once that becomes your firm understanding of how things really are, every other piece of persuasion that you learn from books, etc.
The book behind me, Win Bigley, is the one you would want to start with if you wanted to learn persuasion.
So that book makes way more sense if you're a trained hypnotist.
I would like to present to you the following thought.
You've seen me talking about Trump's mastery of persuasion for several years.
Have you ever seen somebody who's a trained hypnotist disagree with my take on Trump?
Nope. You've seen people disagree with me on...
Just everything all over the board.
There's always somebody who disagrees with anything.
But you have never seen, correct me if I'm wrong, fact check this, you've never seen a trained hypnotist say, oh, that stuff you're saying about Trump, that's exaggerated or that's not real.
They all see it.
And once you have that base of training, you'd see it too.
So, Lancer says, I unplugged from social media and all media for a week and the world didn't end and I found myself thinking and feeling quite rational.
Am I crazy? You know, if you haven't experimented with this, you really need to, because I've been experimenting with it lately.
So, last few nights, I've tried to see what I would feel like if I didn't spend as much time on social media.
I can't seem to go cold turkey.
But if I just cut down how many times I'm looking at it, so I can just live in my life, you know, live in the now.
And I've been trying that for the last few days, and I've got to tell you, it's really good for your mental health.
So you should give it a try.
So the old guy, that's his name on here, is asking about the Michigan software accounting glitch.
I think all of the news about the glitches, you should put a little asterisk next to that.
Here's why. If what you observed was the count on the screen suddenly changing to something it shouldn't be, you're going to say to yourself, ah, ah, I found it.
There's fraud.
Because there's no way you could get, let's say, 5,000 Joe Biden votes with no Trump votes.
If that's what you're thinking, I would suggest you should reduce your confidence in that being the kill shot here.
If you were going to do something devious to a vote machine, you would probably be smart enough not to change it in a way that CNN would show it on their screen during primetime.
And that's the allegation.
That you could see the numbers Change to something fraudulent in real time while you're watching CNN because they have a feed from that system and when it changes, it's like, oh, that can't be a natural change.
I would say that if you had been around software a little bit more, you would not be so confident because software can do a lot of stuff that doesn't look natural that maybe is.
For example, could it be that the The Trump votes and the Biden votes are in different databases.
Could it be that they exist separately and then they are combined at the end?
I don't know. I don't know if there's any reason to do that.
Maybe you just put them all in the same database and you just say if it's a Biden or a Trump victory.
But do you know? Do you know the answer to that question?
Are they all in the same database all the time?
During the entire part of the process?
Or is there ever a time when the Biden votes are in a separate database from the Trump votes before they get combined?
What do you think? Because if they're ever in separate bins, that opens up the possibility that they're simply updating in batches and maybe one had a delay.
So imagine, if you will, that there are two sub-buckets And they're being filled with Trump votes in one bucket and Biden votes in the other.
And then when they get a few votes in there, they send those updates to the combined system.
But then, there's a little glitch in one of the buckets.
It doesn't lose any votes, it doesn't gain any votes, and it doesn't make any mistakes.
It's just delayed a little bit.
And being delayed just one second builds up 5,000 Biden votes in the bucket and then it does what it's supposed to do.
It dumps them to the final bucket.
What it would look like to you is that 5,000 Biden votes came in and it couldn't possibly be a coincidence because it isn't.
The non-coincidence is that it was just a one second delay in an update that affected nothing.
There was nothing affected by it.
It was just a one-second delay in one part of the system, completely normal, and it batched up a bunch of votes and delivered them at the same time.
Nothing changed in the final outcome.
Now, do I know that there are two buckets?
No. I don't know that.
I'm giving you an example so that you can allow your imagination to expand To understand that in the software world, there could be another explanation why you could get a whole bunch of votes all in one way electronically.
Now, if somebody came in with a big box of written mail-in ballots and every one of those 10,000 mail-in ballots had one name on it, well, that's probably not a glitch.
So if you find out something like that, well, that's not a glitch.
Now, just because those big bucket glitches might not be real, they could be real.
They could be exactly what they look like.
It could be fraud. But even if it's not real, that doesn't tell you a single thing about whether the system is fixed.
If you were going to rig a system and you were good enough software-wise that you could get into this obviously protected system, you would be a high-level person, right?
You're not dumb.
You're very smart, and you want to cover your crime.
Would you ever create a fraudulent bug in the voting system that delivered 40,000 votes to the same person at the same time?
You wouldn't. You'd take a little out of here, a little out of there.
You would take every, let's say every precinct, you'd say, let's just take off a few from here.
It would be easier to subtract votes than to add votes.
Right? It'd be easier just to ignore some votes that just never get counted.
They just get ignored.
You would never see that.
You would never know anything was wrong.
So I reject the idea that you can see high-end fraud by watching CNN's feed on the monitor.
Maybe. I'm not saying it's impossible.
I'm just saying if I had to put the odds on it, I wouldn't bet on that one.
I definitely wouldn't bet on that one being the kill shot.
Alright, I've been going on way too long, and I think I will stop here.
