All Episodes
Nov. 29, 2021 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
51:23
Episode 1577 Scott Adams: How I Riled Up the Low-Information Binaries and Kamala is on the Roof

My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com Content: Rumor: Promoting VP Harris to Supreme Court Ghislaine Maxwell prosecutor is Jim Comey's daughter List: How to know you're a fascist CNN coverage of car attacking Waukesha CNN coverage of rock attacking Asian woman Moderate lefties begin rejecting extreme lefties 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

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Bam! Wow.
Wow. What a morning and it's just going to get better.
Holy cow!
I think this is going to be the best time you've ever had in your life and maybe the best time anybody's ever had in any life ever.
We're including past lives.
And if you'd like to take it up a level, and I know you do, because that's the kind of people you are.
Do you settle for the best day ever?
No. That's not good enough.
Let's take it up. Take it up a level.
All you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice or a stye, 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 unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip, and it's going to happen now.
Watch this. Watch it.
Savor it. Savor it.
Good. Good job on the simultaneous sip.
Those of you who only watched, well, some people like to watch.
Some people like to get right in there.
You know what I mean? You know what I mean?
Some people just want to sit in the corner and watch.
But that's okay. That's okay.
I'm not judging. I'm not judging.
Yes, the people who do the simultaneous sip are better than all the other people.
No, I did say that.
Just kidding. Well, you should know, if you're not on the local subscription platform following me, That I'm almost at my 200th micro lesson.
These are these little two to four minute lessons where I teach you a life skill that you can actually use forever.
And we've got about 200 of them.
The one I did yesterday was a micro lesson on persuasion voice.
So how to control your voice for maximum persuasion.
So that's on locals.
Last night my house got vandalized.
Yes, my house got vandalized.
Now, I don't know who vandalizes a house that's bristling with video cameras.
But it's probably going to turn out to be a bad play.
Because I expect that ten minutes after I get off this call, I'm going to have a license plate and an identification.
Let me just caution anybody who wants to screw with my neighborhood.
My neighborhood is pretty...
We're pretty prepared.
So, yeah, you can cause some damage to my house.
And we don't know exactly if I was targeted or somebody else in the house was...
Was the target of it.
But it's going to cost me some money to fix it.
It'll cost me some money.
And I will know who did it probably in an hour.
All right. So if you happen to be watching or know somebody who did that, just know that I'm going to be fucking them up at about sometime before lunch.
Just know I'm coming for you.
I'll have your identification.
Probably somebody already has that.
They're just waiting to tell me. So, anyway, just thought I'd tell you that.
I don't know if there'll be more as it gets closer to election time.
I'm expecting a lot more attacks on me personally.
Aren't you? Don't you expect that?
There should be a major hit piece developing on me somewhere by now.
Because I have a little bit too much influence.
So whoever thinks I'm influencing in the wrong direction is going to be probably looking for some journalist to take me out.
But good luck with that.
Good luck with that.
All right. So the news is there are rumors coming out of Washington and the White House, and I would say these are probably just rumors, that Kamala Harris looks so unelectable that they're looking at getting rid of her.
But they might do it with a promotion, which would be the most Dilbert way to get rid of a vice president.
What is the most Dilbert way to get rid of a vice president?
If you had to pick one thing, if you're familiar with the Dilbert comic, yeah, she might get promoted to the Supreme Court.
So they could get rid of her.
Seriously. Keep in mind that the Supreme Court is, in my opinion, the last credible institution.
Which doesn't mean I agree with them all the time.
But I think a lot of people would have the same opinion.
The Supreme Court is our last credible institution, even if you don't like their decisions.
At least they're credible.
But if you put Kamala Harris on there for what would look like an obvious just getting rid of her reason, I'm not sure that makes the Supreme Court more credible.
I think that would make it less credible.
I'm not saying because of her qualifications or because of her leading left or any of that.
It's just because if you think she was put there to get rid of her, you're just going to have a whole different idea about the Supreme Court.
Oh, that's where you put the losers, to get rid of them.
I mean, that's not the case, but it would feel like that.
I'm going to say that the Supreme Court rumor is false.
False. They may have talked about it.
But I'm going to predict that does not happen.
Anybody want to challenge that prediction?
Kamala Harris will not be named to the Supreme Court.
They might be talking about it.
But I don't think they can pull the trigger.
Because that would just be so...
Right?
You wouldn't even know how to put words on that, would you?
You would just hear that story and you would go...
Like, it can't even be described.
It's so awful.
Anyway, here's some more weirdness.
Jack Posobiec was noting that the lead prosecutor in the Ghislaine Maxwell case is James Comey's daughter.
Now, have I told you that one of the tells that we live in a simulation is character reuse?
Not just code reuse.
But specifically characters.
Let me give you an example of this from my real life.
I think I can tell this story.
No, I can't tell this story.
Suffice to say, a weird coincidence happened in my personal life.
The same people keep popping up in all kinds of different contexts.
So there's one person who popped up in one context...
Who I knew from another context.
And it was just a weird coincidence.
But what are the odds that a case of this magnitude would have somebody from the known set of characters on it?
I think the answer is usually pretty good.
Because in Washington, isn't every high-end lawyer related to a politician?
Or married to one?
Or used to work for one?
I think in some places you would expect these kinds of coincidences, not really a big coincidence, because everybody who goes into law has some kind of connection to somebody important, it seems like.
Anyway. I guess the judge is not going to allow the case to be televised, and there's speculation that they're protecting the elite pedophiles.
I don't think that's why.
If I had to guess, it would be this.
Now, it could be just a general feeling that they don't want to make a spectacle out of the case.
That would be a good enough reason for me.
But the other reason might be that a lot of names are going to come up associated with Ghislaine Maxwell and with Epstein, and they're not all guilty.
You know what I mean? I do genuinely think that he associated with people who were not necessarily doing any crimes.
They might have just run into him, didn't know what was going on, interacted with him longer than they should have.
Bill Gates, for example, might be one of those.
So I would think that a smart judge would want to close the proceedings just because lots of names would come up.
Without a case against them.
It's one thing if prosecutors have a case, but if names just come up as associates, or people they knew, or people who traveled with them, I feel that would be deeply unfair in our system of justice.
What do you think? Don't you think it would be deeply unfair to start hearing names of people who just were in the circle?
Trump. Trump's a good example.
Right? Clinton. Bill Clinton.
I don't have any evidence that they did anything wrong, either one of them.
Nor do I have evidence that they didn't.
I don't have evidence one way or the other.
But I don't think that, unless you're going to bring a case against them, I don't think we should be hearing these names in some kind of, you know, defamatory way.
Well, let's talk about the Omicron...
The virus which the World Health Organization knows literally nothing about.
This is what they said on their tweet.
This is the who. We don't yet know whether it is associated with more transmission.
Well, that'd be pretty important to know.
We don't know if it gives you...
We don't know risks of reinfection, risk of evading the vaccines.
Basically, we don't know anything about it.
So you should be very, very afraid about the thing we don't know anything about, I guess.
But they're working urgently to answer those questions.
Now, I ask this question because I'm an optimist.
Not because it's likely.
I'm just an optimist.
I'm trying to think of any way that any virus would stop circulating.
Because we've talked about this before.
For some reason, they just stop.
Now, the old thinking was that things stop because you reach some kind of herd immunity.
But we know that that's not the case.
Like the Spanish flu, I don't think, reached herd immunity, but it stopped.
So I had speculated, and I'm getting closer to saying this is probably true, that the only way any virus stops is that it creates its own vaccination, meaning that a variant eventually comes out that affects people as well or better than the original, But doesn't make them that sick.
And then gives them some immunity against the bad one.
Is there any scientific evidence for that at all?
Is that... I can't tell if this is me just spitballing or if there's any science who's said something similar.
Well, I know a dead host is useless.
Yeah, but that's not exactly the answer here.
Okay. Well, that's what I think is happening.
And one possibility is that this is the one.
The Omicron might be the vaccination.
It might be the end of the pandemic.
But it's too early to say that because the early reports of mild symptoms are coming out of South Africa.
Now, South Africa is part of a continent in which people are way younger, way thinner, way less likely to have any problems at all.
So I think that even the regular COVID would have given them the same group of people, mild symptoms.
So I don't think we know if Omicron is worse or not.
Too soon to know. But we don't see evidence of people having worse problems from it.
So we don't know that it's better.
But there's no evidence of it being worse.
So that's not quite, you know, that's not quite data.
That's short of being data.
But I'm feeling like it's time.
It just feels like this is it.
I'm not sure I've felt like this before.
So I can't tell you that my feeling is based on anything that you should believe, because it's just a feeling.
But I am feeling that this Omicron is going to be a mild one, and that it will finish up our herd immunity in its own weird way.
I said this on Twitter yesterday, and I got almost no pushback on it, which is the story itself.
So here's something that I couldn't have said one year ago.
Like, the public wasn't ready for this.
You ready? So I've told you that there's some big, big shift in public awareness that's happening.
And I'm going to talk about that a little bit more.
But the first thing I noticed was this dog that stopped barking.
For about, I don't know, five years, since I started doing, you know, public stuff about politics, for most of those five years, the biggest criticism I got...
Was, oh yeah, we should listen to the cartoonist.
Let's not listen to the experts.
Oh, we should pay attention to the cartoonist.
Sure, cartoon boy.
Tell us what you're thinking.
We'll just stop listening to the scientists and the experts.
We'll just listen to the cartoonist.
That all stopped.
It's all stopped.
And I didn't notice it for a while.
And it took me a little bit to figure out why.
Now, I could take, you know, credit for maybe being more credible, but I don't think that's what's happening.
I don't think that people's opinion of my credibility has changed, you know, because of my performance.
I'd love to think that the world was like that.
You know, they could see me doing a good job and then they could say, oh...
That one's doing a good job predicting, so we'll give him a little more credibility.
No, I don't think that happened.
Here's what I think happened.
I think it was like Trump beating Hillary Clinton in 2016.
Trump never made himself more popular...
He simply made her less popular successfully.
Remember I predicted that?
I said, Trump doesn't need to become more popular.
He just has to make her less popular.
And then he went out and did that. He did exactly that.
So I think what happened is that the experts have so self-immolated That almost anybody seems credible relative to the experts now.
Because the experts have done such a bad job, at least it looks that way.
I would argue that it isn't so bad.
But the public impression of the experts is awful right now.
So suddenly, if you say, well, I heard it from an expert versus I heard it from a cartoonist, they don't sound that different anymore, do they?
LAUGHTER They should.
I mean, they should sound different.
But the experts have done such a good job of destroying their own credibility that people just don't say that about me anymore.
So that's the first thing.
So I did a little experiment on Twitter because I was very curious about...
Many of my critics who seemed to think I had completely different opinions than the ones I actually have.
And they were quite adamant in their criticisms of the things I don't think and have never said.
And I wondered, where is that coming from?
And is this something that happens to everybody?
And I just see more of it because I have more of a public profile.
And so I did a little experiment to find out, and I think I have the answer.
I didn't think I would necessarily get one, but I do.
So I want to give you...
I'll tell you what happened.
So I tweeted, if you're one of my critics, tell me in one clear sentence what you believe is true that you think I don't.
Just give me the one thing we disagree on.
What do you think happened?
When I asked people to tell me, my critics, the people who were really, really mad at me, to tell me what they disagree with, what do you think happened?
Almost none of them disagreed with me.
I Yeah. No, it wasn't crickets, because they had to say something.
But I'll give you some of the examples of what...
Now, they imagined...
I was saying things that I didn't, and I'll tell you why they imagined it.
There's a very specific reason.
The people who think they disagreed with me and that I'm talking crazy, almost all were Twitter followers, or people who had seen me on Twitter, but not the live stream.
So the people who have seen my live streams had a completely different opinion of me.
But on Twitter, the biggest complaint was that I don't seem to take a side.
I'm not taking a side.
Or that I seem on both sides of issues.
Is that fair? Would you say that observation is true, based on Twitter anyway, that I seem to be on both sides of issues?
That's how it works.
Every issue has some positives on one side and some negatives on one side.
So if you're not on both sides of every issue, are you even thinking independently?
You should at least be able to say, oh, here's a good point on this side, here's a good point on the other side.
Now, on Twitter...
I think I'm less likely to state a direct opinion than I am here.
I hadn't really thought about it, but I think that's true.
So the people on Twitter I call the under-informed binaries.
The binaries are people who see two teams, and they see you saying things that would be good for one team, but wait, now you're saying things that would be good for the other team.
So now, Scott, you're being ambiguous.
How can you say something good for one team and then also say something good about the other team?
That doesn't make any sense.
So, Scott, you won't take a side, so therefore you're a weasel.
That's what they say. Is that what's happening?
And some people say I'm betting both sides.
It's called fence-sitting, some people say.
Yeah. I would call it looking at all the issues.
I mean, that's what it looks like to me.
So the binaries are the people who believe that everything fits into the two buckets.
And I never fit into the two buckets.
So the binary choice is don't take the vaccination because it's dangerous or take the vaccination because it's good and it's more good than bad.
Right? Those are the binaries.
Cassandra says, you fell for several hoaxes, but yet you won't be able to name any.
Watch this. Cassandra, name a hoax I fell for.
I'll just wait for you.
So on YouTube, name a hoax that I fell for.
If you mean the Covington kids for exactly 24 hours, that would be true.
But if we're talking about the virus, yeah, there won't be anything.
So the Covington kids was...
Yeah, I was fooled by hoax for all of 24 hours.
So I copped to that.
You fell for the ICL model.
No, I didn't. I don't even know what the fuck that is.
I'm sure I didn't fall for it.
Um... The previously vaccinated poses a far greater risk?
No, the science is not growing on that.
You're reading crackpots.
I'm not ruling it out, but the science is not growing on that.
I don't think that's true. So here's what's happening.
I think the people on Twitter who don't see me dealing with the whole issue, they just see me say things like, I'm not sure if the vaccines work, but I took them.
Because that doesn't fit into another category, right?
I don't know if the vaccines are good or bad.
I only know that I decided to take them.
Nobody else has that opinion that I know of, or at least they don't say it in public.
Probably lots of people have it.
Or how about this? I think lockdowns work, and we totally shouldn't do them.
Right? It doesn't fit into another box.
People say either the lockdowns don't work and we shouldn't do them, or they do work and we should do them.
I say they do work, but we shouldn't do them.
Let me give you some of the other comments that people believe I think.
These are things that people said about me.
You think vaccines work.
Is that an accurate description of me?
You think vaccines work.
All I know is I took them, and every expert in every country says that they work.
That's what I know. Do you disagree that, you know, let's say 99%, do you disagree with the fact that 99% say that they do work and that I took it?
That's all I know. And I know that there are other people who are serious people, mostly rogue people, but they have credentials.
And I acknowledge that they say there could be some big problem.
All right, so that's too nuanced, I guess.
Somebody says, I strategically avoid stating my position.
No, I don't. No, I don't.
I just don't always do it on Twitter.
You believe it's likely that the VAX compliance close to 100% will make the government remove restrictions?
And somebody says there's no chance of that.
Yes, I do believe that.
And so do all of you.
So do all of you. It'll never happen, right?
We don't think it can happen.
But imagine if California reached 100% vaccination, or 95%.
They would lose their argument for continuing to keep things locked down, especially as the therapeutics are coming online.
So I believe that if vax compliance was high, which I don't recommend...
I'm not recommending you get them.
I'm not recommending you do or don't get a booster.
So I'm not saying what you should do.
That's the problem.
I'm just saying, predictably, if the government's reason for lockdowns goes away, probably the lockdowns will.
Not right away, but we could make it happen.
If you got COVID, why would you not try ivermectin?
I don't know. I don't know.
Why do you think that I disagree with you?
I would try it. So can I say that I think it's very unlikely that ivermectin is the solution to COVID, and at the same time can I say, but if I got COVID, I would take ivermectin right away, because I don't fear the consequences of it hurting me.
So I occupy all these weird middle grounds where I can feel both sides, but I don't think either of them have it quite right.
Somebody said they've successfully inserted, they being the deep state or somebody, have successfully inserted the narrative of blaming the wave of heart problems on COVID, and the blue pills have taken it hook, line, and sinker, and that I'm the canary in the coal mine.
So the suggestion is that I'm part of accepting the narrative that the wave of heart problems are the COVID and not the vaccination itself.
No. No.
No. No, that doesn't describe me at all.
What I would say is we don't know.
I'm saying that all data is unreliable.
There is definitely alarming stories about people dying.
Usually those alarming stories turn out to be fake.
They're just coincidence or misinterpretation.
But I'm not going to tell you that the heart problems from the vaccination are less or more than...
The COVID risk.
I'm just saying that they both have a risk.
How in the world would I know which one is bigger?
How would I ever know that?
Anyway, I could do some more of this, but my favorite one is the Abacus.
He's a user. He sent me a list of tells for being a fascist and says that you should look at how many Scott Adams applies to.
So I'm going to read the list of how to know you're a fascist, and I want you to vote in the comments which of these apply to me.
Powerful and continuing nationalism.
Yes or no? Does that apply to me?
Powerful and continuing nationalism.
People are saying no.
Really? Definitely yes.
Yes. Yes.
If this is a tell for being a fascist, absolutely.
I have a powerful and continuing sense of nationalism.
I'm not apologizing for that.
I would call that patriotic.
And I would hope that people in other countries feel the same about their country.
I hope so. Because I'm sure some of their countries are quite awesome.
And they should feel quite proud about it.
All right, how about this? The second one is disdain for human rights.
Do I display a disdain for human rights?
No. How about identification of enemies as a unifying cause?
That would be everybody.
Right? Is there anybody who doesn't identify the...
The side that's causing them problems.
There's nobody who doesn't do that.
So yes, I absolutely do this.
So, so far, two out of three signs of fascism I perfectly identify with.
Supremacy of the military.
Well, supremacy meaning the military runs the country?
I'm vehemently opposed to that, but I would like our military to be supreme compared to other militaries.
So this one's ambiguous, but I certainly don't want the military running our country.
Rampant sexism.
Did you know that was part of fascism?
I feel like this was just a woke thing that got added to the list.
Rampant sexism?
What? What's that got to do with fascism?
But do I display rampant sexism?
Rampant sexism would be the idea that some genders are superior.
Yes, I do. Yes, I do have rampant sexism.
I believe that men cannot have babies, for example.
Some of you disagree, I know.
But I believe that women are superior to men in the production of human life.
You know, men are pretty good at their part, but when it comes to actually incubating the baby and producing it, compared to men, women do that way, way better.
So I guess I am a rampant sexist because I do think women make babies better than men.
How about controlled mass media?
Well, I don't control the mass media, so I'm not sure that applies.
Obsession with national security.
Who isn't? Is there somebody here who doesn't think national security would be really high on the list of things to be concerned about?
I cop guilty to that.
Religion and government intertwined.
Well, I'm not a believer, but I do acknowledge that the United States has intertwined Christianity and government and got a good result, I think.
Now, I could criticize lots of elements of that and have, but I wouldn't doubt the fact that religion and government formed a Not a perfect union, but pretty good.
Pretty good. Corporate power protected.
Yeah, I want corporate power protected.
That's why we have laws.
We have laws to protect everybody, including corporations.
And corporations, of course, are created for the benefit of the people.
It just helps rich people more, but it doesn't hurt other people.
Mostly. Labor power suppressed.
Have I wanted to suppress any labor power?
I'm pro-union, so I don't know about that.
Disdain for intellectuals and the arts.
Well, okay. Disdain for intellectuals and the arts.
Guilty. Guilty.
Obsession with crime and punishment.
Well, obsession is just sort of a...
You know, a trigger word.
Isn't everybody very interested in crime and punishment?
I mean, it's part of the texture of life.
How about rampant nepotism and corruption?
Yes, I have hired relatives.
I have, in fact, hired relatives.
Now, I don't run the government, so I think that would matter.
Corruption? Not so much.
And then fraudulent elections?
Oh, I don't think that's me you're talking about.
That might be the Democrats.
So anyway, this list of what it means to be fascism is completely ridiculous.
But apparently I do meet quite a few of those things unapologetically.
All right. The Waukesha narrative is getting hilarious with CNN. These are two things that CNN has said without being embarrassed, apparently.
On CNN, they reported, Waukesha will hold a moment of silence today.
This might have been a tweet or a headline, I can't remember.
Marking one week since a car drove through a city Christmas parade, killing six people and injuring scores of others.
Now, I am mad at that car.
If it had had a driver, we'd probably want to know more about that driver.
But CNN's reporting it was a car.
So now we have rogue cars driving through parades and killing people, and that's a trend I hope doesn't include.
But no mention of a human involved in the crime, just a car.
Also on CNN said that a NYPD hate crimes task force is investigating after police say an Asian-American woman was attacked with a large rock.
So it's worse than just the cars going rogue.
Now the rocks are throwing themselves.
It's dangerous to go outside.
You got your COVID. You got your cars driving themselves after you.
You got your rocks that are just flying through the air on their own.
It's a dangerous world, people.
It's a dangerous world. So, of course, what's happening here is that CNN, if anybody was white like Rittenhouse, they would be talking nonstop about that white supremacist, which he's not.
You know, that would be fake news.
But that's what they do, and did.
But as soon as it's not a white male who's the alleged perpetrator, well, it's just the car driving itself and the rocks throwing themselves.
Because the last thing we're going to do is blame anybody who's not a white male.
All right. I believe that there is an awakening happening and it looks like this.
So it's a bunch of things that are happening that are changing the consciousness of the country.
Now, I predicted this would happen after Trump, that we would just see reality differently.
And specifically, we saw that the news is fake.
But mostly, only the right saw that.
The left thought it was only the news on the right that was fake.
But the right, I think, is a little more aware that even the news from their own side could be fake.
They're more likely to believe the news on the right, but they know now it could be made up because they've seen enough examples.
But the left is just figuring that out with the Rittenhouse case in particular.
And now with the Waukesha story, I'm hearing anecdotally, so we don't have a poll on this, but anecdotally, a lot of Hollywood people, a lot of left-leaning people, and people are sending me tweets, you know, private communications, showing that their leftist friends have gone over to the other side.
And they don't say it in public.
But a lot of left-leaning people just woke up and said, wait a minute, is all of the news fake?
How long has this been going on?
Yeah, all of the political news is fake.
I don't know about the rest of it, but all of the political news is fake, and it has been for a long time.
So the left is faking that out.
Here's what else is going on to further wake them up.
The Democrats are watching the far left of their own party destroy their chances of ever having political power again.
So certainly the moderate Democrats are saying, wait a minute, why are we associating with this crowd?
They're batshit crazy.
So they're seeing their own wing being crazy, while they always accuse the right of having the crazy wing, which it does.
So both sides have crazy wings.
I would say both are racist.
You know, if you go far enough to the right, you get racist.
But most of the right are not.
If you go far enough to the left, you get racist.
But most of the Democrats are not, you know, not leaning hard in that direction.
All right. Hollywood has even turned on the wokeness.
I mentioned a series I've been watching called The Sex Lives of College Girls.
I know, I know, it sounds like, you know, porn or something.
But think of it as, it's basically sex in the city redone with college freshmen.
So think of it that way. So it's just the Sex and the City model, which is, you know, four or five females, you know, working out their sex lives.
So this is just a college setting.
Now Mindy Kaling is one of the producers of this, with one other guy, I guess.
So Mindy Kaling is behind it, and that's important, because it viciously mocks woke culture.
And one of the main characters is apparently a Trump supporter, but they don't say that.
A female Trump supporter.
Now, I'm the one saying Trump supporter.
The show doesn't say that at all.
It just looks like a Republican.
But the fact that Hollywood is viciously mocking the woke people in the show, that's different, right?
It's now a...
It's a subject of ridicule.
So you've seen Bill Maher turn against it, the wokeness.
And now we see a pretty big property with a woman who you would imagine would be in the woke crowd, because she's in Hollywood, person of colour, woman.
Every characteristic that would make you think she'd be the wokest person in Hollywood.
And she's producing a show that mocks it.
Now, it could be that that's not necessarily her opinion.
She might just be a good artist who likes to put out content that's provocative and may not match her personal opinions.
That's a thing. But just the fact that it's even on at all, It means something to me.
Now, you also have to add in Biden and Harris' approvals are in the toilet, and the Build Back Better thing's looking bad.
So Rasmussen had a poll, just came out.
51% of likely U.S. voters oppose the Build Back Better bill.
Now, 51% isn't a landslide number, but it certainly tells you that there are more than just Republicans who don't like this thing.
That's clear. So some of the sheen of, you know, Biden will do everything better, everything the Democrats do is better than Trump, that's all just dissolved now.
Then you look at the fact that Trump's policies on a number of areas are just clearly better.
The border, you don't think that a solid chunk of Democrats are saying, you know, if I had to be honest, Trump might have been a bastard, but the border was in better shape then.
You feel that they're seeing it now a little bit.
Likewise with inflation, likewise with China, likewise with a lot of other things.
Although I would say Biden and the Democrats are not terrible on China.
They're not worse than the Republicans.
I think they both fell short there.
And then, of course, the Rittenhouse case opened a lot of eyes.
So Guy Benson tweeted this.
He said, three left-leaning friends have independently texted me about this vanishing national story, talking about Waukesha.
They understand what's happening.
In other words, they understand now that the press is making stories disappear if they don't support the Democrats or the narrative, let's say.
Now they can see it.
But they can't quite bring themselves to flat out and say, it's effed up, one wrote.
And then two of them concede that they now better understand conservatives' complaints about the media.
Here it comes.
Or as I like to say, it's happening.
It's happening. There is an awareness shift going on that's now, I think, easy to identify.
We don't know how far it'll go.
We don't know if this is just a minor pushback and then things keep going the way they were.
But I've always told you that the slippery slope...
Is not real.
Or a better way to say it, I think I've said it poorly.
When I say it's not real, that probably is just fighting words.
So let me say it less provocatively.
A better way to think of the slippery slope.
So instead of debunking it, let me upgrade it and get you to a place you can agree, I think.
Everything goes in the direction it's going until there's a reason for it to stop.
You all agree with that, right?
Everything will keep going the way it's going, everything, until there's a reason for it to stop.
Could be a physical reason, could be psychological, whatever.
So the slippery slope doesn't add anything to the basic understanding that everything goes the way it's going until it stops.
But if you can't see what would stop something, you say it's a slippery slope because you can't see the stop.
But the stop materializes when it's needed.
And I think we're seeing it materialize.
The woke stuff now, I think, is so widely discredited that you would have no risk at all of mocking it in public.
I don't know you could have done that as much even a year ago.
You could just say it's a whole bullshit philosophy that's hurting people more than helping, and you could say that the school systems are the systemic racists, and you'd like to help.
So I feel like things have really, really shifted just in the last, really six months, I think it's accelerated.
So this is all anecdotal, right?
Unless you have some kind of a scientific reason to think that there's something going on here, you should be a little bit cautious.
Oh, it's pronounced Waukesha.
Waukesha. So I've been pronouncing it Waukesha?
Yeah, remember when they called it political correctness, right?
Erica says, I have lots of friends confessing their Democrat hatred privately to me.
Yeah. So, yeah, I think the pendulum...
Is a better model than the slippery slope.
The slippery slope is like, you know, if you imagine the pendulum, you know, imagine the one that's got the several balls that are suspended, and you take the one ball, and you let it swing, and it hits the balls, and the other one on the other end goes up the same amount, and it goes for a while.
That feels like a better model than the slippery slope.
Meaning that things will go in one direction and then they almost always reverse because people just get tired of things heading in the same direction or there's a counter that pops up.
Greg Gutfeld's show has helped increase the awareness level of the middle third of the public.
Well, to the extent that he's pulling in any independence, yes.
All right.
Now, how many of you see it?
Thank you.
Are you seeing this trend in awareness?
Are you seeing the complete destruction of the credibility of the press and the professional set in ways that even the left can clearly see now?
They can see that their own media has duped them.
Now, here's the other tell.
It used to be when I called the Find People Hoax a hoax on Twitter, it would be just filled with people saying, you crazy thing, I saw it with my own eyes, but of course they didn't.
They saw the selective edit of it, which reverses its meaning.
Now, it used to be that people pushed back on that.
Now, I don't know if they all understand it's fake, Or if they know it could be, so they're just not joining the fight.
So I don't know if I've convinced them it's fake.
I've convinced everybody who looked at the transcript.
If you look at the transcript, it's obviously fake.
But I think people have softened to at least the idea that pretty much everything said about Trump was made up, or hyperbole, or crazy talk.
The one thing that I think is always completely fair to say is Trump University.
I think people sometimes ask me how I defend Trump University, and I say, I don't.
I don't.
You have any opinion of that you want.
I will answer this one text.
Um.
And that's all.
All right. My door freaks out when your alerts go off.
The bird was the vandal.
Because somebody says gas prices are now so high, it is actually cheaper to buy cocaine and run everywhere.
I appreciate that.
Yeah, you know, I can't defend Trump University, but I'll give you some context.
I was in the licensing business for many years with Dilbert, and I can tell you that the person who licenses their name or their character, in my case, they don't look at all the operating details of the company that does the licensing.
You know, you do a quick check to make sure it's not a complete fraud.
But let's say it was somebody you knew.
I think he probably worked with somebody he knew.
And they said, hey, we'll do this thing.
We'll put your name on it. Trust us.
So, you know, if he trusted someone he shouldn't have trusted, you should certainly hold that against him.
You know, put it in the whole picture.
But if you believe, there's no evidence of this, that he knew exactly what was going on and was okay with it, that's not an evidence.
Yeah, and I'm definitely licensed to people I wish I had not licensed to after the fact.
So you're saying my Dilbert condoms were not a licensed product?
Yeah, I'd worry about those.
Do you know how many sales gurus call their programs universities?
Yeah.
Well, yeah.
Did we do Kamala on the Roof?
Yes. So, yes, we're talking about Kamala going somewhere.
We talked about that. All right, I don't have much else to do to talk about.
How about this? Look at this comment.
You okay with the normalization of pedophilia, Scott?
All the capitalists. Why would he even ask that question?
Why do you even ask that question?
Like, what would even provoke you They ask me if I'm okay with horrible crimes.
Why would you even be curious about that?
For the record, I'm generally against all horrible crimes.
Oh, I haven't watched the Beatles get back to special, but it's on my list.
If there's no Supreme Court, how will they get rid of Kamala?
I don't know of any way. I don't know of any way you could do it.
Let me tell you what I think the Democrats fear the most.
You ready for this?
Here's what they fear the most.
Biden has to step down early.
Kamala Harris takes over.
And because she got the top spot the way she did, it makes her automatically the front-runner for the nomination.
Can you imagine anything that would scare The Democrats more than that.
Because that would be a gimme, wouldn't it?
That would basically be the elections over, I think.
I'm not even sure it matters who she ran against.
I think she would lose to everybody.
Oh, the Get Back show about the Beatles is good.
You can't primary a black woman.
Is that what you're saying? That's in the comments?
Yes, you can. All right.
I'm just looking at your comments.
Yeah, your head would explode.
You attend Dilbert University?
Well, you know what? I'm thinking of creating at university.
So I told you I have 200 micro-lessons now.
So I'm thinking of packaging them somehow as, you know, I had this idea of a university that you could attend while you're on the toilet.
So the lessons would all be two to four minutes, so you could do it while you're in there anyway.
You do one a day, you'll have 365 life lessons at the end of the year.
Maybe more.
So I jokingly called it turd university because you do it in the bathroom two minutes a day.
Are they appropriate for teens?
Yes. The micro-lessons don't have any profanity, and they are all appropriate for teens.
Although I am considering adding some content, though...
I don't know if it would be appropriate for teens.
They won't watch it anyway, so I don't want to worry about it.
Here's what I'm thinking about.
I'm going to turn off YouTube because you guys can't hear this topic.
There's something I'm just going to talk to the local subscribers about.
Nothing personal. It's just that some things, if they get into the total public domain, they turn into something that they shouldn't be, which is actually the topic of what I'm going to talk to you.
But the locals people won't do that, which is what's good about the subscription system.
So, with all due respect, YouTube people, I will talk to you tomorrow.
Export Selection