My book Reframe Your Brain, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/3bwr9fm8
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, AI Usefulness, Hot Rodent Men, 3D Printed Nuclear Reactors, CA Farm Water Restrictions, Oakland Reparations Committee, Bump Stock Controversy, Maricopa County Election Integrity, Tariff based Taxes, 2024 Election Whistleblower Awards, Lara Trump, US Military Draft, President Trump, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams, because that's kind of what it is.
And if you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can even understand with their smooth, tiny human brains, all you need for that is a cup or mug or a glass, a tanker of Charles Einstein, a canteen, a jug of flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dope being at the end of the day, the thing makes everything better.
It's called the Simultaneous Sip.
And it happens.
Now.
Technology on point.
Everything's working today.
Well, let's give a little thank for our experts, shall we?
You know, experts get a bad rap, especially lately.
But what would we do without them?
Here's a case in point.
Finally, After long last, COVID, long COVID has a definition.
Now that's what we needed because long COVID, everybody was all over the place.
Like, what is it?
How do you identify it?
How do you know you had it?
You know, what does it even exist?
But finally, the experts have come together and they've decided that the definition of long COVID is as follows.
It has to happen after COVID.
So it can't be before COVID.
That seems to be built into the definition, right?
So you can't get COVID before there was COVID.
So the experts have clarified that it could only be long COVID if you've had COVID.
Now that's a good first step, but it gets better.
And it could be identified by any one of 200 symptoms that may come and go during the rest of your life.
So finally, we have a little clarity.
It's something that happened after you had COVID, any time in your life, and could include any one of 200 symptoms that may come and go for reasons you don't understand.
And that's called Long COVID.
Now, other people have called that, well, various names, old age, old age, because that happens to me after COVID, And I think I get about 200 symptoms.
I get about 200 symptoms a day now.
And that's just the first five minutes after I wake up.
I'm like, oh, my back.
Oh, you know, that sort of thing.
So it's probably must have some long COVID.
Companies are discovering that all their big AI projects that were going to save them money and change the nature of the world.
Have hit what some call the trough of disillusionment.
And that it's not really changing the world the way they thought and a lot of projects are stalled.
I could have told you that.
The reason I could have told you that is I tried several projects myself.
I tried to use AI to do a bunch of things that would be completely relevant to what I do for a living.
And I thought, man, I'm going to be the first one.
I'm going to be the one who's the first cartoonist to use AI in like a real cool way that's really going to impress you.
I can't get a fucking thing to work.
It's fun to talk to it and use it for education and stuff, but to actually turn it into a tool that I can use in my work?
Nope.
No luck at all.
I do hear that there are some upgrades to the Delphi AI system, which I've been trying to build an agent in and ran into some obstacles in terms of what it could or could not do.
But the company was very responsive and they say in a week or so they're going to have a bunch of fixes and whatever so that I can get it to do what I want.
So I'm open minded about it, maybe, but I'll let you know.
So far AI Because it gives unreliable answers to things.
There's just a whole host of things you thought it would do that it can't ever do.
Because if you can't know that it will give you the right answer, what is it?
It's like a person you have a conversation with.
If you have a conversation with somebody and they give you some wrong fact, You know, we kind of discount that as that's the way conversations go.
But if you're asking for data and it sometimes just gives you the wrong data and you don't know why and you can't fix it, that doesn't work at all.
So I do think AI is going to be as big as everybody says, but there's probably a gigantic percentage of it that will never work.
At least during using the LLM technology.
It might work in some future iteration, but not now.
Well, I was watching The Five last night and I saw a story.
There's a new trend, sort of non-obvious, and as the Chiron read on The Five, women are falling for guys who look like cartoon mice, which they refer to as hot rodent men.
So men who have that vibe of looking sort of roughly like a rat are becoming a little bit more popular.
Now, this was good news for me.
My patience has finally paid off, and it looks like it's my time to shine.
So, good luck to the rest of you handsome-looking people, because your day came and went.
Now, it's time for the rat-faced people to rise, and I might be their leader.
I might be.
But, not just that.
Let's look at the other science.
There's a study from Japan that says if you eat small fish whole, like the entire fish, bones and all, it's really, really good for your health, because apparently all those bones and things are good for you.
Now, I'm not super surprised about that, because yesterday I was watching a video of a slow motion capture by what looked like a golden eagle catching a fish.
And popping it in his mouth and eating a whole.
And I thought to myself, hey, that that that golden eagle isn't even chewing.
It's actually just going and like swallowing a fish whole.
And so I said to myself, I wonder if the whole fish is healthy.
Apparently it is.
Apparently there's not much more better you can do than eat a whole fish.
But here's the question I ask.
Why is it so consistent that if there's something good for you, it's also horrible to do?
Like, could they come up with anything worse?
Like, I expect tomorrow will be, and science has discovered that if you can shove 10 pinecones up your own ass, you will add 10 years to your life.
And I'll be like, but I don't want to shove pinecones up my ass!
That sounds really painful!
And people will say, well, I mean, if you don't care about your health, you can do it your way.
No, now I got to eat a whole fish and shove pine cones up my ass.
Everything's too hard.
Well, here's a surprising, surprising result of a study.
Thanks to science, we have determined.
Remember, you used to hear from women that if only men would help with the housework after they got home from working all day.
That then they'd want to have more sex with him.
And so we were told that the sexiest thing you could do, Ben, was do the dishes and vacuum while your wife is watching.
And a lot of you said, finally, I've cracked the code.
All I have to do is a little extra dusting, put this apron on, cook some food, clean up after myself, take care of the kids, and I'm going to get some super action.
That's what I was told.
For probably 20 years?
30 years?
Well, in a new study it says it turns out that helping with the housework gets you less sex for heterosexual married partners.
So the man will get less sex and I guess that means that the woman will get less sex if everything's working out the way it should.
So, if you want to do well with the ladies, You should look more like a rat-faced boy and less like some kind of handsome thing.
Nobody wants that.
So look like a rat-faced person.
You want to not help with the housework.
That appears to be good for your sex life.
And I'd like to add my own little twist.
You'll see this from experts as well.
Shaquille O'Neal said this the other day in a video.
Never share your feelings.
No.
No.
Did you ever fall for that trap?
How many of you have ever fallen for the trap of sharing your feelings?
How'd that work out?
So here's my advice to you.
Look like a rat-faced boy, don't communicate with your lover, and whatever you do, don't help out around the house.
And you will be amazed how much poontang you're getting.
So there's your relationship advice from the single guy who's not in a relationship.
And if that doesn't frighten you, it should.
There's a startup in India that printed a rocket engine in 72 hours using a 3D printer.
They printed a rocket ship And then sent the rocket up and it worked.
They printed a rocket ship, a rocket engine.
They printed it in 72 hours.
That's amazing.
That's like one of the most impressive technology things I've ever heard of in my life.
Now, let's take it to the next level.
If you can 3D print something as sensitive and powerful as a rocket engine, How far are we from 3D printing a small, modular nuclear reactor?
Suddenly, if you could get rid of the burdensome regulations, but not the ones you need, if you could get rid of regulations, and you could locate the new reactors Let's say where there are already nuclear power plants, and you can keep the waste there, which is the new way they do it.
In some cases, they can reuse the waste for fuel for other types of reactors.
If you could do all of that, and then you could have a standardized design that's approved by the government and all the regulatory agencies, and your biggest problem was actually manufacturing, you might be able to 3D print it.
Imagine if you could 3D print a pre-approved known model of a small modular nuclear reactor.
Now you might say to yourself, I don't want to be the first one to live next to the 3D printed nuclear reactor, but I would have said that about going up in a rocket.
If they can make it safe enough for a rocket, I don't know.
Seems like they might be able to make it safe enough for a nuke.
With a little extra work, maybe.
That's one of those boring little stories that might be like one of the biggest deals in the whole universe.
Could be.
Meanwhile, there's a Turkish student who was trying to pass some difficult entrance exam and cleverly used a hidden camera and a button that would look at the test and it would use AI To solve the test questions and then read it into an earpiece so the guy was listening to the answers while the button was looking at the test.
And he got caught.
Now, I feel like I would have wanted to hire that guy on the spot.
Because if his system worked, it's kind of impressive.
It's like, ah, if you can do that, Yeah, I'd like you to work for me.
Anyway, it seems like there's going to be a lot more of that, that type of cheating.
Well, the New York Times is reportedly, they got rid of like nine out of the 16 of their artists who were on staff.
And they did it because some say it's because of AI, but I think the New York Times says, no, no, it's just cost cutting.
But the union, Uh, for the workers at the New York Times, uh, said that, uh, firing artists and replacing them with AI, uh, the, the union said, and I quote, I thought we were better than this.
Better than this?
Is the union actually a communist organization?
What do they mean by better?
I thought better was companies hire people when they need people, and they fire people when they don't need people, and it's called capitalism.
It's called capitalism.
That would be the system that we're living under, allegedly.
But according to the Union, who apparently are communists, I thought we were better than this.
Better than what?
Capitalism?
If you're better than capitalism, what's the name of that?
What are you calling the thing that's better than Hiring and firing depending on the business's needs.
What's better than that?
Communism!
I can't think of anything else they'd be talking about.
So, apparently the employees of the New York Times are literally communists or socialists or something.
But they don't understand this whole capitalism thing.
Well, here's the good news and bad news.
Let's see if you could have predicted this.
If you haven't read the story, I want to see how long it takes you to predict the ending of this news event, right?
So it involves California.
So put on your California thinking cap.
It involves the drought, which California had had for years, which is now solved.
It turns out that California is just flush with water.
Got plenty of water.
At the same time, they're going to deny farmers They're going to cut a lot of the farmers back to only 40% of the federal water they were supposed to get.
I guess there's federal water and other water, but it'll be a major pull back in the water.
Why?
All right.
It's California and there's plenty of water, plenty of water, everybody agrees, but the farmers will not be allowed to get nearly as much water as they need.
Why would that be?
You tell me.
It's California.
Well, let me guess.
Let me fill you in.
It's because of an endangered fish.
There's a problem with an endangered fish.
Yep.
So is that the most California thing you've ever heard in your life?
Years ago, before I built the house that I'm living in right now, I thought I was going to build it in a different place.
I had bought several acres down the road.
And when I went to look into building on it, turns out they had maybe some endangered fish in the little creek that was dry most of the time.
Or frogs or something.
I forget what it was.
But I've actually been limited from building for a fish or a frog that Nota has ever seen.
And by the way, there weren't any there.
It just looked like a place there might be some endangered fish or something.
It's actually insane trying to get anything built in California.
I don't recommend it, by the way.
I wouldn't do it at all.
But anyway, so this endangered fish, I don't know how endangered it is or how important it is, because frankly, I've never I've never missed that fish.
But apparently you could eat that fish whole and it would be really good for you.
But don't.
It's an endangered fish.
So even though it'd be very healthy to eat a whole, don't do that.
It's endangered.
So what are the farmers going to do?
Well, I don't know, but the only thing I can think of is if the farmers can't get water for their crops, they might be able to get the huge masses of illegal migrants to urinate on them.
I mean, I don't know if that would help, but it's better than nothing, right?
That's just my idea.
All right, the Oakland Reparations Committee wants $5 million.
And you're going to say, well, that's not nearly as much as I thought.
Oakland's a pretty big place.
And the Reparations Committee is only asking for $5 million.
I saw that and I thought, huh, that might actually be something we could talk about.
Because, you know, we wouldn't miss $5 million in our taxes.
And then I read it more carefully.
No, they don't, the reparations committee in Oakland, they don't want $5 million for reparations.
They want $5 million from taxpayers to come up with a plan for the reparations.
$5 million to work out a plan.
Now, as a person who lives in the Oakland area, what should I do?
To avoid being penalized for being white by having to pay for some reparations that I had nothing to do with.
What should I do?
Should I get the fuck out of there?
Can we be adults for like a minute?
I didn't create the system.
I'm just in the system.
It's not my fault.
If the system makes it more expensive to live in a state where there is a big black population, You should get out of there.
Or at least it should be one of your factors.
If you live anywhere in a place where DEI is a big emphasis, you should get the fuck out of there, if you're white.
Or Asian.
American.
You should get out of there.
Because you don't have any options.
You can't fight it.
And why would you stay where things are bad?
The number one thing that I teach people about career success, is if you can't do it where you are, Get the fuck out of there.
It's the very first thing I did when I graduated college.
Because my hometown was a tiny little town with, you know, no real industry or anything like that except tourism.
And the first thing I did is move to the California Bay Area before even knowing what I'd do for my life.
Because you have to go where the opportunity is.
So, at the moment, California is becoming kind of a hellhole.
I wouldn't recommend anybody move to it.
It's just really hard to move out of it.
And believe me, I've been doing a lot of research.
They've got these clawback provisions.
They can tax you even if you leave, you know, demonstrating that you really left.
If you, if you visit a lot, it's going to be a problem.
Yeah.
California is just a fucking piece of shit right now, but it has lovely weather.
And if you can afford it, that part's great.
Well, the, uh, Stanford had this weird disinformation research center, which turned out to be just a place where the government would work with these, I don't want to call them fakes, but they were obviously people working on the censorship industrial complex.
And they just closed down because they had so much heat.
Well, I don't trust it.
Do you think that just because this prominent censorship entity got closed down, do you think Do you think that they're not going to do any censoring?
I assume they just got more clever about it.
Don't we assume that outside of X, the platforms are all doing the same kind of bad stuff?
Maybe just more cleverly.
So in other words, instead of kicking somebody off a platform, maybe just nobody sees their posts.
I haven't heard as much complaining about it this year.
Have you?
It used to be that it was just so obvious.
The censorship that was just continuous complaining because you couldn't miss it It was everywhere, but I really haven't heard it so far this cycle Does that suggest that we're actually getting some kind of control over that or we just don't know where it is now?
See what I what I fear is that it's just a whack-a-mole situation and we whack this Stanford Disinformation Research Center.
I mean collectively we whacked it and But it doesn't mean it didn't just pop up somewhere else under a different name.
I assume that's what's happening.
All right.
The Supreme Court struck down the Trump era ban on bump stocks.
I guess they're, so if it's not a ban, you can have them.
Now that was a weird one because you wouldn't expect anybody Trump related to want to ban anything gun related.
But if you don't follow gun stuff, the so-called bump stocks would turn your gun into a wildly inaccurate instrument.
And so the gun people said, who the hell would want to use a bump stock if it just makes your gun less accurate?
Like the one and only time you'd use it would be that, you know, Vegas shooting when you're shooting into a gigantic crowd and accuracy didn't really matter because you weren't aiming at a specific person anyway.
But short of that, I'm told that if you You know, had a handgun and went in some place with bad intentions and just carefully shot, you would do more damage than a bump that's just going to be firing bullets into the ceiling as much as the anything else.
So I don't think it matters.
This bump stock thing is such a small little thing.
Makes no difference to anybody.
I don't think.
All right, I continue to ask the question of why voting machines exist.
If they're not cheaper or more secure or making us feel more credible and they're not faster, why?
There was a gentleman I saw on social media here who asked his local town to explain why they use machines.
They said something about them being more efficient or reliable or something.
Clearly not true.
Clearly not true.
So why do we have them?
Now, other people have said that, well, you know, if it produces paper, you can always be, you can always double check because you just look at the paper.
But apparently there are cases where it doesn't produce paper.
And there, you know, we know this Puerto Rico had just all kinds of trouble with their voting machines.
And I guess they didn't produce paper.
RFK Jr.
is basically saying you can't trust the voting machines.
Unless it creates paper.
So he would do legislation that says you can keep your voting machine, but it's got to create a piece of paper.
So we can check to see if it was real.
Is that enough?
I don't know.
I don't know.
But let's check in with the Rasmussen folks who like to keep us updated on Various claims of irregularity in voting from 2020.
So here's what we believe we know from the Maricopa County, one of the most questioned voting election results.
In 2020, here's what we know.
There was only one legal type of paper that could be used, and there are credible allegations that there were up to 10 different types found.
Now, do you know why there's only one One type of paper that's approved for an election in a given area.
Does anybody know why they say you can only use one piece of paper?
My first thought was, oh, it's because they know that this kind of paper is accepted by the machines.
That was my first thought.
You want to make sure it can be processed through the machines when they count.
You don't want any cheap paper that gets caught in the machines.
But it turns out that's not really the reason.
That's maybe one of the reasons.
They make sure that the paper works.
But the other reason is to make sure that there's no fraud.
Do you know how they can detect the fraud?
If somebody used the wrong paper.
It's a fraud detection.
Now, for some reason, that didn't immediately occur to me.
I just assumed it was a functional question.
And that if they used other paper, but the machines accepted it, I was thinking, well, that's not a big problem, is it?
What's the problem?
So they ran out of paper.
Some people didn't get the memo.
They just used whatever paper was available and it worked fine.
No problem.
But then once you realize that the limitation of the paper is a major way that they prevent fraud, and then you see that there were credible reports of 10 different papers used, that would pretty much be guaranteed fraud if you could prove this is true.
It's hard to imagine it would be anything but exactly what it looks like.
Now, is it proven?
I don't know.
Because it's hard to believe anything in the election domain, because so many things are found not to be true.
But that claim still stands, meaning that no court has said it's not true.
There's no court that said, no, that didn't happen.
So the claim is out there.
Whatever status it is, it's out there.
Here's another one.
Within Maricopa County, there was one legal software version, only one that was legal, but two versions and a compiler were found.
The compiler was capable of creating executable files and then deleting them without detection.
But there is some evidence that it did so three times during the election.
Why is your compiler creating and executing files and then deleting them?
What would be the legal reason to do that?
I don't know.
Maybe there is some legal reason.
You know, anything, anything, nothing would surprise me at this point.
But certainly everything about that looks fraudulent.
But remember, don't get fooled by Krakens.
There are tons of times since 2020 That both you and I, probably, heard a report and you said to yourself, oh, this time that's the smoking gun.
Then maybe it turned out not to be.
So you should always keep a real, real, real open mind about any specific claims.
But I take the argument from specific claims to the general.
The general is, what are the odds that this is the only non-corrupt system in the United States?
I'd say zero.
Just common sense.
And if you say, well, prove it, then I'll say, well, how about I don't have to prove it?
How about I just show you that every single other system can be hacked and has been?
And if anything that can be gamed is being gamed everywhere all the time, that's the way the world works.
So the fact that you didn't catch it probably doesn't mean anything.
Because people presumably would figure out how not to get caught.
So I don't have any proof that there's any kind of election irregularity.
All I have is the common sense that of course it is.
Of course it is.
Why would it be true if it doesn't need to be and somebody could benefit from faking it?
It seems unlikely that it's a fair system.
You know that President Trump floated the idea of having a
Having more tariffs on incoming products from other countries and getting rid of the income tax And I saw a long post by Balaji Srinivasan in which he's explaining there's actually There's an historical precedent because apparently before the income tax that was actually a big way that the United States funded itself and It's actually possible that we could do it
But as Balaji points out, it probably would take 10 years of economic pain like we haven't experienced since maybe the Great Depression.
So, I mean, he didn't say the Great Depression part, I just added that myself.
It's just that it would be very disruptive to make that kind of a change.
But it's not impossible, and it has some benefits.
And the benefits are that it would make the country run like a company that's trying to make money.
So, it would try to sell our goods to other people and make more money than the other people were making by selling to us, basically.
So, we would charge them for incoming stuff, so their stuff was more expensive, which would make it more profitable to build it internally.
And then manufacturing could move back to America because the tariffs would make it expensive to buy things from other places.
Now, if you add robots plus 3D printing and some tariffs, you get a lot of things.
You could pretty easily imagine the manufacturing coming back to America first slowly and then quickly, right?
Once we get all the transportation and the electrical and everything worked out, it might happen quickly after it goes slowly for a while.
Anyway, the biggest problem is that our current process, as Balaji points out, is that we just print money when we want to.
And it wouldn't work if you had a tariff.
If you had a tariff, you'd only have that money.
But if you can just print money, suddenly, here's another trillion dollars.
So how do you tell yourself to stop printing money?
Just because the system is collapsing if you keep doing it?
Hasn't stopped us yet.
So yeah, it's probably impossible from a bureaucratic point of view.
Here's a question I have.
How big are the election whistleblower rewards this year?
And don't tell me there aren't any, because that would be crazy.
Are you telling me that it's not obvious that if you were to find some trouble in 2024, and if you reported it, and let's say if it's big enough that it would make a difference, There's no reward.
Here's why you need a whistleblower reward in advance.
Right?
So Lara Trump, um, you should be listening to this.
There should be, it should be known in advance that there will be a huge amount of money to any Democrat or anybody else who comes up with the goods, like an actual prosecutable, large form of fraud.
Here's why.
You want to create a situation where people who have to get other people involved with their fraud, which probably would be the case if anybody was doing anything.
Yeah, it would take some insiders, you know, you'd need somebody to drive a truck, maybe somebody to unlock a door, somebody to turn the other way.
So probably any form of election cheating, hypothetically, again, I'm not aware of any proven forms in 2020.
But hypothetically, if someone was planning an op of that size, other people would be involved.
And if you had a big enough reward, you can guarantee that the people who were involved in it would have to kill all the other people involved to avoid the whistleblower.
Imagine putting a plot together.
All right, the five of us are going to do this plot and we're going to cheat in the election.
But when it's done, any one of the five of us can go collect a million dollars just by turning in the other four.
So what are you going to do?
Are you going to be part of that plot?
Or are you going to say yes and make sure you're the first one to turn it in?
Because if you're not the first one to go whistleblower, the first person gets a million dollars and you get jail time.
So what would you do?
Well, the first thing is it would create a situation where the leader of the plot would have to murder all the underlings after the plot was executed.
Because you couldn't have somebody out there who could make a million dollars And before they were just driving a truck.
Or they were the janitor that unlocked the door.
Right?
You can't have somebody out there with like a million dollars to gain if they bucked the system.
So there should be a very large award reward in advance that everybody knows about that says if you find some things it has to go through the court of course they have to be court uh court uh affirmed but if you don't have that it looks like hey you can give me a hundred dollars to open this door i'll take it will you talk to anybody about it nah i'll just keep the hundred dollars So you've got to make it too expensive to cheat.
See where I'm going in this?
Make it too expensive to cheat, because somebody's going to drop a dime.
Too much to gain.
Well, on the plus side, remember I told you that Lara Trump seemed like the right person for the co-chair of the RNC?
Because you needed somebody who had a predator mindset.
And I'm going to say this in a positive way, in case it sounded insulting, it's not meant to be.
Lara Trump has predator written all over her.
Would you agree with that?
Let's put it this way.
If you look at somebody like Adam Schiff, he might be an evil little troll, but he doesn't look like a predator.
He looks like prey.
In the wild, he'd be the first one that the lion ate.
But Lara Trump would be the lion.
Right.
So she's got, I think she has all the qualifications that you need for somebody who's going to just really make it happen.
And apparently she's put together a pretty major effort for poll watchers and watchdogs during the poll.
Now that's the thing you were waiting for, wasn't it?
Weren't you waiting to find out that the Republicans were actually going to fucking do something for once?
It turns out she is.
And it's pretty big.
And it probably will make a big difference, because you don't have to have them everywhere.
You just have to have them in the key places.
So, this is part of the theme of everything seems to be going Trump's way at the moment.
We'll get into more Trump stuff.
But now that we know what could have happened, it looks like the censorship machine is at least being wounded, if not dismantled.
It looks like the people who are going to watch the elections are going to watch it a lot more carefully.
And by the way, we still don't have an answer of why we use electronic counting machines.
Nobody has even offered an explanation.
How far do you think we can go into the election cycle without anybody, anybody, anywhere, offering a counter argument like, oh yeah, the machines are good, because?
It's going to get more and more embarrassing the longer we go with nobody even trying to answer the question.
And suppose somebody does answer the question.
Even that's bad, because why didn't the public know about any of that?
Why is it we don't know why you're doing it?
We should know.
That should be kind of transparent.
We're doing it because, maybe it's a good reason.
Maybe?
Anyway, you know, have you ever heard that saying, those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it?
Sounded pretty smart when the first time you heard it.
If I ignore history, I'll fall into those same traps of the people in history, so I better understand my history so I know what works and what doesn't work.
Well, that would make sense if history were real, but we know the history is completely made up, because we know that the current news is completely made up.
What will the news say about the January 6th protest?
They're already calling it an insurrection.
No insurrection happened, but that will be the news.
And someday people will look at the history books and say, hmm, that was a terrible insurrection back there on January 6th.
And it won't be real, but it'll be history.
I'm updating that to those who ignore history are less misinformed.
The more you know about history, the dumber you get.
So when I hear the historians, especially the presidential historians, weighing in as experts, I think to myself, your entire industry is built around bullshit.
You're actually analyzing the entrails of people who lied to you.
You're not even looking at the history, you're looking at the entrails of the liars and telling me what you think will happen in the future.
The dumbest thing ever.
So I wondered how many other old sayings are complete bullshit.
So the whole thing about learning from history is ridiculous.
Be yourself.
Worst, worst advice ever.
Don't be yourself.
That's a terrible idea.
Figure out what would be a better version of yourself and try to work toward that.
You're not done.
You're not so good that being yourself is a good idea.
What if you'd done that when you were 12?
Would you still be acting like a 12-year-old if you just thought that's how you were naturally?
No!
Don't act like yourself.
Act like something useful.
Act like something better than you.
Maybe you'll become that person.
How about follow your passion?
We don't have to talk about that, but we used to hear about that, and now that's obviously bullshit.
How about this big question about the Saudis not gonna, I don't know, trade in U.S.
dollars, and then our petrodollar domination will go away, and the country will collapse?
And I thought to myself, I don't think anybody even knows what's gonna happen.
And as of today, that's my current view.
Looking at some expert opinions.
Well, it's probably not a big deal So how many of you thought it was the end of the world and today you read the news and the experts like, you know Actually, probably not that big a deal How long would be we've been worrying about this being the collapse of the United States and then when it happens people go, you know That's not the most important thing So my current view is that
There will just be adjustments and everything will work out.
Well, you'd be surprised to find out that the Department of Justice who reports to Garland doesn't want to prosecute their boss for contempt.
Huh.
Bannon got prosecuted for contempt of Congress.
Peter Navarro is still in jail for contempt of Congress.
But when Garland is in contempt of Congress, oh no, they're not going to prosecute it.
Now, the Republicans did a good job.
Of forcing the hypocrites to out themselves.
So now we don't have to wonder.
We don't have to wonder.
Uh, if there's two forms of justice, one for Republicans and one for Democrats, there it is.
So your questions have been answered.
There is a separate form of punishment for Democrats, for Republicans.
Well, you heard a story that has represented us past some measure.
That would automatically register young men for the draft.
Now, the clarification is this.
It was already the law that young men had to register for the draft.
So this change is just doing it automatically.
Is that bad news or good news?
Well, I'm pretty sure if a draft became necessary, Whether or not you registered would be less important than whether or not they had a way to find you.
And they could always find you.
So, some number of people will not register for the draft because they didn't know they were supposed to.
Just won't do it.
They just didn't know it was important.
Should they be in jail?
Apparently it's jailable.
Did you know that?
It's a felony to not register for the draft.
How many of you didn't know that?
So it could be a quarter of a million dollar fines, could be felony, but it's even more than that.
Eventually, when you age out of it, and the statute of limitations wears off, at that point you can't be jailed, and you can't be fined.
But apparently you are forever banned from working for the government or getting government financial help and a lot of things.
And a lot of states have their own laws to punish you for not signing up.
So if you make it automatic, it's actually safer for the young men because then nobody's going to say, Hey, you didn't sign up.
So now you have to go to jail.
They'll say, oh, everybody signed up, it's automatic.
Isn't that better?
So what you might have thought is, oh my God, they're instituting the draft, is really just they took away a potential penalty for young men who, for no fault of their own, maybe didn't register.
So it probably is just a net plus and nothing else.
That's my guess.
However, is the timing suspicious?
Recruitment is way down.
We know that.
Recruitment's in the toilet.
And it's hard to get qualified people to volunteer.
And the Ukrainian war is heating up and people are talking about boots on the ground of at least Europeans.
It's not much of a leap to think that maybe the United States is just sort of getting ready.
Yeah, just in case.
Which isn't a bad idea for a country, because it sends a signal to the other countries that we're serious.
But Here's the kicker.
Why is it that only men would be drafted?
We have a Democrat in power.
Should they not be honest with their people?
So I think the Democrats have to do one of two things.
Either say, we were lying all the time about, you know, the genders being basically equal to do everything.
So really we were when it really matters.
We were just kidding.
You're not equal.
The men will do the fighting You ladies stay home.
They can't say that By the way, that's not my opinion.
I'm just saying that what are they gonna do?
So they built a They built a party that is pro-woman woman can do everything They need to be registered for the draft fully so I don't think men should be registered for the draft unless women are, so long as we're living in a world in which everybody's the same.
So I think women should worry about combat and worry about getting drafted.
So I think the odds of women being drafted into the military under a Biden regime are non-zero.
I'd give it odds of maybe a size 20%.
That if Biden wins reelection, that women will actually be drafted and that we'll be prepping for a European war.
Now I would bet against it.
Yeah, I would bet with the 80% likelihood it wouldn't happen.
But if I were a female voter and I knew there was really no chance that would happen under Trump, but a 20% chance I would get drafted into the army and sent to Ukraine.
And I think that women need to be a little bit more informed.
That they're very close to being handed a gun and sent to Ukraine.
They're very close.
I don't think they know that.
So it would be nice if they were at least warned that the possibility is there.
MSNBC, the propaganda network, It's so funny.
Like, you know, I always say I'm watching it for fun.
And I always think, oh, you think that's hyperbole.
No, I actually watch it for the laughs.
Because they're so batshit crazy.
But really, it's just propaganda.
So they're just acting.
But here's what they're trying to sell us.
They're trying to sell us that their business leaders, who of course don't give their names, anonymous sources.
MSNBC's got some anonymous sources.
Those are always reliable, aren't they?
And they said that they questioned Trump's mental fitness because he couldn't keep a thought straight and he would go in one direction and then go in another direction.
Behind closed doors.
So here's what MSNBC is trying to sell their public.
And I'm not making this up.
This is actually what they're trying to sell to their audience.
That Biden is, uh, looks dead in public, but if you were to catch him privately, perfect.
Trump is in public all the time.
Doing these high-level hard things like rallies and talking for an hour extemporaneously.
And while he does look great in public, behind closed doors he's actually retarded.
So if you're an MSNBC audience, they're literally trying to teach you that Biden is a retard in public, but behind closed doors just fine.
And that Trump, every day you see him, he looks just fine.
But behind closed doors, let me tell you, he all falls apart behind those closed doors, according to anonymous people who don't like him.
They're even saying that it's full projection and that the right-leading media is becoming like North Korea.
How can you watch Morning Joe and not thinking that's the North Korea?
The projection is in full form.
Well, to counter that, Chamath Palapatiya,
One of the wealthy investor VC types who was at the David Sachs event and where Trump was there raising money in San Francisco and he was talking recently on his podcast about the experience of meeting Trump personally and What he came away with is he's definitely sharp in public in private He's pro AI Doesn't want to overregulate it.
He's pro crypto and understands it, doesn't want to regulate it too heavily. He's pro low regulations and low taxes, basically all the things the business people want to hear.
He understands them all, that the tariff versus income tax is a pretty complicated thing, which he apparently understands and is promoting, or at least floating as a possibility. And the other thing that Chambath said is that he's super funny and personable and charismatic. He just, you know, he's...
He said that his experience of him in person was so different from his sort of bombastic public persona that nobody would even imagine it.
That was exactly my experience.
In person, he's humble and polite and funny and charismatic.
Like, you could not like him more in person.
He really has the whole package of, you know, how to work a crowd, how to work an individual.
So Chalmuth came under the spell, and he even said that Trump was making him laugh.
So apparently he was looking at Chalmuth and his wife, who was very attractive, and he said, wow, you're a beautiful couple.
My goodness, you're a beautiful couple.
And then he turns to Chalmuth, Within hearing range of his beautiful wife, he goes, man, you must be really rich.
Now that's fucking funny.
It's funny that he said it in front of the guy's wife.
And even Java thought it was hilarious.
His wife thought it was hilarious.
And they'll probably talk about it for the rest of their life.
Now that's Trump, right?
That is exactly who he is in private.
He's hilarious.
And he's very fun to talk to.
All right.
Other stories, everything's going Trump's way.
A bunch of CEOs, according to the Wall Street Journal, the top CEOs are flocking to Trump.
Well, I don't know if they're flocking, but apparently Trump has won over the major bank CEOs, you know, the Jamie Dimon type.
Doesn't mean they're necessarily voting for him, but they do seem to think there's a Trump advantage to banking and business.
So if you get the bankers, you have the money people.
But he also has the most important venture capitalists in Silicon Valley.
And by the way, pretty much all of them are all the ones who talk in public.
I haven't heard any venture capitalists lately being pro-Biden, except one who looked batshit crazy.
So the reasonable ones that you know to be smart are pretty much all Trump at this point.
Bill Ackman, same thing.
And for all the right reasons, you know, AI, crypto, regulation, taxes, it's exactly what you think.
So they're all coming home.
Meanwhile, even according to Rasmussen, even Arizona looks like it's going to go to Trump when he narrowly lost it last time.
If you add in the other candidates like RFK Jr.
and Jill Stein, whatever, Trump has 41 to Biden's 37.
And he's doing even better than Carrie Lake is in her Senate race that's closer, where she's just a little bit behind her challenger Ruben Gallego.
So it's, what is it, 44 compared to 41.
So that's a closable gap.
We'll see if she does.
Because they're 10% undecided.
Do you think the undecideds are really undecided if they vote?
I feel like undecided is where you hide a pro-Trump vote.
Because if you're pro-Biden, it's just safer to say it, isn't it?
Or it used to be.
It's less safe now.
But I think the 10% are likely to lean pro-Carrie Lake, so she might have a little good luck if these numbers hold up.
We'll see.
All right, so here's the Trump update.
Let's compare the Trump update to the Biden update, all right?
Trump is ahead in all the polls, again, so that's great.
He's got the support of the most important people in business in the United States, from Elon Musk through the bankers to the venture capitalists.
They aren't just the business people in those entities.
Those are the best business people.
The smartest ones in all of those industries.
It's kind of obvious now.
He has, to the chagrin of Democrats, he has basically pulled the Republican Party together.
I guess even Mitt Romney was in the group of people who met with Trump when he visited Capitol Hill.
So even people who were very, very anti-Trump before have softened up.
And coming around.
People who said bad things about him right after January 6th have decided, well, maybe I took that too far.
And you've seen that J.D.
Vance, Vivek, there are people who went hard at him.
And then later in the fullness of time and information, when, you know, that wasn't exactly what it looked like, was it?
So, the other thing is that Trump is getting the support of men, the UFC.
I saw Tim Pool mention that Trump is getting the male vote, the Republicans.
I saw Greg Guffield mentioned it.
I've seen it in other publications.
It's now super, super obvious that the Democrats are the party of women.
The Republicans are the party of men.
Not that there aren't, you know, men in the other and women in the other, blah, blah, blah.
It's just a trend, not a universal.
And Trump still is ahead on all major policy issues.
I think if you took the top three, they're all Trump.
You know, immigration, economy, Ukraine, it's all Trump.
So that's Trump.
So Trump basically won everything.
And the only bad thing was somebody made up a new hoax that he insulted Wisconsin.
An anonymous person said they were in a meeting and he insulted Wisconsin.
And then when he was asked about it, he just brushed it aside.
He goes, no, there's high crime there.
You know, that's what I was saying.
Now, so that's it.
So he was basically one little hoax that nobody cared about.
And all else went his way gigantically.
Huge amount of money raising, a huge change in opinion about what people thought of all the lawfare.
Everything's going his way.
Everything.
Let's see how Biden's doing.
Biden is seeking young influencers for his campaign, which apparently is hurt by the fact that when you're trying to get TikTok influencers to back your campaign, It doesn't work as well when you've just signed a bill to ban TikTok.
That's right.
So where Trump is brilliantly working the podcasts and raising gigantic amounts of money even from jail, Biden decided to use TikTok influencers and then ban TikTok.
In other news, he's continuing his world US embarrassment tour.
By wandering around like an animated statue in front of the other world leaders, just in case you'd forgotten the contrast.
So, it's not bad enough that we show him wandering around like a dementia patient in the United States.
No, we had to put him on a stage where all the other world leaders appear to be functional, even if you don't like their policies.
They appear to be able to walk and talk.
And you see him up there and you say, hey, why is it we have the only leader in the G7 who can't walk and talk?
So that's not ideal for the Biden team, and the biggest question about Trump is whether the bad guys using lawfare will jail him before the election, but all smart people think he would win even from jail.
Whereas Biden's biggest question is, will he survive until Election Day, or will he crumple into a pile of dust and the wind will blow it away before November 5th?
So overall, I would say that Trump's looking a little bit better, winning all the polls, getting all the business support, winning men by a huge margin.
He's favored on all the policies, but Biden is looking for TikTok influencers while banning TikTok.
Fucking idiot.
Embarrassing the world, the U.S.
around the world, on camera so we can all watch it.
And the biggest question is whether he's even healthy enough to survive until Election Day.
So what if he wins?
I saw Greg Guffield ask this question.
What if he wins?
There's going to be some trouble.
I don't recommend trouble.
Yeah, don't do anything.
But how is the public going to accept that?
It's just going to look like it's rigged.
So there you go.
So it's all good for me.
I'm one of those hot rodent men.
Okay, and the last thing is that the Secretary of State Blinken, he said that the Kremlin is intensifying its hybrid attacks against NATO members.
Now, do you know what the hybrid attacks are?
That would be like hacking and You know, murdering people in suspicious ways.
That's right.
So, do you believe when Tony Blinken says Russia's doing hacking and hurting the countries that are near Russia over there?
How do they know it's Russian hackers?
If I've taught you anything, it's this.
If somebody claims that Russian hackers broke into anything, that's probably bullshit.
I'm not saying that Russian hackers never have broken into anything.
I'm just saying they'll never be able to prove it.
And it's always very convenient when it happens, isn't it?
Oh, we're mad at Russia because of Ukraine.
And there's all these suspicious hacks.
Well, that must be Russia.
No, it might be.
But I would put zero credibility On any claim of Russia hacking.
How about Russia hacking Hillary's emails?
Nope.
I do not believe that that really happened in the real world.
That looks like bullshit to me.
Maybe.
I wouldn't say it's impossible, but I think every claim of Russia hacking is in the really low credibility range, no matter where it comes from.
Even if the government says, oh, we've got tons of evidence.
Can't show it to you, but we got all the evidence.
No, don't believe it.
Because Russia is just the scapegoat of scapegoats.
So if somebody says, hey, we found a bunch of dead bodies.
We think it's Russia.
Maybe.
Probably not.
The anti-Semitic people on YouTube are just so animated.
the next.
Every day, I have to deal with people telling me I don't understand history.
And if I did, I would see the mass Jewish conspiracy.
And I always ask, I'm willing to listen to any argument.
So, what do you got?
And it's always nothing.
So when I say, okay, well, if you're making a claim, what would be the evidence for that?
Well, it's got a few new history.
I go, well, OK, why don't you point me to something?
Well, if you're not going to be educated, no, just show me something.
And it just disappears as soon as you ask for anything reliable or anything.
So we're still talking about VP possibilities?
Yeah.
TV heads care about defending them.
Biden wandering around was not shown on mainstream TV.
Yeah, the people still watching mainstream TV are just lost.
I'd love to see Trump say that.
I'd love Trump to say, you know, you should lose all credibility in the mainstream press.
And you should look at at least the podcasters who are sort of the alternate news at this point.
Yeah, so is it the WEF that's controlling the world?
Or is it the Freemasons?
Or is it the gigantic Jewish conspiracy that you're all sure is happening, but nobody has any information that they can share with me that would be not as stupid?
You know, a lot of conspiracies.
Well, I don't know.
Some of them might be true.
But that, ladies and gentlemen, concludes my Saturday Amazing Coffee with Scott Adams.
I'm going to say goodbye to you.
YouTube and Rumble and X and talk to my beloved subscribers on Locals.
If you're not subscribing to the Dilber comic that's either on X by subscription or on Locals, you would miss that Dilber is using the declining birth rate argument to try to get his date to sleep with him because they're going to need to increase the Population of the Earth, and we're all dead.
It doesn't work out well for Dilbert, as you might guess.
And if you have not yet bought my book, God's Debris, the complete works that includes the first two books, plus a new short story to complete the Avatar arc, you should, because people are loving it.
The reviews are crazy.
It's a good gift book, by the way, and a great summer book.
Or reframe your brain is good too if you haven't.
It's actually great if you haven't seen it.
Alright, so that's it for me for the big platforms.
