Find my Dilbert 2025 Calendar at: https://dilbert.com/
God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorks
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Jordan Conradson, Kamala Harris, 2024 Election Buffalo Run Claims, Early Voting Surge, President Trump, Mainstream Media Credibility, The Atlantic Propaganda, Democrat Mental Health, Persecuting Donny Deutsch, Enemy Within Hoax, Trump Cursing, VP Harris, Obama Promotes Hoaxes, Elon Musk, Re-Engineering Government, George Washington Trump, Golden Age, MSNBC Priming Color Revolution, Democrat War-Gaming Trump Win, Leaked Israel War Plans, Popular Vote Win, Electoral College Win, 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
This is the best time you've ever had in your life.
If you'd like to take it up to a new level, a level that nobody can even understand with their tiny, shiny human brains.
All you need for that is a cup or mug or a glass of tank or chalice or stein, a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
It happens now.
Go.
Meanwhile, all of the lazy podcasters taking the morning off.
My goodness.
My goodness.
Do you feel sorry for them?
Their lack of energy.
Their low output.
Their unproductive ways.
But now you're here with me.
And we got news.
I was reading an article by Ricky Schlott.
I guess she writes for the New York Post.
And it wasn't an article.
It was actually a post on X. And she said, public service announcement to single men.
There are literally so many single women sitting around at bars waiting to get hit on all of a sudden.
Go outside for once, and the ratio will be massively in your favor.
Really?
In my entire life, the only time I've ever seen a woman in a bar who wanted to get hit on was on television.
I've never seen that in the real world.
In the real world, they're either with a guy or they're with their friends in an impenetrable circle, and they're all waiting for the same six-foot-tall guy who's got $200,000 income at age 22.
So, no.
Going to a bar is the worst place you're ever going to meet anybody.
And by the way, maybe you want to meet somebody who doesn't go to a bar to meet somebody.
So, no.
Worst advice of all time.
Don't go to a bar to meet a guy.
Anyway.
Speaking of that, if you are subscribing to the Dilbert comic, it's now called Dilbert Reborn, if you subscribed either on X or on the Locals platform at Scott Adams, the Locals, you would know that there is a mistake in today's Dilbert comic.
My comic is written and The first draft of the art is drawn by me.
But then I sent it out to my assistant.
And my assistant does the final art and the color.
And I don't see it until I'm ready to post it.
I could.
I mean, I could see it early.
I just don't look.
And this morning I realized that my comic where Ashok the intern, who was born in India, is using online dating.
And it's not working out too well for him.
But my art director colored him the same color as the rest of the white characters.
So you'll see that Ashok the intern has changed his race for one day.
I'll change it back after we're done.
But for one day, Ashok the intern is looking all pink and Caucasian.
Anyway, but we'll change that.
And ten years ago, the comic that's running also on the same online places, if you subscribe on X to Dilbert or on Locals, you'll see that ten years ago, the comic that Dilbert was running is a robot that's taking over for management in the company.
And the robot is trying to navigate the fact that all humans are liars.
And I was thinking, so that was 10 years ago.
Now we're right on the cusp of having an actual robot boss.
Because it isn't hard to imagine you could have a robot that could, I don't know, monitor the metrics of your performance and have conversations with you to motivate you.
Hey, I noticed you're not doing so well today.
Everything okay?
So you could probably have a robot boss anytime you wanted.
I mean, I think the technology is basically there.
However, how in the world is a robot ever going to navigate the fact that people lie all the time?
Because your real boss is going to go up to you and say, all right, what do you absolutely need to do your job?
Well, I'm going to need 10% more in my budget next year.
All right, I'm going to cut your budget 10%.
No, wait, what?
What?
I just said I want 10% more in my budget or I couldn't possibly do my job.
Then your boss says, I know, I heard you.
But we're going to cut you 10%.
What?
Yeah, you just do it anyway.
How's the robot going to do that?
The robot's going to say, you need 10% more.
I do not have a mechanism for funding.
I do not know what to do because you need 10% more, but I cannot get 10% more.
There is no path forward.
I give up.
So we're either going to have to teach our robots...
How to detect lies with certainty, which maybe you could actually do.
Or we're going to have to teach them that everything that people say is a lie.
And in order to handle that, you have to lie back.
So in the real world, the way it goes is, I need 10% more, which is a lie.
Then the boss says, you can't have it.
Because my boss said, I can't raise the budget.
Which is also a lie.
Because you're going to spend the money somewhere else.
But the boss didn't lower your budget.
You're just saying that.
So you usually got the employee lying to the boss, the boss lying to the employee.
But over time, the liars have figured out how to operate in a world where everything is a lie.
How in the world...
Does a robot learn to operate in that world?
Maybe it can be done.
I wouldn't rule it down.
Maybe they can do it better.
But it's certainly an interesting question.
If everything is a lie all the time, and that really is our world, how does a robot figure that out?
I don't know.
Anyway, if you're worried about how to get a date and your dating apps are not working, I have a great idea.
You should become a music executive if you're a guy.
Apparently, if you're a music executive, oh God, can you do things.
I don't even want to tell you the things you can get away with if you're a music executive.
Most of it's illegal, unethical and illegal.
But it will certainly end your dating problems.
According to Pussycat Dolls singer Kaya Jones, she was one of those people who was on the inside to know that Diddy's downfall is, quote, bigger than just the rapper himself and has the potential to bring down some big entertainment executives, who she claims...
We're all about the sexual abuse.
Now, at this point, there are enough people who do know what was going on, who all have the same story, which is, this is much bigger than Diddy.
And I think that sounds right.
It does sound bigger than Diddy.
Of course, if your job is to be one of the pussycat dolls, And to essentially sell sex that comes with noise.
You're probably in your most dangerous situation when it comes to those executives.
But more to come.
Will we ever find out?
Will we ever find out what was up with Diddy?
I think the Diddy thing is going to go the way of Epstein, which is not the most innovative thing to say because a lot of people think that.
I just don't think we live in a world where Where the people who are still rich enough can ever go to jail.
I've got a feeling that Weinstein must have pissed off somebody important.
I feel like the only reason he went to jail is that he wasn't on the inside anymore.
Like there was something he did that made somebody mad or, you know, he did a bad deal with somebody, something.
I feel like there's more to that story.
Well, anyway, according to Patty Nyberg at Task and Purpose, there's now an army device that can determine if you've got a traumatic brain injury just with a drop of blood.
That's actually a really big deal.
If you could take a quick drop of blood and you would know if somebody had traumatic brain injury or not, it would change how you handled it.
And that's a pretty big deal.
Now, you might say to yourself, but Scott, how often do you really need to use A tool to take a drop of blood to determine if somebody has a traumatic brain injury.
Well, I would recommend it for all of the hosts of MSNBC because they clearly look brain damaged.
And it's just one drop of blood.
It's not a lot.
It's not a lot to ask.
I would just like to see the main hosts, just see if they have any traumatic brain injuries because it looks like it.
They act like it.
Anyway, I saw Jordan Conradson writing for the Gateway Pundit talking about all the various videos that allege that Kamala Harris looks drunk.
Now, I looked at all the videos, and I said to myself, she does look drunk in every one of them.
At least one of them might be manipulated, and the others might be just a case of her being exuberant and joyful.
But here's what my takeaway from that is.
If you can't tell if your candidate for president is drunk off of her ass, or if that's just the way she normally acts, isn't that enough reason not to vote for her?
If you can't tell by looking at her?
I don't know.
That's either totally drunk, or that's just the way she is.
It almost doesn't matter if she's actually drunk, does it?
Because I don't want that representing me.
Like, do you want her to go over to some big G20 or something?
And everybody's like, is she drunk?
Or is that...
I think she's drunk.
No, no, no.
That's the way she acts.
Seriously?
That's the way she acts.
That's not drunk?
I don't know.
Well, now that you mention it, she does look drunk.
That's not your best foot forward.
There really isn't.
One thing nobody ever asked about Trump, is he drunk right now?
Nobody ever asked that.
There's reason for that.
All right.
Laura Loomer gives us a warning about the election claims.
You've heard the term Joshua Steinman taught me that, at least on X, he taught the rest of us, that there's a name for it.
It's called the Buffalo Run.
So a Buffalo Run is where fake news is created that will get some group of people to embrace it and say, oh, that thing happened.
That's outrageous.
That thing happened.
And then they debunk it.
So the point is to get people to embrace something that's very untrue until they ruin their credibility by believing it in public.
And then anything that they say after that, you say, well, oh my goodness, well, isn't that the same person who said X? So the Buffalo Run is the big Kraken-like claim that turns out not to be true.
And Laura warns us, and I will reiterate, that just like our prior elections, there will be incredible claims of cheating.
Most of those incredible claims of cheating, most of them won't be true.
Does everybody here get that?
That whatever you hear about cheating, and no matter who it comes from, No matter what entity publishes it, no matter what writer writes it, no matter how many witnesses there are, almost all of them are going to be fake.
Even if the election is totally rigged.
Because the ones you're going to see are the ones that are not hidden.
And the things not hidden are going to be hoaxes.
So you're going to see a lot of fake claims that will be tremendously detailed and will be absolutely fake and could come from sources that you really, really trust.
So just assume, here's the rule that I would use.
Assume that individual claims are probably not true.
They could be, but probably not.
But also assume that the system itself is not dependable.
Meaning that we don't have a way to know if the system is accurate or not, unless you got lucky and caught something you weren't supposed to catch.
But we don't really have a way to know that the election systems are all working okay.
We only know what we caught.
So if you know what you know, then you know something.
But nobody knows what they don't know.
Which pocket do I have a dollar in, people?
Here, we'll do a test.
This is an election test.
Which pocket, left or right, do I have a dollar in right now?
You don't know.
Well, the answer is I don't have a dollar in either of my pockets.
But the point is, how could you be certain where my dollar was?
But at the end of this election, people are going to say, I'm certain that it was a good election.
How?
How?
How could you possibly know I didn't have a dollar in my pocket?
How do you know the unknowable?
How do you know that a state actor didn't hack it and left no trace?
How in the world do you know anything is fair?
The only thing you could know for sure is if you found something, there was enough time, there's never enough time, you had standing, you never have a standing.
You know, in this weird hypothetical world, you might be able to catch something, but you can't prove something didn't happen, and you know that they're already brainwashing the public so that the public thinks they can tell when something didn't happen.
Nope.
You cannot tell if I have something in my pocket or not.
You do not have the ability to know either one.
But if I stood up and reached into my pocket and took out a dollar...
You might know that.
But if I don't do that, you don't know for sure what's in my pocket, and you don't really have a way of finding out.
There's nothing in my pocket.
We're getting reports of big numbers for early voters.
We'd like to think that means something, but it might not.
It could mean that both sides are just really incentivized.
I think that's true.
I think both sides have a lot of energy for voting.
But we're seeing that even in Georgia, the early voting is huge.
Now, I'm seeing the Conservatives say, there, because the early voting is huge, we have proven that there's no voter suppression and there's no problem with people getting IDs and stuff like that.
That doesn't prove that.
You can't say that just because voting is at an all-time high or even that early voting...
That doesn't tell you that everybody could vote.
They're barely related.
So don't do that.
It just makes you sound dumb.
What you can say is that there's a lot of voting.
That's all you can say.
You can't say that there were 100 people who wanted to vote, but they couldn't figure out how.
Because there might be.
Might be 100 people who didn't get to vote.
How would you know?
Again, how would you know that somebody didn't vote?
The only thing you know is how many voted.
It's the same problem.
If, in fact, there were people who didn't vote and you don't know their names and nobody told you about them, how would you know if they existed or not?
Now, I suspect there's not a big problem with people who want to vote and can't.
But you wouldn't know because people did vote.
That's not the evidence that there are people who can or cannot vote.
Anyway, according to CNN's Harry Enten, Trump's net favorability numbers are better than ever.
In 2016, he was negative 27 on favorability.
Then in 2020, he was negative 12.
2024, he was negative 9, which would be a disaster for Democrats if that number held.
I would like to reiterate one of my best predictions ever.
That I said that when Trump left office after 2020, that he would be more popular every year than he's out of office.
And there it is.
And my reasoning for that is that I knew that the hoaxes and just the ridiculous fake news about him would eventually fade away because that stuff doesn't necessarily even get written in history books.
But what you remembered would be, wait a minute.
Inflation wasn't so bad.
We didn't have wars.
So you would remember his results, but the claims that were just ridiculous would sort of fade away in time.
And to some extent that happened.
Although the new hoaxes are coming in big and strong.
CNN's also, Harry Enten is talking about the margin of black men voting for Democrats versus Republicans.
In Obama's election, he had an 81-point margin among black men.
So he had 81 points more than his competitor in black men.
Clinton still did good.
Hillary, 63.
Biden lost a little more, down to 53.
And now Harris is down to 41.
Harris has half the popularity of black men as Obama.
What do you think that's about?
Do you think that is sexist?
Because Obama thinks that the black men are being sexist.
Do you think that's what's going on?
I did actually see some street interviews where some black men said exactly that.
I'm not going to vote for a woman.
But they didn't look like they were necessarily the people who were voting at all.
The people who said that on camera, I'd never vote for a woman.
I just...
There was something about their vibe that didn't say, I'm going to vote for anybody.
Just, I couldn't imagine them being there on election day.
But maybe...
You never know.
So I don't know what that's about, but Trump's doing great.
And I guess Trump's going to the black barbershop.
Is that today?
Can you give me a fact check?
When is Trump going to the black barbershop in Pittsburgh or someplace?
I forget where.
But that's going to be really fun.
See, I think every time you see Trump working with real people, then the he's a Hitler messaging that's coming just looks more ridiculous.
If you only knew him from his speeches, and then the Democrats are framing him as Hitler or Mussolini, you could look at his speeches and say, yes, he's a powerful man saying things powerful.
Yes, just like a dictator.
But then you see him talking to real people.
And you can't even imagine it.
It becomes unimaginable that he would walk out of that barbershop and he's Hitler when he walks out the door.
It's not imaginable.
You literally can't imagine it.
So it is such a good move to bring him down to what I call the retail level, where he's talking to voters and not talking to pundits and interviewers.
It's perfect.
So I think that's a winning play in his final days of the election.
I think it's unbeatable, actually, in terms of votes.
Let's see.
Real clear politics has Trump with a 93.2% chance of winning the Electoral College, but they still have Harris winning the popular vote.
So that would be, we'll talk about another poll that says the opposite.
This says that Trump will win the popular vote as well.
But this would be the worst case scenario.
The worst case scenario is that Harris gets the most votes in the country, but Trump wins anyway the way he won against Clinton.
Because then the people who are unhappy can say, It's not really fair.
We should get rid of the electoral college and we should have done it retroactively.
And then there's going to be protests in the streets.
And then you'd sort of understand it, wouldn't you?
You'd say to yourself, well, the majority didn't get its way.
So you can kind of understand why they'd be mad.
But suppose it went the other way.
Suppose Trump got a big electoral victory, but also squeaked down a victory in the popular vote.
Feels different, doesn't it?
Even a 1% difference, if he could just make it in the popular vote, then the story becomes he won the electoral college, and guess what?
Had there been no electoral college, he still won.
If we can say that at the end, that he would have won with or without an electoral college, then we've said something.
And I think that the way our brains are organized as Americans, that if you can win both of those, it's like winning two elections, effectively.
It's like two elections.
So if he can win them both, that's going to be impressive.
Otherwise, I think you're going to see the color revolution.
By the way, do you know what that is?
So if there's anybody here who doesn't know what the color revolution refers to, it's how America and the CIA take over other countries.
A big part of it is they encourage and pay and organize street protests of whoever the muscle is in that country.
So if it's the unions, then they back them and the unions protest.
If it's America, it might be Black Lives Matter and Antifa.
But the people on the street are fake.
They think they're real.
The people on the street have real emotions and believe they're there for real reasons.
But they wouldn't be there, except they're organized.
And it's the organizing that's the fake part.
So, what we expect is that when Trump first got elected, and by the way, this has all been war-gamed by Democrats.
We know this.
We know this for sure.
That when he got elected the first time, they put the people on the streets, you know, the Black Lives Matter fake, And that was to create the impression that the public was against Trump.
So if you could see every day there's massive protests, you'd say, well...
You know, the public must not like him.
And then if they moved against him in a political way and the fake news was against him and the lawfare was against him, it would all look consistent.
It would look like, oh, he's a Putin.
I guess everything's against him.
So if he's removed, I guess we'd feel all right about that because the street protests would end and it all seemed like it made sense.
So if you're going to overthrow a country, whether it's the CIA overthrowing our own country, which I do believe that they tried to do and have done in the past, you need the muscle on the street.
And to get that, it would be really, really helpful if Trump didn't win the popular vote.
So the street muscle problem gets complicated if the majority clearly wanted Trump to be president.
Alright, let's see what else.
Polling company Atlas Intel has a new poll.
Now, if that doesn't mean anything to you, because you say to yourself, Atlas Intel, I've never even heard of them.
Well, it turns out that they were the best polling company last cycle.
So they had the most accurate results.
And do you remember I told you that everybody would be moving into accurate mode when it got close to the election?
Because you have to be accurate when you're close.
Because that's the one that they'll monitor.
Nobody's going to say how accurate you were in August because it can't be proven.
You don't know if you were accurate in August because there was no election.
But you do know if you're going to be accurate in November because there will be an actual election.
So that's the only one you've got to get right.
You've got to get the last ones right.
But there's two things going on.
And I believe that one of them is crooked.
Maybe both of them are.
The one thing that's crooked is that I think that there are some fake polls that are going to try to make the election look like it's too close to call.
Therefore, if there's any cheating, they can say, well, look, we had several polls that said it was too close to call, and Harris won by.0001.
Totally not surprising.
So why would you even think there was any cheating?
That was well within the expected range of possibilities.
So part of the polls, I believe, this is my belief, based on living in the real world, are fake, and they're fake to make them as close as possible so that the cheat is possible.
That's what I think.
That's speculative.
It's just based on living in the real world and based on what I'd do if I had control over bad things.
But separate from that, there will be the pollsters who are not in on the cheat.
But they do want to make sure their numbers are good, and maybe they wanted to stay consistent with other pollsters during the year because they would look like they were crazy if they were way off.
So everybody sort of groups together during the year just so none of them look crazy, but at the end they bifurcate.
One group goes toward the truth.
Like probably Atlas Intel is.
And one group goes toward the tie.
Oh, it's so close that no matter what happens would be possible.
Anything's possible now.
So you're going to see both of those things happening.
Atlas Intel says Trump would win the national vote by three.
Just hold that in your...
Put that in your brain for a second.
The most accurate pollster...
And one that, in my opinion, is not one of the ones who's trying to be fake, but one of the ones who's trying to be as real as possible, especially at the end.
They have him winning the national vote, not the electoral vote.
He wins that also.
He wins every state.
But he'd win the national vote by three.
Republicans don't do that.
So if he does...
It's everything.
It's a landslide.
So the biggest glaring light is this pole.
There's lots of other poles, and I wouldn't ignore them.
But there's one that's better than the other poles.
And Rasmussen will be up there, too.
So make sure you're watching Rasmussen.
They typically end up in the top five of the pollsters.
And Atlas Intel, also a top five.
So, they have both swung to Trump.
So here's what Trump is doing, according to Alice Intel, in the various swing states.
Pennsylvania up 3.3, Michigan up 2.8, Georgia up 1.4, Arizona up 0.6, Nevada up 0.3, North Carolina up 0.7, up in Wisconsin.
Oh, I'm sorry.
In North Carolina, Harris is up 0.7, and Harris is up in Wisconsin 0.7.
So I correct myself.
So Trump was ahead in 5 out of 7.
And then they have him in the electoral vote, 286 to 252, which is not as big a difference as you might imagine.
I think there's a betting...
I think the betting markets have Trump, like, way ahead again.
But I wouldn't trust the betting markets for a prediction.
All right.
Here's something that is true that I hadn't thought about so much.
Patrick Bat-David said to Trump, I guess yesterday, you kind of did kill mainstream media.
And Trump said, I did.
I'm very proud of it, too.
He actually did.
That's a true thing.
That the entire mainstream media, at least, let's say 95% of it, was completely against Trump when he entered the race.
And he destroyed the entire industry.
Now, maybe it would have happened on its own, because there were other economic forces.
But the credibility of the news is completely gone.
And he did that.
So I'll brag again.
In 2015, I told you Trump would change more than politics.
He would change the way you saw reality itself.
This is that.
Reality itself used to be that if it's on the news, it's probably true.
Today's reality is that the news and the truth are just completely unrelated.
I mean, they might overlap, but you wouldn't know.
You'd have no way to know.
It's just propaganda.
Now, that's something we know that we didn't know before.
And I could see it coming like it was a train coming right at me.
Reality was going to completely change.
It's completely different now.
All right.
So you might know that the publication called The Atlantic used to be something like a regular publication, but now it's just a propaganda vehicle owned by Steve Jobs' widow, who's a good friend of Kamala Harris.
So here's one of their headlines, The Atlantic headline.
Trump is speaking like Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini.
Now, at this point, they're just being stupid and funny, aren't they?
Like, it used to be that I thought, oh, I have to go say something to debunk this.
But do you need to debunk it anymore?
This is a propaganda outfit.
As long as you know that they're not anywhere near the news business, and they don't try to be, and they're not intending to be, it's just propaganda.
I'm not saying that they're biased.
I'm saying that they are properly a propaganda tool that is pretending to be a different thing.
That's different from the news that's biased.
Very different.
The news is very biased, no matter what news you're looking at.
But this isn't bias.
This isn't bias.
This is just a propaganda outlet.
So MSNBC is not the same business as CNN. CNN and Fox News, just to balance out the point, are in the business of news and But the opinion people are biased in one direction in one case and the other direction in the other case.
Now, that's well disclosed, meaning that if you're watching either one, you've got a pretty good idea what you're watching.
And as I've said, both Fox News and now CNN, they didn't do it as much before, they do have credible voices, so you've at least heard the other side.
You know, it's way more biased in each case, but you're going to hear the other side.
MSNBC doesn't even do that.
The Atlantic doesn't do that.
These are pure propaganda pieces.
As long as you realize that if you're watching MSNBC, you didn't even know what news was.
That's a true statement.
If you're watching MSNBC because you think you're watching news, you are in a different universe.
No, they're not even trying to be news.
They are only a propaganda outfit.
And if I were just saying that to be biased, I would be saying it against CNN. And CNN... In the first election was just a propaganda outfit.
They've changed ownership.
It's obvious that their preferences have changed for how to present themselves.
And right now I would say they're a biased news outfit, but a news outfit.
I would say that Fox is a biased news outfit, but a news outfit.
The Atlantic is not a news outfit, or even an opinion piece.
It's just propaganda.
And Washington Post is a bit of a hybrid, but more of a propaganda outfit.
And MSNBC is nothing but propaganda.
You're not even going to hear the other side.
Anyway, and I wonder how big the mental health crisis will be, and at what point can you blame the propagandists?
Let's connect some dots.
Let's see.
We believe that the ripple effect of slavery from a couple hundred years ago, or whatever it was, is affecting black Americans today to their economic and maybe even psychological detriment.
I agree with that.
I don't know how to measure it, and obviously people are affected in different ways.
Some are not affected at all.
But it's true.
There's a ripple effect, and it's gone many decades.
It makes a difference.
Now let me ask you this question.
We've watched the fake news for over eight years spew propaganda that half of the country are racist and pro-Hitler and they live in a hellscape and they're unscientific so the world's going to burn up.
Which of those two things is harming more people in 2024?
Well, look at the therapy.
What do they say in therapy?
Oh, I live in this world with Trump's a racist and everything's bad and I've got to transition myself and now I wish I went back in some cases.
And then the propaganda says that Hitler's taken over and the planet's going to burn because Hitler's not going to let the climate change people do what they need to do.
What do you think hurts people more?
I don't know.
I don't know how to measure it, but if I had to just guess, I would guess that black people are over slavery way more than the cat ladies are over Hitler.
That's what it feels like to me.
And when I say black people are over slavery, I don't mean they're over slavery.
I mean, I'm comparing two things.
The people who are currently out of their minds...
about Trump and they believe that he's gonna have the military round them up and put them in camps or something.
They've got a current real mental crisis.
If you're suffering from the lag effect of slavery, which I admit is completely real, there's definitely a trickle effect, ripple effect that affects real people, you're probably not thinking about it every minute.
I mean, I don't know.
Are you?
You could give me a fact check.
But do you wake up thinking about your legacy of slavery if you're a black American?
Or did you just go to your job?
And maybe if the topic comes up as an intellectual discussion, maybe you say to yourself, you know what?
I might be making 20% more if not for that.
So, you know, maybe something's owed to me.
That feels to me almost like an academic issue.
At least for some number of the population.
For others, everybody's different, of course.
But I would say the Atlantic and MSNBC are far more dangerous than the legacy of slavery at the moment.
The legacy of slavery, of course, far, far worse if you look at the totality of history.
Far, far worse.
Alright, let's talk about this enemy within.
So, I feel like the Republicans are sort of ignoring this.
And I'm not sure that's the wrong answer.
Because typically when the Democrats come up with a new Trump hoax, people like me go nuts and try to really concentrate on fixing the impression of it.
It never makes any difference.
Because the Republicans knew from day one it was made up.
And the Democrats are using it as a recreational belief, and you can't talk somebody out of the recreational belief, because part of the recreation is you trying to talk them out of it and then resisting.
That's part of the fun, is making you go crazy trying to talk them out of something they don't really believe, but they'd love to make you think they believe it.
How many people do you think really believe That Trump plans to round up his political enemies with the military if he gets elected.
How many people really think that?
I mean, it's fair to say that there are zero Republicans.
Is that fair?
Probably zero.
Like actually zero.
Like you would search the whole earth and you wouldn't find one.
That one Republican who thinks that Trump is going to use the military to round up his enemies, that's the same person who can't figure out how to get an ID to vote.
Yeah.
And it's also the same person on the Epstein list.
You know, the list of things that we'll never see and doesn't probably exist.
Well, Epstein list probably exists.
But...
The pundits, like Donnie Deutsch on MSNBC, they will tell you with pained, pained looks, faces that look like they're just ready to be carried off to the gulags.
Oh, Trump is going to round me up!
So Donnie Deutsch asked, who did he ask?
What's his name?
Al Sharpton.
If Al was worried...
That Trump would round them up.
And they said they were both worried.
So Al Sharpton is worried.
Trump's got him on a list to round them up.
And Donnie Deutsch has the same problem.
Thinks he's on the list.
Going to get rounded up.
Well, no they're not.
Do you know why they're not going to get rounded up?
Number one, if they didn't do any crimes, and I'm not aware of any, They don't have any chance of getting rounded up.
Do you know why?
Because Republicans.
Republicans are not going to be on board with rounding up people for non-crimes, even if we don't like them.
That's what makes a Republican.
The Republican says, I'm looking at the law and the Constitution.
Are you rounding up somebody We didn't break a law and did not violate the Constitution.
I'm out.
That's every Republican.
There's no Republican who wants Al Sharpton to be rounded up because he says things we don't like.
None.
There's nobody who wants that.
Do you think Trump could get away with that?
He doesn't want to, first of all, but could he get away with it if he wanted to?
Of course not.
No.
But if it were the other way around...
And the Democrats said, Trump's a Hitler, put him in jail for anything you can get him on.
It doesn't matter what the charge is.
They could do that.
And they're trying.
And it's right in front of you, and you don't have to wonder.
But it doesn't work that way the other way.
The reason the Democrats are so afraid is that they know they're doing it right now to Trump, trying to put him in jail for nothing, because he's a political enemy.
So in their world, it's perfectly understandable that you would try to put somebody in jail on made-up charges so long as you didn't like them.
It doesn't work that way the other way.
The conservatives simply don't think that way.
Their entire game is constitution-law.
Law-constitution.
Law-constitution.
If they break the law, yes.
Coming after them hard.
But short of that...
There's literally nothing to worry about.
Like, this is the smallest risk in the country by far.
And Donnie Deutsch is not important to anything.
Did you ever hear anybody saying, I was going to vote for Trump, but then I heard Donnie Deutsch crying, and so I changed my mind.
No!
No!
So, anyway, this is all stupid.
I guess what Trump is saying is he said that people like Adam Schiff are domestic enemies, but he's also said that the domestic enemies, not necessarily Adam Schiff, would be maybe causing a problem on Election Day if they try to riot.
And he might use the military to calm down the violence.
That's pretty far from saying you're going to put Adam Schiff in jail because you don't like his pencil neck.
Schiff is not going to jail for his pencil neck.
That's not going to happen.
But if anybody broke the law, no one's above the law, I've heard said.
Trump is the best swearing president of all.
He uses curse words better than anybody ever has because he doesn't overuse it.
And he uses it in the context where it makes sense.
You know, he doesn't do it in the State of the Union.
He does it when he's doing a rally.
But he had another one.
And I quote...
He was at a rally and he says, you have to tell Kamala Harris that you've had enough, that you just can't take it anymore.
We just can't stand you.
You're a shit vice president.
The worst.
You're the worst vice president.
Kamala, you're fired.
Get the hell out of here.
The crowd goes wild.
Now, I feel it's necessary to fact check that.
Trump's claim is that Kamala Harris is a shit vice president.
I've got to fact check that because I like accuracy.
Even if it comes from somebody I appreciate, like Trump, I'm not going to let him get away with a fact check that doesn't work.
So here's the fact check.
Kamala Harris is not fully comprised of fecal matter.
So when he calls her a shit vice president, He's using shit in a hyperbolic way.
Sort of the way people talk, you know, in a normal way.
So, it's very important.
She's not the enemy within, but rather, this is an important point.
The fecal matter that is inside her body Does need to get out eventually.
So that's sort of an enemy within.
So shit is actually an enemy within.
Well, all of us, if we eat right.
But Kamala Harris is not necessarily fully fecal matter.
Now, that's important to know, because in an election, people say stuff like this, and I think it just has to be called out.
Now, am I doing it right?
Am I doing it right where I interpret Trump to mean literally what he said?
I'm doing it right, right?
Because you just have to act like you don't know how words work in the real world, and then you can fact check Trump all day long.
Well, I think you meant this literally.
And indeed, at the same time, Obama was giving a speech in Las Vegas where he said, you can't imagine that the president is kidding.
You have to take him seriously in everything he said.
So that does suggest that we must take seriously that Kamala Harris is comprised of actual fecal matter.
But I don't think so.
I think it's hyperbole.
Do you remember I told you that the story about China using a quantum computer to crack military-grade encryption?
What did I say about that story?
Does anybody remember?
So the story was that China had some scientific effort and they cracked the strongest encryption in the world.
And what did I say?
I said, if that were true, you would not know it.
Because that would be the biggest, most important military secret of all time.
And the people who leaked that to the press would have already been murdered along with all of their family.
So I said to you, I don't think this is real.
Because if this were real, there's no way in hell...
It's getting out from the military secret part of China.
Well, it's not real.
So it didn't happen.
It was fake news.
So the update is fake news.
I think that the truth is there was some lesser kind of old thing that got beaten, but it's been beaten by ordinary computers too.
So no big deal.
I think it was just the reporter didn't understand what had happened.
Kamala Harris has an ad campaign, the Post Millennial is mocking here, in which The campaign is suggesting that if you're a man, you're not going to be able to get a date with a woman if you vote for Trump.
And so it showed five women and one guy, and he's trying to get a date with them, and they all pop a balloon, which is the symbolism for saying no to him.
And all five of them pop the balloon and say no.
Now what's interesting is it was a black man, and all five of the women he wanted to date were black women.
And the black women rejected him.
So, first of all, there wasn't really nearly enough diversity in that dating pool.
Just because he's a black man, I don't believe that limits him to just black women or even women.
And so I would add at least a gay man in there, two trans, and a little diversity.
Please, please.
Anyway, that happened.
You know, I mentioned that Obama was in Vegas giving a speech, and here's what I don't remember about Obama.
Did he always...
Completely lie his ass off about everything.
Now, all politicians exaggerate.
They all paint their picture.
They spin.
But wow, almost everything out of his mouth was one of the common hoaxes.
He even went for the, Trump's going to use the military to get you.
He went for every hoax.
He used the, calling the military suckers hoax.
So I was trying to remember, was he always that big a liar?
Because I just don't remember him that way.
Okay.
So those of you who paid more attention than I did are confirming he was always a gigantic liar.
Okay.
I will accept your take on that.
Meanwhile, while Obama was lying and everybody else is being crazy, Trump was once again saying that with our support, he'll take us to the golden age.
So apparently he has settled on this golden age messaging.
He said, with your support, we'll bring back our nation's strength, dominance, prosperity, and pride.
He said, this will be America's new golden age.
100 years from now, the presidential election will be looked upon as America's greatest victory.
Now, how much hyperbole is in that?
On first reading, you would say to yourself, I think, if this were a normal year, you'd say, okay, you know, sounds great, but probably...
You know, next year will be like every other year, and the year after that will be like every other year, unless there's a pandemic.
You know, it's not like we're going to go to the golden age suddenly.
Except that we might.
So here's a word that Elon Musk used yesterday, just one word, that gave me so much optimism and made everything make sense.
He said that the government needs to be, and here's the one word, re-engineered.
Oh my God, did I want to hear that.
What I didn't want to hear is, I'm going to take down the expenses 25%, which maybe he could do.
Because one of the things I've heard Musk say a number of times about his businesses is the biggest mistake an engineer will make is to optimize something that shouldn't have been there in the first place.
And he's made that point a lot of times.
So when he looks at the government, do you think he sees a government that's working fine, but maybe it could use a little less money?
I don't think so.
I think he sees a government full of things that don't need to exist.
And that if we look at it as an optimization problem, we're dead from the start because you can't get there from here.
But if you look at it starting from scratch, how would you build a government if we'd never had one?
And you could build the best one But you can just forget about the past.
Now, we've got to keep the Constitution, and I think that that's safe.
There's nothing that Trump's, there's nothing that Musk is going to do that's going to violate the Constitution.
So that's safe.
But there's a whole bunch of stuff you can do within the realm of the government that would be massively helpful.
Now, here's what else I think.
I spend way too much time watching Graham Norton shows about past civilizations that used to be and then got destroyed.
And we keep finding these big cities that got buried, and there used to be a whole population here, but they all died out.
And then you look even as recently as the Roman Empire, and you say, the Roman Empire, they had control of all kinds of parts of the world.
How in the world did they lose out?
Oh, well, they did.
Then you look at the Mongols.
You know, the Mongols, they had control over everything.
How is it the Mongols aren't still in charge?
Well, it didn't last.
In almost every civilization that you see from the past, there's a point where they peaked and they did well and then everything went to hell and they fell apart.
Now, how could you possibly break that cycle?
Well, the first thing you need is an enduring physical advantage.
And we haven't.
America has that physical advantage that we have the oceans between us and our adversaries.
It makes us really hard to control.
If anybody wanted to do it militarily, it would be a tough egg.
So we still have that.
But...
We're completely falling apart in terms of culture and governance and efficiency.
We're dying in regulations.
We're just not promoting the best people.
We got open borders.
We've got massive deficit, etc.
But here's what we also have.
We have the American spirit.
Which, as much as you want to say everything's going wrong, and it is, everything's going wrong.
Let me tell you what the American spirit is that's different from all the other cultures that ever lived before and died.
The American culture says, if you're not working, I will burn you to the ground tomorrow and start over.
If you're not giving me what I want, I'm going to put you right in the garbage can.
If you've been operating for 200 years, but it's not working today, bye-bye.
I will get rid of this old product so I can sell the new product.
I will stop being a computer company.
I'll become a phone company.
I'll become a music company.
I'll become a rocket company.
Americans destroy before we build.
And the destroying is maybe even a bigger part of our character than the building.
We're hella good builders when we put our minds to it.
But we're the best destroyers.
And if you can't destroy what you got, you'll never go anywhere.
You're going to die.
I worry that Europe is pretty good at building, but pretty bad at destroying.
Kind of trapped in their past a little bit.
Not us.
Not us.
We'll change anything that needs to be changed.
We'd like to keep our constitution, but we're even talking about changing that.
There's nothing we won't change.
And if you put in an Elon Musk, you don't have a normal situation.
You give me a Vivek, Ramaswamy, whole new deal.
We're talking about founder-level strength.
You give me an RFK Jr., What stops him?
Nothing.
Tulsi?
Incredibly strong player.
Whatever she does is going to be important.
And then you give me Trump.
The George Washington of all George Washingtons.
I know, I know.
The Democrats don't see it that way.
But the thing is, Trump will destroy something to build because that's what he does for a living.
He demolishes what was there.
Unburdened by what it has been to build the new thing.
What does Musk do?
Musk starts with first principles.
It's his biggest thematic personality extreme that he will not care what's been done before.
He only cares what's the right way to do it.
So when you unleash a Trump, Vance, Vivek, RFK Jr., and Elon Musk on this ailing country, which is in fact failing, I think you all feel it.
We are a failing country.
And if nothing changed, we would fail.
But, good luck, China.
Doing what we can do.
Good luck Germany.
Good luck France.
Good luck Canada.
Good luck Great Britain.
You used to be great.
You can't do what we can do.
We can burn it all down.
And we can build something great on those ashes faster than anybody can.
So, we are entering a period where the golden age, when you throw AI into the mix, you throw nuclear power that's coming online like crazy, you throw robots into the mix, And if we're lucky, drones will end the risk of nuclear war because a drone war would be better, but we won't do the drone war either because it would still be mutually assured destruction.
We might actually be moving our mutually assured destruction from nuclear, which would be the worst kind, To still having the reason to not fight, which is the drones would make it unlivable, but you could recover from drone attacks, you know, better than nuclear.
So it could be that we're going to have a much better food supply.
It could be that we'll be back on track in terms of paying off our debts.
It could be that we will close our borders or at least have a vetting system where we get the best workers and the best outcome.
It could be That we'll wrap up the Ukraine war pretty quickly and get along with Russia well enough that we wonder why we ever didn't be friends.
What did I just say go by?
Oh, so Trump is going off to McDonald's today in Pennsylvania.
Trump's going to be working at McDonald's.
Oh, man.
You've got to tell me when that is.
I will stop everything to watch him working at McDonald's.
I can't love that more, honestly.
I just can't love it more.
So, his campaign is just acting so smart.
Not doing 60 Minutes, correct.
Not doing any more mainstream interviews.
If he doesn't feel like it, if he doesn't feel like it, fine.
But man, barbershop twice?
McDonald's?
Rallies?
Podcasts?
Oh yeah.
He's setting the standard.
You're watching Trump set the standard for what a modern campaign should look like right now.
Kamala Harris is not.
She's basically just trying to tread water and do what people are telling her and probably a lot of infighting.
Trump is just making it look easy.
So, is the golden age coming?
Well, I don't know.
But I will tell you, everything is lining up to make it possible.
In a way, it's kind of special.
I haven't seen it before.
So, maybe.
Pollster Scott Rasmussen says transgenderism and sports, specifically biological men who have transitioned to women and playing in women's sports, apparently it might be a bigger factor in the election than people realized. apparently it might be a bigger factor in the election And I'm not surprised.
You know, if you don't have a family member who's in that situation, it's probably not at the top of your mind.
But if you knew anybody who is competing in female sports and they ran into that situation, you would get radicalized almost immediately.
Because as soon as you say, wait, we're hurting young women.
I hate to say this, but if the problem were young men were getting hurt, nobody would care.
Let's be honest.
If somehow the trans community was causing men who were in sports to get injured more often, we wouldn't even have this conversation because we don't give a shit about men.
Now, I'm saying that with hyperbole because we don't care enough about men.
But when you say a young woman...
Who is probably a hundred times more important than a man.
If you are a species for which mating is the main thing you do, women are more important.
And a young woman is more important than a woman who's not in, you know, baby making age.
So biologically, there's nothing more important to us, male or female, than a young baby-making age woman.
So if you say the 18-year-old boys are getting more head injuries from football, well, something will probably happen.
You know, people will advocate about it, but it's not really going to move the vote.
I don't think a national vote would move because somebody said, I'm going to get rid of football because it's hurting boys.
Nobody cares, unless it's your boy.
But if you say that women are getting beaten up in just some schools sometimes, suddenly you're just so activated.
You're like, seriously?
A young woman is being beaten up by a man or what some would say is a man and the person who would self-identify as a woman.
It feels different.
So I would not be surprised if Scott Rasmussen is correct and that, at least at the suburban level especially, the suburban mom level, it could be that Could be that that changes some votes.
We'll see.
Apparently, Jewish support for Democrats is the lowest since the Reagan era.
If the vote were held today, Harris would win the support of just 67% of Jewish voters, still two-thirds.
But it's less support than at any time since Reagan, I guess.
So that's important.
All right.
Insurrection Barbie, which is becoming one of my favorite accounts to follow in X. I don't know who it is, but Insurrection Barbie is the name of the account.
And I want to read to you about the color revolution that could be coming in a few weeks if Trump wins.
So this is Insurrection Barbie's account, and I'll just read it to you.
Because you need to hear the whole thing.
Because if this is describing exactly what you see, you're going to know it'll be like you're seeing around a corner, okay?
So Insurrection Barbie says, if Trump wins, color revolution protests on the streets.
If you want to understand how badly Kamala Harris is doing in this race, all you need to do is look at this clip from MSNBC. And then there's a clip involved.
But MSNBC said the quiet part out loud.
They are deathly afraid that Trump will invoke the Insurrection Act And the riots that are going to hit our streets after he wins will be stopped.
In other words, the MSNBC people are basically telling you there will be riots if Trump wins.
What they don't want is that Trump will use the military to stop them, because continuing the riots in the street is how you take over a country.
So MSNBC, being the propaganda network, It's trying to prime you that if anybody tried to stop protests, they would be the bad guys.
Not the people doing the protests and trying to take over the country.
It would be the people stopping them from taking over the country.
They would be the bad guys.
Okay.
Continuing in Insurrection Barbie's post, how do I know this?
And Barbie says, they always tell you what they're going to do.
So that's the Tucker Carlson thing, which I used to doubt, and now I do not doubt whatsoever.
They literally tell you what they're going to do by blaming you for it.
And she says, or he says, I have an article from the Guardian about the war games that the blob, that's the deep state, did in preparation for the second Donald Trump victory.
One of the scenarios in those war games, and by the way, this war gaming is a real thing.
The Democrats do this.
The war games was what would happen if Fox News lies and said there are dangerous protests and riots outside, when in reality, it's just the American people rising up against the fascists.
See where we're going?
What would happen?
They war gamed it.
If the public protested the result and Fox News said these are just protesters, instead of agreeing with the fake news, which will say a fascist took over the country and the country needs to take him down right away.
So what would they do if Fox News told the truth, that it was just a president getting elected, when the narrative should be that he's a fascist and the country is protesting against him?
The eventual outcome of the war game was that there was nothing they could do to stop the elected president from invoking the Insurrection Act.
And in the clip, Mika from Morning Joe was admitting they're terrified of Trump and that Trump will do just that.
So they're basically priming you for the coming street protests.
The street protests will not be organic.
They will be CIA, MSNBC, which is the same thing, basically, led, and other fake news.
And when Fox News tells you that these are fake protests, they need to be able to respond, to be able to say, no, no, no, it's because a fascist got elected, don't you know?
That this is natural things happening and the voters really care.
So that's coming.
Anyway, there's some fake news about a drone strike on Netanyahu's home in Israel.
Some of the news say that the drone struck his home, but it wasn't there.
Others say that it was sent in the direction of his home.
And I think somebody else was guessing that it might have landed near the home.
But didn't hit the home.
So there's no evidence that I can see that his home was hit.
There is some suggestion that maybe something was aiming at it, but we don't know.
That's not going to stop anything.
And there were some leaked war plans, allegedly, So, allegedly, the Pentagon leaked some Israel war plans, so the war plans against Iran.
So, I wasn't clear if it was just the defensive war plans or the offensive war plans or both, but do you believe that true war plans have been leaked?
If I were Iran, I would be saying, I'll bet those are fake war plans that got leaked.
Because if you were going to try to get somebody to prepare for the wrong thing, you would leak some war plans and make them think, oh, no, they're aiming for nuclear facilities.
And then they put all their defenses around the nuclear facilities.
And then Israel would take something else.
Now, the other possibility is it's a real leak, which would be a real problem.
I don't know how war plans ever stay secret, frankly.
So I'm surprised they're not always leaked.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, that is the conclusion of my remarks for today.
It's going to get real interesting as we get to these final days.
I remind you that I believe it is two weeks, when it's two weeks from Election Day, is that Tuesday?
Is this coming Tuesday, two weeks from Election Day?
Because I think that's the day I said I was going to do a live stream and vote by mail.
I will tell you, you won't see my ballot, and you won't see me fill it out.
You'll just see me.
So there's some legal question about whether I can show a ballot.
It should be legal in California, but I wasn't planning on showing it to you anyway.
So I'll give you more information, but I think at 9 p.m.
Eastern Time, which would be 6 p.m.
my time, two weeks before Election Day, the Tuesday.
I think that's this Tuesday.
I will be live streaming to all platforms and I'll simply invite you if you have ADHD and you're meaning to vote and you just need a little bit of somebody doing the same thing at the same time so you can focus, I'll just come on and I'll encourage you to go find your vote wherever it's sitting around on whatever desktop or in pile of mail and just pull it out and just fill it out while I'm filling out mine.
And I won't tell you how to vote.
I won't tell you how to fill yours out.
You're in a different state anyway, probably.
I will tell you that if you're in a state where Trump can't win, as I am in California, you really still need to vote.
This is the first time that I can say with a very strong voice that That voting in a blue state where it's definitely going to go the other way is very important because you want to win the national vote.
If Trump wins the Electoral College and doesn't win the national vote, we're going to have a lot of trouble.
We're probably going to have a lot of trouble no matter what happens.
But you can minimize the trouble by making sure that Trump wins the national vote.
And the only way that's going to happen, I think...
Is if he gets an unusually large vote in, say, New York and California.
Now, I've seen people question, why would Trump go to New York State when everybody knows he can't win in New York State?
Do you understand now?
Does it all make sense now?
It doesn't matter if he wins New York State.
New York State has a lot of people He should be going where there's a lot of people, in addition to going to the swing states, which he's doing plenty of.
He needs to go where there's a lot of people.
Because if there's a lot of people, some number of them can switch his way if he does everything right.
And that's good for the overall national vote.
Now, the national vote doesn't get you elected.
It's only the electoral college.
But if he doesn't win both this time, It's going to look like trouble.
So he might be running the smartest campaign we've ever seen.
I think you could argue that when this is done, history might judge it as the best political campaign we've ever observed.
It just looks so good, honestly, just so good from top to bottom.
And compliments to everybody involved.
I'm sure there's plenty of infighting.
I'm sure there's plenty of disagreement in the background.
But it looks like, over and over, the best ideas are winning.
You know, I always tell you that the people with the best ideas are in charge of everything.
Because the boss wants the best idea.
So if you have the best idea, you're in charge.
Your idea becomes the policy.
And it looks to me like Trump has surrounded himself with extraordinary talent this time.
He had a lot of talent the last time, but it looks different this time.
I mean, it looks really qualitatively different.
So I think the level of advice that not only that he's getting, but that they're filtering through.
It seems to me that smart people from all around in his circle, you know, the expanded circle of his supporters, not the people in the room, but just supporters, it seems to me that there's a direct connection now between the incoming suggestions and getting all the way to his desk.
Do you feel that?
Because I think the barbershop idea and the McDonald's ideas, I think those are both things that were suggested by somebody.
I'm one of the people who suggested the barbershop idea, but I imagine there were probably others that did the same.
But those ideas got all the way to Trump.
I would be amazed if he came up with them himself and probably didn't come from the inner circle.
It probably came from the outer circles and made it through the inner circle all the way to the big guy.
That is amazing.
And by the way, this is typical.
We've seen this a whole bunch of times.
Where an individual idea is just strong enough that it penetrates all the circles and gets right to the big guy.
It gets to the boss.
I've never seen anything like it, actually.
We have several examples where it's obvious it got all the way to the boss.
So this is by far the best campaign of my life.
I've never seen anything like it.
And I thought Obama was amazing.
But I think this is a new level.
All right.
Yeah, and Barron Trump.
All right.
Barron Trump appears to be one of those voices that normally, you know, you don't expect the 18, 19-year-old man, whatever he is, you don't expect him to break through.
But if his ideas make sense, such as the podcaster Aiden that he talked to, the best idea wins.
So there he is.
Brian Krasenstein is posting.
Theory, men voting for Harris are the silent voters in this year's election.
They will throw the pail.
If there's one thing I can say for sure, the one thing I can say with complete certainty, we will not be surprised by the number of men who vote for Kamala Harris.
You might be surprised by the number of men who have voted for Trump, but no.
No, that's not going to happen.
That's funny.
All right.
That's all I got for you now.
I'm going to go talk to the locals' subscribers because they're amazing and special and unusually sexy.
And I'll talk to the rest of you tomorrow.
Same time, same place.
Thanks, YouTube and Rumble and X. And remember, the Dilbert calendar is available for pre-sale.
