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, Gene Editing Behavior Modification, MSNBC Propaganda, Joy Reid, Multiculturalism, Glenn Greenwald, Dopamine Viewers, MSNBC Sale, Elon Musk, NewsGuard's Truth Identification, Tucker Carlson, War Speculation, Nigerian Education Strategy, Talent Stacking, Scott Jennings, idealogical Diversity, Trump Popularity Surge, Tariff Success, Pro-Crypto Trump, Christopher Rufo, Keir Starmer Petition, Trump Effect UK, Trump Effect Mexico, President Sheinbaum, President Trump, Denver Mayor, Deportation Resistance, UAP Hypothesis, Anti-MAGA Blacklist, 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
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and I'm almost positive you've never had a better time in your life.
But if you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny, shiny human brains, all you need for that is a cup of margarita glass, a tankard chalice stein, a canteen jug or 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 dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
Happens now.
Go.
Very good.
Thank you.
You know, I'm proud of all of you for sipping so competently.
All right.
Well, lots of stories today.
Let's start with the good news.
According to Andrew Humberman, you can turn yourself into a morning person in three days of pain.
So just three bad days and you can become a morning person.
Here's how.
Set your clock for 5 p.m.
every day, no matter how tired you were the night before.
And get up at 5, drink coffee, have some social interaction, a little bit of sunlight, a little bit of eating, and those things will set your clock.
The next thing you know, you're a morning person.
Do you believe that?
How many of you believe that you could change yourself to a morning person if you're not already one?
Well...
I can only tell you my anecdotal experience, which is in college, I strategically decided to become a morning person.
And I turned myself into one.
And I didn't know I could ever be one.
It didn't seem likely, because I like to stay up late, just like most people.
But very quickly, and with the help of coffee and sun and food, I guess...
I turn myself into a person who loves, just loves the morning.
I mean, the first four hours of every day of my life are kind of terrific every single day.
Really just terrific.
And that's what you get by being a morning person.
Now, beyond that, I believe I've lived two full lifetimes because most of your day is garbage time.
You know what I mean?
You're like, it's time to take out the trash to the curb and you're walking to your, your, your trash cans.
And most of it's not really living, but the morning time I really use for all the good stuff.
So it's almost like it doubled my life.
However, I have a question whether all people can be turned into morning people.
My suspicion is, because science seems to think that there are morning people and non-morning people, that this won't work for everyone.
However, I also have this following hypothesis, that night people are morning people.
That night people like the time after midnight.
That's the morning.
So if you like to be up after midnight because it just feels great to be up after midnight, that's probably how I feel at 4.30 in the morning when I'm up.
And often I'm up at 3 just because I feel like it.
So there you go.
Be a morning person.
Double your life.
According to Gilmore Health News, there's now this gene editing process Technology that might remove your anxiety and alcohol dependency linked to adolescent binge drinking.
So if you were a binge drinker when you were young and it changed your brain, now they think they can edit your genes to fix it.
I have just one comment about this.
I don't think I want to go first.
You know what I mean?
I don't want to be the first person who has gene editing to change their brain.
I mean, it could work out great.
It has great potential.
But I don't want to go first.
Let's see what happens to somebody else.
It turns them from a Republican into a Democrat.
You've got to watch that stuff.
Well, this is the most predictable thing you could ever imagine in the world of technology.
According to TechCrunch, guess what got invented?
Yes, it's exactly what you expected somebody to make, and why did it take so long?
Somebody made a way that you could fake being on a Zoom call.
Now, you know you wanted that.
You know the Dilbert comic was waiting for it.
And apparently you can take a quick video of yourself and then AI will remember what you look like.
And then you could be in your car and pretending that you're sitting there in front of your office.
So your actual audio in your conversation could be from your phone in your car.
But what people would see on Zoom is something that looks like you talking.
Pretty cool.
And the odds of people taking Zoom calls on the toilet just went to, well, 100%, because not much else to do when you're watching the Zoom call.
So yes, there will be a lot of Zoom call toiletry.
Well, Chinese scientists have finally built something you've all been waiting for, a recoilless AK-47.
According to Stephan Chen in the South China Morning Post, now you might say to yourself, do we really need the recoilless AK-47 rifle?
And the answer is yes, if you want to put it on a drone.
If you want your drone to go around and murder people, it would be nice to have a recoilless one so it doesn't knock the drone out of orbit.
So good news, people.
There's the perfect murdering device now.
So if you put some AI facial recognition on your drone, which is completely practical, and you give it GPS navigation so that there's no amount of jamming that will stop it from getting to its destination, which is now completely practical, And then you put the recoilless rifle on it, which is now completely practical.
And then you track somebody's location by their phone, which, if you're the government, is completely practical.
And then you could just send your drone out to shoot them and then go bury itself in the ocean.
It sink itself in the ocean so they can't find the gun.
So that's a thing now.
Yeah, so the GPS jamming is not going to work if you've got the AI that can recognize the ground from the sky.
In other words, it will look at satellite images and it will know where it is just from the image.
So that's cool.
All right.
Here's what I call the reverse of a good job.
What would be the opposite of a good job in this case?
Now, the situation is coming up with a headline to make somebody click on something and read the story.
Now, as you know, there are a lot of stories that are clickbait.
Literally, the headline is better than the story.
You're like, really?
Really?
Trump ate a baby?
I gotta see what that's about.
Click, click, click.
But there are some headlines that make you definitely not read the story, and those are more interesting to me.
Here's a headline that made me definitely not click the story.
It was in The Hill.
And the headline, it's an opinion piece, but the headline is, How well does Donald Trump understand Elon Musk?
I'm not going to click on that.
How well does Donald Trump understand Elon Musk?
Well, let me say, for the opinion writer, that would require that they had penetrated the mind of Elon Musk and also Donald Trump.
So they can not only see what's in Musk's brain, you know, in order to write the article, but they can also see what's in Trump's brain, And also they can see us so well that they can tell how much Trump's brain can understand Elon's brain.
I'm not going to click on that.
That might be the dumbest idea I've ever seen for an opinion.
No, I will not click on that.
Sorry.
Simon A. Teba is talking about Morning Joe.
So Morning Joe is trying...
I swear to God, Morning Joe can't possibly be a non-comedy channel, right?
Is it trying to be a comedy channel?
Is it parody?
It's so close to parody, you just can't tell.
Because now they're insisting that Twitter is where you get all the disinformation, and you should really trust real journalism, such as you'd find in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Axios.
Also known as the True Guardians of Truth.
You know, they left off Washington Post.
I don't know why.
Yep.
So the first story is about how Morning Joe on MSNBC says that truth is on their network and these others, not on X, not on X. My second story is about how Joy Reid, one of the hosts of MSNBC, and her guests are talking about how Trump will deploy the military and choose citizens.
And that Trump wants to, quote, end multiculturalism in America.
How do you interpret that?
So Joy Reid is taking the story that Trump is thinking about using the military to transport some illegal migrants back to their home country.
Transport.
But she, of course, has changed into fake news where they're going to be shooting people on the street.
That's not even a conversation.
The military is not going to be shooting anybody in the street.
So it's complete fake news directly after their episode about how the real news is on their networks, right?
But then with her guest, she ties it into, I guess, the guy who, one of the authors of Project 2025, had written that they want to end multiculturalism in America.
Now, if you're watching MSNBC and you're talking about the military shooting citizens, what do you think it means when they say they want to end multiculturalism?
Well, if you put it in that context, it sounds like Trump wants to use the military to shoot brown people.
Isn't that the way that comes off?
Here's what it really means.
The military might be useful for some of the behind-the-scenes logistics, such as guarding and then transporting immigrants have been picked up by the regular authorities who do those jobs normally.
So that's the military part that they've completely misrepresented.
But the end multiculturalism, when I first read it, I thought, I couldn't possibly say that.
There can't possibly be a document that somebody wrote those words, we want to end multiculturalism.
But then I realized what it means.
It takes a few seconds to understand what it means.
It means that America is a melting pot.
It's the same thing.
I grew up learning that America is a melting pot, so that no matter what culture you came from, When you got here, your first or second generation would become Americans.
So that would be ending multiculturalism.
You're simply not being everything to everybody.
You're trying to encourage everybody to become an American.
When did that become a problem?
That's not a problem.
That's an ambition.
It's an ambition to get people on the same page.
Multiculturalism is completely unmanageable.
There's no way you could have a country where everybody can do their own thing.
You know, as much as you think that'd be a great, great idea, there's no practical way to do that.
You have to get on the same page on the basic stuff, like, you know, is it Sharia law or is it not?
I mean, these are really basic stuff.
Anyway, can you stone somebody because they were allegedly, you know, unfaithful to their husband?
I mean...
The multiculturalism isn't something you want to have more of.
That's not going to help you, no matter how awesome it is.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with anybody's culture.
I'm just saying you can't put them all in the same bag and expect it to work out.
So MSNBC, just pure propaganda.
Glenn Greenwald, I love watching him dumping on MSNBC, talking about how their audience is so small.
It's smaller than a lot of YouTube shows.
It's probably smaller than the number of people who will watch this.
So my audience for this live stream is roughly the same as MSNBC's audience in primetime.
But Greenwald thinks that it's because the audience realized that MSNBC had been lying to them about everything.
He said, oh, definitely Trump's going to jail.
Oh, well, he's not.
Well, he's definitely not going to get nominated.
Oh, he got nominated.
Well, there's no way he's going to win.
Okay, he won.
But at least he's not going to win the popular vote.
Okay, he won the popular vote.
But at least he's not going to get more black...
Okay, he got more black votes.
But he's definitely not going to get the...
Okay, he got more Hispanic votes.
And he's not going to win the women...
Okay, he won a lot of women.
But there's no way he's going to sweep all the seven...
Okay, he swung...
He swept all the swing states.
So at some point...
Do you think the MSNBC audience realized that they've been lied to about everything?
I'm not so sure.
So, you know, Glenn Greenwald, I think, is one of the better observers of everything.
So, you know, I hate to disagree with him.
But I don't think people are that smart.
I don't think that they do know they were lied to.
Turns out that 9% of Democrats believe the election was stolen.
And that the reason Trump won was that he stole the election.
Because there couldn't be any other reason.
Do you know why?
They watched MSNBC. They realized there's no way that Trump could win legitimately.
But then he wins.
So cognitive dissonance clicks in and your brain goes, click?
Must explain.
Anomaly.
Cannot explain how he cannot win, but yet he won.
Oh, I get it.
Must have been, yeah, cognitive dissonance.
And I think the rest are simply avoiding it.
Or try not to think about it.
Because I think it went from a source of dopamine...
Where they turned it on and agreed with everything that they were already thinking, and it made them feel smart and superior.
But now when they turn it on, it's the same people, except instead of making them feel smart and superior for being watchers of MSNBC, the very people who are supposed to be smart, and therefore you're smart because you watch them, are saying, we seem to have gotten everything wrong for four years, but we're trying to figure it out.
We have 500 hypotheses of Of why everything was wrong.
Why don't you talk?
You talk for a while.
And now it's just cringy.
So there's no source of dopamine.
So if you see, this is one of the most useful frames you'll ever have.
The most useful frame for understanding your reality is that people chase dopamine.
They chase a good feeling.
And it used to be nothing but a dopamine hose.
Every moment it would make you feel smarter than those stupid mega people.
And now you turn it on and you see some of your favorite people saying, you know what?
MAGA is pretty good, actually.
And then you find out that the smartest, most successful entrepreneur in the world is fully in for MAGA, and you're like, wait, what's going on?
Yeah, it's got to be very disconcerting.
Keith Olbermann is panicked.
He's panicked.
That Elon Musk might buy MSNBC. Now, Elon did ask the question, how much does it go for?
The hilarious thing about this is that the question of whether Elon Musk would or would not buy NBC is only the price.
It's only the price.
There is a price by which I guarantee he would buy it.
I don't know what that number is for him.
But let's say all they have left is assets.
Maybe contracts, some receivables and a building and cameras and camera trucks and stuff.
How much would all of that be worth if you put it all together?
50 million?
50 million?
Because I don't even know if they own the buildings.
They might be renting the buildings.
So that might be just a liability.
So if he could buy MSNBC for, let's say, $30 million net, do you think he wouldn't?
I think he'd do it just for fun, just to see what happens.
And then you combine it with X and start doing some shows on there.
It would be amazing.
So no, it's not a question of whether he wants to or doesn't want to.
I'm almost positive it's just price.
So if they priced it at a billion dollars, I'd say, no, there's no way.
At half a billion, I'd say, no way.
At a hundred million, it starts getting maybe.
At 50, it's probably more likely yes than no.
But I have no idea what it's priced at.
All right.
Meanwhile...
Have you heard of NewsGuard?
This is kind of funny to me.
So there's an entity called NewsGuard.
I think you've heard of them.
So they're a for-profit.
And what they do is they charge various platforms on the internet to help them guard against fake news.
So they'll identify the fake news so that the platforms don't have to get caught with fake news.
And So, but they also offer these what they call nutrition labels for each search result.
So you could do searches, and as a consumer, it would tell you if the, let's say, the reporter who wrote the story is credible, or if the source of the story is credible.
So they would have, like, the New York Times would be, you know, like at the top of the credibility list.
Do you see the problem here?
The New York Times is at the top of their credibility list.
Okay.
Really?
But here's the best part of it.
So there's an entity news guard that is charging people and doing really well.
Apparently their business model is working.
It's a very robust business.
And their proposition is they can tell which news is true and you can't.
That's the proposition.
That's what you're paying for.
They can tell what's true and you can't.
Now, I've got a question.
If there's an entity in the world that can tell what news is true and what isn't, shouldn't they be the news?
Because does it make sense that there is no news entity that knows what's true?
The only people who know what's true is the people criticizing the news entity?
So wouldn't it make way more sense if news guards said, you know what, people?
Since we know what's true, and all the other news entities, you know, maybe yes, maybe no, we will be your news.
So the real news is through us.
We're the real news.
Nobody knows what news is true.
We wouldn't have massive, almost universal fake news if there was anybody who could tell the difference.
The News Guard doesn't know what's true.
NewsGuard can, and probably often, catch things that are definitely not true.
But that's a long way from knowing what's true and what's not true.
It's just catching the easy stuff.
Do you know who else catches all the easy stuff?
Me!
I do it for free.
Show me the headline, I'll tell you if it's true.
If you looked at my record of guessing what is true and what is not from just first glance, It's not bad.
It's not bad.
And I've taught most of you how to do it because I'm not guessing.
I'm using pretty well understood rules of, you know, how do you spot fake stuff, for example.
The one I talk about all the time is that in an election period, there's always a report of an anonymous insider inside the White House who heard the person running for office say a terrible thing that you're pretty sure nobody ever said in the real world.
And then I say, There is no credibility to one anonymous source in the White House saying that somebody said something that nobody else heard and is really terrible.
Never, ever believe that story.
It'll always be there, but never, ever believe it.
I'm pretty good at that.
Haven't been wrong yet.
All right, so it's just funny to me that NewsGuard could even exist without just saying, why don't we be the news?
So let's see what else is going on here.
We've got...
Tucker is worried that war is coming because the Trump administration is so anti-war that the people who think they might benefit from war, or even worse, they might benefit from getting rid of Trump because they think Trump will open investigations and prosecute people who really need to be prosecuted.
But those people who might need to be prosecuted are maybe powerful enough that they could start a war that would distract us and, you know, be bad for Trump and hurt his credibility and maybe keep them safe.
Now, that's pure speculation from Tucker.
I worry about it.
I worry that there might be that the worst people in the world might be getting ready to start wars.
But on the other hand, I also think it's too late.
I think it's too late.
I think that the Trump effect is already too strong.
Maybe if they'd done it sooner, it would have worked.
But I'll tell you about the Trump effect.
Before I tell you that, Here's the coolest story in the news, if you're me, all right?
So if you don't mind, this will be a moment of just pure me talking about myself, because it's funny.
All right.
As far as I know, this is a true story.
The country of Nigeria...
They have a new national strategy in which they want to make sure that they're aggressively teaching technical and vocational skills to their youth.
That's a good idea, right?
They want to make sure their youth has skills.
Kind of basic stuff.
But the way they described it is that they want to make sure they have more than one skill.
So in other words, they want to do something called talent stacking.
Have you ever heard of that?
So the Nigerian government is announcing that talent stacking, something that I popularized, is going to be their main way to success.
But here's the best part.
So this is from X from their, let's see, I think it's from their Minister of Education.
I swear I'm not making this up.
This is from the Nigerian government, their Minister of Education.
Quote, Scott Adams once said, quote, every skill you acquire doubles your odds of success.
This is real, by the way.
This is real.
He said, this is part of President Bola Ahmed Tenubu's renewed hope agenda and our Federal Ministry of Education strategy.
He says, that's why we are aggressively reviving our technical and vocational educational and training system.
Do you know where that comes from?
Every skill you acquire doubles your odds of success.
Do you know where that comes from?
It comes from that book that I'm pointing to over my shoulder.
So my book, Atta Failed Almost Everything and Still Went Big, has that quote.
So Nigeria, their federal ministry of education at least, read my book and Which was designed to take somebody who doesn't have mentoring and doesn't have good career advice from any other source.
I put it in one book.
It was designed for teenagers.
Now, it's written for adults, but it's designed so that a teenager could breeze through it pretty easily.
It's written to be really friendly to read.
So Nigeria may have decided that if they follow the blueprint in that book, they can transform their country into an economic powerhouse.
It's called How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big.
And by the way, if you don't know, that book has been hugely influential in the United States.
But a lot of its influence is by influencing other books in the same domain.
So you'll find other very popular books you may have read that borrow from that book.
So I think it's the most foundationally persuasive book in career success at the moment.
Now, here's the fun part.
What if they're really serious about just using that book as a sort of a framework for how to fix the future?
It would actually work.
It would totally work.
Because everybody who's used it so far says it works.
Why wouldn't it work there?
And wouldn't it be funny if my legacy was fixing Africa?
Because if Nigeria overtly uses my book and credits me for some of the ideas they're using, and let's say it works.
Let's say their GDP shows a boost in a few years, and they say it's because we're doing this.
Other African countries might say, hey, what are you doing over there?
Why is that working so well?
And then they'll say, well, if it works in Nigeria, it seems pretty straightforward stuff like, you know, build skills.
Why don't we do that too?
So, the irony of the simulation is that of all people in the world, it seems that That I might be the solution to fixing Africa.
Now, I'm not saying it's likely.
I'm not saying it's likely.
I'm just saying it's perfect.
If we don't live in a simulation, how do you explain this?
How do you explain that the guy who got canceled, if you know what I mean, is now the savior of Africa?
Those are my own words.
Okay, but how much do you love that story?
I don't think I could possibly be happier.
I feel like in some ways my entire life just made sense.
Like everything I've done for my entire life, just in this one moment, I looked at it and I said, if this is real, everything I've done for my entire life makes sense.
I wouldn't change a thing.
I can't even imagine what would be a bigger boost to the well-being of more people than having them understand the strategy for success that pretty much is going to work for everybody.
So that really happened.
Anyway, Scott Jennings on CNN continues to be one of the better Scots.
He's at least in the top three.
I don't know if you noticed, there are just tons of Scots doing things.
They're getting nominated, they're senators, they're all kinds of things.
But Scott Jennings, one of the better Scots, is reframing Trump's cabinet picks as ideologically diverse, which is good work.
Because the bad guys, the Democrats, are going to say, hey, where's our racial diversity?
And then Scott Jennings can say, this is the most ideologically diverse group of people you've ever seen.
Because Trump literally has a whole bunch of ex-Democrats and current Democrats, maybe.
You know, RFK Jr. and Elon.
And, you know, I could go through the list.
And the All In Pod guys are on board.
I don't know if they were ever Democrats.
But...
Or which one of them is whoever Democrats.
But yeah, this is the way to do it, Scott Jennings.
You should say that it's the most ideologically diverse big tent, and it is.
And the ideological diversity is the part you want.
That's the part you want.
So I love that there's no pandering, or at least not too much pandering.
There's a little bit of pandering in the nominations.
I don't have to point out the pandering, but there's a little bit.
A little bit.
Did you know there was a recent survey by CBS News that found that 59% of voters approve of Trump's handling of his transition so far?
That's a pretty solid majority.
59% approve of his transition.
I've told you before about the new CEO play.
When you're a new CEO or new leader of any organization, like a new president, it's really important.
And Trump totally nailed this on the first time he ran and won.
When he started work before he was sworn in, and he and Pence were traveling around trying to get businesses to stay in America and stuff.
And that is so powerful, this first impression stuff.
So by doing a very capable and early and aggressive staffing, and much better than the first time he did it, most people would say, it gives a real good impression.
So even people who might not have voted for him said, you know, it looks like he's getting some work done.
And that is so, so good.
Persuasion-wise, getting the first two months right is like getting the first year right.
But if you were a standard politician, you'd probably be quiet for a few months, and then once you're sworn in, you might say, okay, now we're sworn in.
We'll get this year right.
Have a good first year.
Trump is going to get his first year right before he's sworn in.
Now, that is so much smarter than what you'll see anybody else do.
It's just, it's a whole different level.
Anyway, Trump's popularity, according to modernity, is surging among young Americans.
So it rose from 19% to 57% in just over a week.
What?
What?
So according to this one source, Trump's popularity surged among young Americans in that 18 to 29 in the space of just over a week.
So conducted from November 17th to 19th, the survey revealed that 57% of Americans 18 to 29 now hold a favorable view of Trump.
What?
Marking a net favorability increase of 19 points in that demographic increase?
In a week.
Is that possible?
Apparently, TikTok has gone strongly Trump.
Or at least, you know, there's big movement in that direction.
You know, I guess my first impression would be this might be like that Iowa poll that said Kamala Harris was way ahead.
And you said to yourself, that's a fake poll.
And then later you find out, okay, that wasn't real.
I don't know that, I don't think that in one week Trump's popularity went from 19 to 57. Do you believe that?
It seems far more likely something wrong with the way they asked the question or something.
I do believe that its popularity is sharply up.
That feels right.
I don't think it's up this much, but could be wrong.
Anyway.
Here's something I didn't know.
Did you know that China is no longer the main source of U.S. imports?
And a lot of that is because of Trump's tariffs on Chinese goods.
So Trump, in the first term, tariffed Chinese goods to try to get more things made in other countries and made in America.
And the made in America part, I don't know about, but Mexico surged.
So Mexico is the number one place That we buy stuff from the United States.
Now, that doesn't mean that the raw materials are from Mexico.
So a lot of the components of what they make in Mexico might be made or produced in China.
So there's still that.
But Vietnam and South Korea and Mexico and at least one other place have gone way up.
And China has gone way down in terms of stuff we buy.
So the tariffs worked.
To me, it looks like they worked.
So if you're looking for when do tariffs work and when they don't, apparently we got something like what we wanted from the Chinese dominance of our purchasing situations.
But last year, products coming from China made up 14% of all imported goods, the lowest share in nearly two decades.
But like I said, a lot of the stuff is really Chinese, but it's coming through, manufactured by other places.
Well, Trump and...
Crypto apparently has a backer.
There's this banker, Arkansas Representative French Hill.
That's a funny name.
French Hill.
He used to be a community banker.
Apparently he's really big on crypto and he seems to have the confidence of the administration.
So if you're wondering why is Trump getting pro-crypto advice, which it appears he is, this is one of the sources.
I assumed it was J.D. Vance and Vivek and maybe Elon.
I assumed that they were the ones who were whispering crypto in his ear.
But maybe having it from an Arkansas representative makes it that much more palatable because you've got a solid representative who's elected.
It's not just the swirling around people who are not elected.
So that's good news for crypto.
Meanwhile, Christopher Ruffo has apparently met with Trump a few times.
Now, if you're not following the career and work of Christopher Ruffo, you should.
So let's call him an anti-DEI activist who's been very successful.
He's met with Trump and he's trying to get Trump, I think, to threaten colleges and universities with losing their federal funding if they keep doing DEI stuff.
He wants to get rid of all the affirmative action stuff from any institution with federal government, federal funds.
I think Trump's going to do that.
And I do think that Christopher Ruffo is, I think he's won a place, assuming that this happens, I think there's a good chance.
I think Ruffo has won a place in history.
Like, he's not a footnote.
If he pulls this off, he's one of the important people in American history.
This is a big deal, a really big deal.
And he's certainly the biggest name in this push.
All right, I'm going to call this the Trump effect.
You ready?
So apparently over 2 million people have signed a petition in the UK calling for a general election because they're not happy with their government.
And a poll says their prime minister, Keir Starmer, his approval rating has plummeted by 43 points since he took office just four months ago.
Have you ever heard of anybody's popularity in American politics plummeting by 43 points?
I've never heard of anything like that.
I've never heard of anything even close to that.
What's the most any American politician ever plunged in popularity in a short period?
Nowhere near 43%.
I mean, I think even Nixon did better than that after Watergate.
I'm not sure, but probably.
Anyway, so the lawmakers are going to debate the petition, and I feel like that's a Trump effect.
You know why?
Because I think the UK has this feeling.
You don't need to live this way.
There's something very powerful about that statement, isn't there?
You don't have to live this way.
Trump has used it, and I feel like they feel it, because the United States just proved to the UK that you don't have to live this way.
And if they're watching the United States, and they're watching what happened with Trump, and then they're looking at their own country, and they're looking at their own government, The election of Trump could make your popularity of your current leader drop 43 points in four months.
I mean, probably more recently, is my guess.
So...
Do you think this is a Trump effect?
I strongly believe it is.
Now, tangentially, because obviously UK has their own problems, so just having lots of problems would be enough to not want to keep your leadership.
But to this degree, this is a crazy degree of loss of confidence.
I feel that the reality of Trump getting re-elected Probably fundamentally changed how the UK voters saw their own country.
Like they have a chance.
Because the US looks like it went to the precipice.
Maybe we're still at the precipice, but found a way to go back.
And it's obvious that we found a way back.
And everybody can see it.
America did it.
By the way, for all you countries who are watching and wondering if we could pull this off, I think we can.
I think America has certain advantages that apparently we've had for a long time.
And one of them, remember what I always told you was our big advantage?
The big advantage in America that I don't think anybody can match is we will shit can anything that needs to get a shit can.
And we will do it brutally.
We'll do it quickly.
And we'll never look back.
If it needs to get a shick hand, ask an American.
We don't save things because they're old and special.
We don't do it because that's the way we do it.
We don't do it because that's tradition.
We don't do it because it's classical.
We don't do it because that's how grandma did it.
We will break anything if it needs to be broken.
Our government needed to be broken.
It needed to be broken hard.
And I don't think anybody thought from other countries.
I think other countries said, oh man, you're in trouble.
You know, you've got, you're too locked in.
You're never going to be able to break this.
But it turns out, Only the Democrats had to be broken.
And Trump broke them.
And then everything else is possible.
That's where we are.
So if you're in the UK and you see that the US found a way to break its way out of an almost impossible situation, that's got to be inspiring.
And it's got to make you want to switch out your own leader as soon as possible.
So I think it's a Trump effect.
You know, obviously, they have real serious problems.
So, I mean, the Trump effect wouldn't have any effect if they didn't have real problems.
And that's my message to the UK. Hey, UK? I don't consider the UK an American ally anymore.
Now, it's not up to me, but...
Nigeria is listening to me, so maybe you should too, is what I'm saying.
So maybe the people in the UK would rather be allies with the United States.
And the reason I say they're not our ally is they seem to be working actively against Trump when they were helping Kamala Harris.
That's not cool.
You're not allowed to go do politics on our property.
Not cool.
You can't be our ally.
If you're sending in people to work for the election of one candidate, nope, not an ally.
And if you're working toward the censorship of American platforms such as X, definitely not an ally.
Now, that doesn't mean you're an enemy, but you can't be an ally if you're interfering at that level.
All right?
Is that clear?
If anybody from the UK is listening, you're not my ally.
Now, our government may say differently, but I don't think we should treat you like an ally.
We should treat you like somebody who's off and on our side.
But no, you're not an ally.
And any special relationship, I'm not in favor of it.
I think we have to treat you more like an adversary that sometimes agrees with what we want as well.
So, yes, you need to change out your government.
For your own benefit.
You know, it doesn't make a difference to me.
But for your own benefit, you need to change out your government.
And then we'll talk about this special relationship, which I'd love to get back.
The more special relationships we have, the better.
So, no, you don't get to be our ally just because you used to be.
Remember what I said?
Americans can break anything that needs to be broken.
You know that special relationship thing we had?
We broke it.
It's broken.
Fuck you.
It's broken.
If you want to fix it, we're all good with that.
I think everybody here will be happy with that.
But consider it broken.
So, fix that shit.
How about Mexico?
Let's talk about the Trump effect in Mexico.
So apparently Trump had a phone call with the new Mexican president, Claudia Scheinbaum.
I just love saying that.
The new Mexican president, Claudia Scheinbaum.
If you had told me, do you think the president of Mexico soon will be a Jewish woman?
I would have said, hmm, probably not.
Probably not.
But here we are.
And she is signaling, according to Gateway Pundit, she's signaling significant policy changes that almost certainly have to do with Trump incoming.
And the policy changes...
Might be something about, you know, closing the border and taking people back and, you know, working to stop the flow of fentanyl, etc.
Now, why would she be so flexible?
Trump's not even in office.
Why would she be so flexible?
Well, I've got a few suggestions.
I didn't know about this till today, but did you know That on the campaign trail, Trump had threatened to reveal the Mexican government's connections to the cartel if they don't do what we want?
How many of you knew that he did that?
I never heard of that for some reason.
Or did I forget it?
Now, is that perfect?
Let me describe that.
That's perfect.
Yes.
He's actually going to blackmail them.
Remember I kept saying that it feels like the cartels in Mexico are blackmailing American politicians?
Like they must be blackmailing them because nothing makes sense.
So Trump says, once I'm in power and I know exactly what our CIA knows about everything, if you don't want me to make this public, you better do every fucking thing we want.
So he just took over the Mexican government by threatening them.
And it worked.
So I saw something that said that the fentanyl problem is suddenly decreased already.
It turns out that the Sinaloa cartel is kidnapping and killing fentanyl makers, including the ones in their own cartel, Because they don't want the pressure from Trump.
Let me say that again.
The Sinaloa cartel is kidnapping and killing their own fentanyl makers because they told them not to do fentanyl anymore, but some are still doing it.
So they're killing them because they don't need the risk.
Because what did Trump say?
Same thing I said.
Send the special forces in and wipe out the cartels.
Or negotiate.
But you don't negotiate until you've told them how you're going to destroy them completely in a way that's completely credible.
And it's completely credible.
So it looks like...
Oh, and then also Trump had threatened massive tariffs.
So Trump threatened massive tariffs on their car manufacturing, which would cripple the economy of Mexico.
Would he actually do it?
Would he make good on the threat of massive tariffs on the Mexican automobile industry?
Yes.
Yes.
That is a threat that's not just talk.
He absolutely had the power to do it, or will have the power to do it, and he means it.
So he threatens their entire economy, credibly.
Credibly.
This is the important part.
If anybody else has said this, you'd say, well, you know, Biden's not really going to put tariffs on their entire car economy.
Trump will.
And they know he will.
Trump said he'd bring in the special forces and wipe out the cartels.
And the cartels are like, oh, well, we're not in the fentanyl business anymore.
We barely even do cocaine.
We're not in the fentanyl business.
Why?
Because when Trump said, we'll send in special forces, they believed it.
Because he would.
Or he could.
And when Trump said, we will reveal your connection to the cartel, did they believe that he might do that?
Yes, they do.
You don't have to be a mind reader to know, yes, they believe he might do that.
So, which of these three things were unavailable to other politicians?
Well, arguably, they all could have done it, but there's only one person who could do it and make sure it worked.
Trump.
Why?
Because he's Trump.
Trump's greatest asset is that he's Trump, and everybody knows what a Trump is.
He's going to fight to the last dying breath.
Trump.
He's not going to take any shit from countries he doesn't need to take shit from.
Trump.
He's going to do what's good for America first.
Trump.
He's going to negotiate hard.
Trump.
And if he needs to bend a rule, if he needs to push somebody too hard, if he needs to threaten, if he needs to violate a few norms, Trump.
It's so powerful.
The persuasive brand that he's created just made Mexico crumple up into a ball and surrender.
I mean, that's what it looks like.
It looks like the most amazing...
This is probably the most amazing bit of...
What would you call it?
What's it called when you're dealing with international countries?
There's some fancy word for that.
But this is the most incredible thing you'll ever see in your life.
He may have completely solved Mexico weeks before he's in office.
This is real.
Now do Canada.
Rand Paul is talking about the Denver mayor who's saying he might refuse to cooperate with authorities who tried to deport any people in Denver.
I heard maybe he'd soften on that, but if he doesn't soften on it or any other mayor tries to prevent the federal government from doing his job, Senator Paul points out that that could be taken to the Supreme Court and you could actually have the mayor removed from office.
For violating what the federal government wants to do or needs to do to protect the country.
So that's Article 4 of Section 4 of the US Constitution.
They could be removed from the office under the 14th Amendment.
How about that?
That's pretty cool.
I wouldn't mind seeing a mayor or two get removed by that, you know, just to basically oil the weapon.
You know, if it's something that you're going to use more than once, well, let's remove a mayor.
One mayor.
It's not going to hurt anything.
Just get rid of one mayor, and then the other mayors are going to say, oh, I'm stealing a lot of money in my job.
I'd like to keep it.
Here's something that I'm going to tie into the current headlines, even though it's the oldest story in the world.
Have you heard of an ancient site called Gobekli Tepe?
And if you have, if you're a nerd like me and you like watching these ancient pyramid stories and stuff like that, there's a...
A set of ruins that don't make sense with our understanding of history, meaning that we think we have this good understanding of when humans developed certain capabilities.
And one of those capabilities is can you build an impressive structure with giant stones that you've carved and transported and fit together, you know, pyramid style.
But it turns out that Gobekli Tepe is way older than Than what we believe is a time when humans could do this sort of thing.
Which would mean we have some fundamental misunderstanding about something from way, way back.
We don't know what it is yet.
But, of course, some people speculate, and there are three of these actually.
There's another one, Ganong Padang, and And there's also the hidden chamber within the Great Pyramid, and I don't know how that fits in.
But there was some expert on Joe Rogan's podcast recently talking about what a mystery these are.
Now let's tie that into something else.
You know the story about the UAPs, which we used to call UFOs, because we used to think they were coming from outer space?
And then the narrative started to turn a little bit, and then the narrative started to be, Maybe they've always been here.
Maybe not always, but maybe they were here before the Ice Age, and maybe they died out, or maybe there's a few left.
Maybe they spread their technology to all these various places on Earth while they were alive, but then they were forgotten and they left or they died or something.
Could it be that the UAPs we're seeing, that our government is suggesting, might not be coming from off-earth?
Are the aliens who built or taught us how to build these earliest structures?
Hmm.
Hmm.
Now this is what I call recreational belief.
I do not feel that I have enough data or certainty to say that there are, in fact, ancient humans who have been walking the earth forever.
Could it be possible that the UAPs are automated and self-repairing and have been working for 11,000 years because they're self-repairing?
And that the people who built them have been gone for generations and there's just the technology left.
And all it's doing is it's sensors.
It's just checking out things that need to be checked out, just like it did when the aliens were here.
Not aliens, whoever they were.
And that maybe it's just going to go on forever.
And they've got these little orbs, and the orbs are some kind of sensors or devices to go look for stuff.
Anyway, so all I'm going to suggest is that we might at some point see a connection between the Gobekli Tepe and the UAPs.
Somebody's going to tie those stories together, like I just did.
According to the post-millennium, there was some kind of mega blacklist that got created by a Facebook group.
So they were trying to figure out all the businesses that may have supported Trump so they could make a list, so they could tell people not to support these businesses.
I tell you, the people on the left are dumb as fuck sometimes.
Do they realize that you can't have a successful country if you do this?
This is the very definition of not understanding how anything works.
If we don't have a free market, we got nothing.
There's nothing left.
If you start saying, I'll only shop at your store if I agree with all of your politics, we have nothing.
That would destroy everything we've ever built, and fairly quickly.
So, stop being so dumb.
Apparently there's a lot of pushback about it, so I don't know that that's going anywhere, but don't do that.
And by the way, you know, it shouldn't be done on the right to punish the left.
I would hate to see any MAGA person create a list of, you know, here are some lefty businesses you should not shop at.
Now, I know that they've done it for some Fortune 500 companies, which is a whole different deal.
You know, if Target is doing some things that you've got a problem with and you're sort of publicly boycotting them, That feels, it's not ideal, but it feels at least fair.
It's a fair fight.
You know, Target can take care of himself.
Target does need to conform to, as best it can, its customers' preferences.
So, you know, the big ones I don't mind so much.
But if you're going to take out a neighborhood store, if you're going to take out the donut store on the corner because it voted the other way, you're not smart.
You're not smart.
Don't do that.
I mean, it's bad enough that you could take out a Fortune 500 company.
Don't do that either.
Maybe you put pressure on them so they change some minor things they're doing.
But you don't want to destroy the economy of the United States because you're mad at Americans.
Don't do that.
All right.
Apparently, there's reporting that Trump is planning to sign some kind of order to remove trans from the military, like on day one.
And my question was, well, first of all, do you think that's true?
Do you think it's true that Trump is planning to remove trans from the military?
The argument would be that there's extra expense.
I don't know if that's the reason, though.
Maybe extra accommodations that are more than they want to do.
Now, I remind you, in case you forget, that the military is the one place that socially we allow massive discrimination.
You get that, right?
In the military, very overt discrimination is acceptable and required.
For example, if you weigh 400 pounds and you try to join the military, Nobody's going to say, oh, stop being fatphobic and let the 400-pounder in.
Nobody says that.
If somebody has a disability, and it's a disability that would be important if you were in a military action, nobody says, hey, what about the Disabilities Act?
You're discriminating.
Nope.
Nobody says that.
Now, where discrimination is not allowed...
Is where it doesn't make sense.
So, allowing people of all races in the military, does that make your country more or less safe?
More.
More safe.
Because if every part of the public can also be part of the military, that does a lot.
To make you feel like your credibility of the whole system, we're all on the same page, we're fighting for the same thing.
I mean, that's really good.
So that kind of discrimination, race or religion, in most cases, wouldn't make any sense.
There's no upside.
There's a big upside to doing it, but there's no upside to stopping it.
But with trans, there are statistically at least big differences in availability, I'm told.
I don't know that for sure, so if you want to fact check me, I welcome it.
And it costs more medically to keep your situation going, and you can imagine it might cause some dissension in the ranks or something.
I'm not too worried about the dissension, because that was true when the military integrated, and we just had to get over it.
So it's not the complaining I would worry about.
Does it really make your military less capable?
That's the only thing that should matter.
So we'll see.
But I didn't know how many trans were in the military, and could be up to 15,000, but not necessarily people who have ever had any surgery, but might be in that category of trans.
Okay.
I don't know if that's true or not.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, this would be the time to order your Dilbert calendar.
Do it fast because they're making them as they're ordered and you don't want to order it a week before Christmas and then they have to make it and then send it to you.
So I would get your Dilbert calendar before December 1st.
You probably still have a good chance of getting it in the first week or two of December.
If you order it then you have a good chance of getting it by Christmas.
I wouldn't take a chance.
I'd order it now.
The only places you can do it Or at the link at Dilber.com, which takes you to the page where you can order it.
If you're wondering about the delivery time of your calendar, a lot of people have asked me, hey, I ordered this in October.
When's it coming?
Because we did pre-sales, so people were paying long before the product was made.
If you're wondering whether your order went through, if you didn't see a confirmation, the email you want to try for that is the one that's on the sales page, not the one that goes to me.
If you're on Dilbert.com and you send a message, where's my calendar?
It goes to the worst person in the world, me.
I don't know where your calendar is, but I'm working with people who definitely know where your calendar is.
So if you go to the sales page, the one you bought it from, there'll be a support email there and they'll be happy to get back to you.
But for most of you, just wait.
Everything will be fine.
You probably don't need to check on it.
Everything's working fine.
There's no delay in the system.
They're being printed.
They're being manufactured.
So I can speak with confidence that if you know your credit card cleared, if there's a charge on your credit card, you probably don't need to check.
It's probably fine.
But if you want to, you can.
All right.
That's all I've got for now.
Where's my calendar?
Geraldo wants to fight Bongino.
That would be a bad idea for Geraldo.
Anyway, I'm going to talk to the people on Locals privately, but if you're on X or YouTube or Rumble, thanks for joining, as usual.
You're all wonderful, and I will see you tomorrow, same time, same place.
