« Coffee With Scott Adams

Episode 1135 Scott Adams: Details on the Coup Plotters Emerge, BLM Focuses on Revenge Over Solutions, Hacking Voter Brains

2020-09-25 | 🔗

My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a

Find my “extra” content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com




  • CNN dark…on the biggest story in the history of America?
  • Is Biden the candidate…to protect those guilty of a coup?
  • Is BLM a REVENGE oriented movement?
  • 8 AM…How’s Joe doing today, another “lid” this morning?
  • When the election is not deemed credible…then what?
  • Kim Jong-Un issues apology

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.

The post Episode 1135 Scott Adams: Details on the Coup Plotters Emerge, BLM Focuses on Revenge Over Solutions, Hacking Voter Brains appeared first on Scott Adams' Blog.

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Phone bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump, but your phones on silent, because that's how good this is gonna be here. Better than even the normal coffee was caravans, we're talking one of the best of all In order to say that, I feel that government, a low? Are you too and before, where you're going word. Anybody like to do a thing called the simultaneous. You know you do It is a couple of under a glass of anger, tells us time again to injure confiscated vessel of any kind. Follow the arabian liquid I'd like coffee. Enjoying join me now for the dopamine. However, the day the thing that makes everything better.
I see unparalleled pleasure of the simultaneous happened. It happens now go Well, according to Jack, preserving this, this podcast is better when you play that one point: five times speed with is both insulting and totally drew. I do the same thing if you haven't, If you haven't at least experimented with listening to podcast at higher speeds Do you really want to check it out. So I don't have periscope as an option, but I put it on Youtube later and its also unpack gas later, so you can listen to it that way or you to listen to it on the locals Duncombe subject,
site are excellent, start well, some stuff. I like looking at the interesting ideas the entrepreneurs come up with for dealing with the quota. By, the situation and the Alamo Draft House, which is a series of I guess, movie theatres. They might be in Texas,. They haven't came, came up with an idea of letting people out the the whole theater and just take people live. There are your own friend, so you basically four hundred and fifty dollars for the theater and other one hundred and fifty dollars for popcorn and food or whatever you you and your friends can just have the little theater for for the movie. Not bad uttered off its the best idea in the world, my talent,
DORA Movie Theater now the third DR ends dense and such, but I like the creativity of it- was a good idea, so so President Trump signed an executive order, essentially saying that. Pre. Existing conditions would be covered, but of course, The non binding executive order. Let me ask you this: how much is eight nine non binding promise if he will Two to me so to make sure the pre existing conditions are covered.
Would you trust a president who made a promise like that and said I am going to cover the pre existing conditions? Don't worry about it. Do you trust that present? Well, here's the thing one or two things, President Trump as done right, is used on such a good job at doggedly pursuing the promises that he has made. That it is completely credible. Now nothing in this world is guaranteed, but in terms of whether President Trump would stick to his promise of fighting to keep the the pre existing conditions, I feel as though he created that asset, meaning that if you asked me for years ago, I'd say well, I don't know you know politicians make promises. Sometimes they keep them. Sometimes I ever reason not to read my lips, no,
taxes well changed my mind so four years ago I would have said, I don't think you can be positive that this president or any other present, would keep a campaign promised But now we ve watched him operate for four years. Seems really clear to me that the president the very high value on doing what. No, what do you agree He puts a very low value on being specifically accurate details and if, as I personally that fails the fact checking and its abundantly clear that he's not Turned whatsoever about getting those details right. Though you can eat that way you loved, but anybody can observe that you know no matter which side you're on were observing the same thing here,
very low value on those little niceties of the details and bidding technically accurate? He does try to be directly accurate. In other words, is please try to persuade the country in a productive direction. There's nothing evil about it both, but when it comes to keeping a promise Even if you can't get it done as quickly as it was working along those such as building building the wall, but slow bonds happening, so you can tell is it always putting the full measure of effort into it?. And I feel as though the president created this asset, nothing he could, is an asset of believe ability when it comes to keeping his campaign promises, which is emotional everywhere? Every president? Add that exactly said the you can keep your doctor. If you wanted situations.
But I don't know that Trump has any of those it. If you look for something like that and Trump and fact checked on this, I might be just missing something that I'm not think that would be obvious to you. But I know that a critic would say well what about the part about making Mexico? but for the wall say I don't think anybody took that too seriously sure that was a campaign theme, etc. You could say, this promise, but was it was it really did the people vote four times a, I think it means that is totally gotta get MAX, gonna pay for them all day. You can argue that he did get them to pay for the wall indirectly in terms of keeping the keeping the migrants
groups from coming across, so he did get a lot done in terms of transferring some of the cost to Mexico that really abbot, but nobody took it to seriously. It wasn't a requirement that all think moving. So I think I understand. Finally because the new revelations coming out about the coup attempt the Russia Collusion coup. Where Breton, Oh me, and all those characters, apparently it if we are to believe the documents were saying I dont know how to interpret them other than a confirmation that there was literally a coup attempt,
I dont know how to interpret, and am I really really tried hard in the beginning of this Russia collusion stuff when, when people who were even more sceptical that I have witnessed as possible, we're saying hey from the very beginning. People are saying hey. This looks like just to attempt. It looks like some kind of organised and I said, if you remember, I said Let's see it was cool down that talk, I don't play Cle evidence of a coup, sure lots of people didn't like the president, there there are people in jobs and they can do little things His life are what is not some kind of regular, understood, explicit coup attempt, I mean that's just crazy. Said that, apparently, was apparently was exactly that
It wasn't even sorted that it wasn't so. Of that it wasn't reminding you of that it was actually that from based on the documents we ve seen, especially the ones that just came out, now, if you understand that- and you understand that the latest documents are a little bit more damaging to both Obama and by meaning. Apparently, if we are to believe always see in the documents, looks like, President Obama was pretty deep, involved in something that looks exactly like a good end, and that means Abiden Biden was involved is using the ruby he would have had to know about it. Now, here's a how do you explain that? I feel as if you would agree with us the following supposition?
that the leaders in the important people in the Democratic party they can kind of get anybody nominated. They wanted. Don't you think, don't you think that the the other The old Clinton crowd in the Obama crowd in the deep state here, the Democrats, don't you think that the leadership of the parties. Could kind of push things and whatever direction they wanted in terms of the nominee, and you might have ass yourself. Well, if that's the case, make the sort of everybody they wanted. The nominee by controlling the media. For one thing: they can control the media coverage. They can control the funding, probably they can control which advisers work for whom etc. So, if you take my ass
that the people in charge do have the ability to create the nominee. They want essentially manipulating the voters into voting through they want. Why would they choose by because by any measure, is the least capable candidate who has ever run for president. I don't think you can find somebody who is less cable. Invited its is certainly not miss their gaze that they the running an incompetent- that's pretty obvious at this point. So. Why would they do it and the answer is to protect themselves bite and is the only person who was in the air in the race for the nomination,
he's the only one who had the following quality. He was just as guilty as the as the other people in the party he's part of presume way. This is the speculation right. My speculation, I think they needed. Because he's both controllable and he has the same risk profile as I do so. You could count on him to to make all the investigations go away because he had the same risk. I don't think there was anybody else in that category. Was there anybody else who would be as good as stooge as as Biden to keep them out of jail, So now, when I say stuff like this, you you should be saying to himself or less just about the biggest story. There's never been a bigger story than this Watergate was appeal. Compared to this.
What was as big as this could, even that Monica Lewinsky, no tiny, tiny little problem. There is nothing that I can think of it and modern be at least my lifetime. I can't think of anything Either you are getting into the Iraq war the wrong way with better information. This is gonna, be gigantic enormous big, story of all time. So let's look at this homepage. See how they're carrying other covering the biggest story in the history of the United States. Let's say nothing, nothing, nothing! Now have you ever seen them just not cover a story
usually they always least put a line, and there were say well something happened, but we're not going to talk about it or well these these crimes, They can serve those are making some claims, but they're all wrong. So don't pay attention to what, if receiving them just go dark. The biggest story in the history of the United States. Just not government wants, I tell you, it tells you they're complicit what else, would it mean? Why else would they not cover the biggest story in again the history of the United States? There is no bigger story than this. Young wars may beer bigger stories but spray bag, and if you wondered, hey is CNN and the means
The media. Are they? Are they sort of complicit with whatever this coup thing was, and I would say at this point it's obvious. You know that there are some claims that have to be careful about making, because you you get into legal problems. If you make a claim that can't be So I just put it in the form of an opinion. Based on what I've seen a reasonable person would conclude. There was an actual cool attempt. Brennan was probably the leader, if not one of them, one of them or the leader and that's CNN at latest. Probably other media were one hundred percent complicit. What else could you enter This has now. I don't know what other entities or cover your not covering it, but keep an eye on that
so here are some of the things that are coming out in these this new jobs, and if I am stand this right, this stuff's all too complicated for me, so I may be MRS details, but I believe it's true. I believe it's true That's the only reason were learning about these new things is because the Flynn case wasn't dismissed as that that we wouldn't have known this stuff, except that they made the mistake of keeping the Flint thing alive, even after the prosecutor wanted to drop it. And then what they're doing the plan is just should just be another crime and he's just a crime. The way they're treating their guy and. So it looks to me like us. The only reason we would know their staff, which is shocking in itself. Some are things we found out one of the primary sources for this
Steele dossier was suspected to be a russian agent at the time. At the time they put the dossier together deciding what to do with it. Even then they knew they knew that the person who is a source was a suspected Russians by now. You think that they would mention that to say that the courts or to anybody you needed to know hey just a heads up. We ve got this information, but an important one. If it comes from somebody, we suspect is a russian spy you'll leave that out and you're not playing on the Antietam America. When you agree, if you intentionally leave out that little fact. You're, not really arm team america- I don't know what team IRAN, but it's not this country.
Apparently there's an agent who worked on the case, William Barnett, who will at the time, and I guess presumably still does that the whole thing was driven by a gets, a trump attitude which he actually said at the time he didn't see the you didn't see the basis for the case. It just looks like he was political to him. Now, don't make too much. That, because, unfortunately, any work group, if you could actually talk to them privately and individually, any work group for any company and the organization anywhere you're gonna fines people in the group who say I don't know why we're even doing this. It's all a big mistake. Are we doing this for all the wrong reasons, So there's always that guy. So if you're, if you're ranking what importance to put on these revelations
there were somebody on the team who thinks the whole thing was bs and you shouldn't have been done. You want to believe that that's really fallen, and maybe this I'm not really about just saying that's. What are you gonna watch, because you always get that guy, there's always a disgruntled employ. Look at me. Look at all the whistle blowers who have stories about Trump. You always have that guy. So just keep in mind that that's on the lower end of credibility, but might be true if it's at least it fits all the rest of the story, all right. What else do we learn there. We learned that Breton falsify the intelligence about Russia. What now, if, if Breton had he was out of CIA at that time right. So we put together this small team of five people
and the head of the team was somebody who is as personal friend somebody had control over. They come up with A set of conclusions about Russia and then bread and tried to sell it to the country as seventeen Intel agencies agreed when, in fact it was a group of five. Just five people all of the CIA, and really one of them wrote so really one person and that one person was handpicked, my Brennan, so really just Brennan so Brennan sold that is own analysis, which was not in agreement with other people in his own group people in these groups and a nation. You should include this part where we think there is a good chance that Putin actually prefers Hillary Clinton and the reason we think he might prefer Hillary Clinton is that she is predictable. And she had already offered a reset. So he knows what
he's getting. But he doesn't know what he's getting tromp at the time. So Brandon chose to leave out the part where his own people said you. Now we think. Might actually prefer. Hillary Clinton does that a big deal. It's the biggest story in the history of the United States. That's not a war! It's the biggest story, licence I the head of the CIA literally falsifying Russia into according to what we ve been told for the purpose of overthrowing the United States government, the legally elected government now Weirdly there might be no penalty for this, because how do you prosecute somebody for having a different opinion, because that will that's
That's what he could claim. He could say. Yeah I saw the Intel about Food referring Hillary Clinton, but in opinion it was not worthy of including that sort of the whole defence you really don't need much of a defence beyond yeah. Maybe I was wrong, but that was my opinion and it was my job to have an opinion. I think I think it's not exactly illegal to overthrow the cut and try to overthrow the government
fail so people operating at that level know how to stay. You know outside the bounds of legality wall at the same time, overthrowing the government or attempting to now, since the penalty, for that is probably zero, cuz of the other always being reasonable doubt. What would you think the penalty should be if it were true and if it could be proven hypothetically? What would be the
appropriate penalties for age on Brennan, yes hypothetically, it was found that he had actually tried to overthrow the government and they did it by falsifying intelligence, essentially leaving out intelligence which falsified it. I think the death penalty right. Should you not be subject to the death penalty for that crime, because I can't think of a bigger crime you? How can you do something? Worse seems like a death penalty crime to me, but I'll bet there will be no penalty whatsoever. So here, I guess I just don't know what to do about the fact that it looks like what's gonna happen. Does that conserve, the media will make a big deal about it
but have you noticed that if conserve, the video is the only one that talks about something it never becomes real to the rest of the world? right? So I believe that our silent news has created this weird situation where somebody associated with the left. Couldn't murder somebody on Fifth avenue. I just pick it example. They murder, somebody in fifth avenue it could be recorded on ten thousand cameras, confirmed in every possible way that that's exactly what happened. This person murder this person in front of people in front of a million cameras and if the entire left means free media decided just not to cover it wouldn't exists, even if the conservative media, when
Crazy on it every day, and it was headlines and couldn't stop talking about it as long as the other side simply treated like it doesn't exist, it actually doesn't exist. We have reached the point where they can disappear reality not just make facts disappear, not just leave out leave every detail not get something wrong. Not even fake news actually disappear and entire chunk of reality, while you're watching him do it. That's where we're at have you told me that that was even possible I might have said well and some weird things: Go away but watching it happening is just blowing. My friend, mind. I'm in my head is just coming right off one
I see it in literally just ignore it. There was no clue attempt at an what you're talking about what else. Could they ignore? What else could they ignore this like? They could ignore anything and just ignore it, and then it doesn't exist. There's a weird little story, Kim Jong on, has issued an apology for killing some south korean guy who tried to defect to the north. What the first thing you have to ask yourself is: why did somebody in South Korea try to defect to North Korea? What the hell there's somebody itself grew and under the reading about North Korea. What did you think we're gonna happen? What do you want to North Korea well can have a good life up there in North Korea.
So apparently he was users drilled for bulletin and killed by the North Koreans, gazetted then, and what they had the air was somebody. Like was breaching their territory, so they kill him Kim Jargon and here's. The weird bar issued an apology. He issued an apology, that's big deal. Because you know you want North Korea to say enter there, let's say, enter the field of adult. You know adult countries a fuel to just act like more of a citizen in the world a small thing, because obviously the apology was warranted, but you still don't expect it right. You you would have more expected year was an accident, but don't send your people across the border. What did what the hell did, you think was gonna happen or just
I mention it for some like that, but apparently Kim Jong, assuming he's still alive, if he's still alive, thought that playing it more diplomatically was was good. So that's a good sign But I have to ask you this question: what was the last time we know we saw him. German one was less time. We saw him alive Now I realize that tourism, video of him, visiting someplace after people, had been rumours that maybe you so you remember a few months back, there was a real re died, but then there was a video of him in public. You look healthy. So then the rumour just one way sort of to me. Not to me, I am not convinced
He's still alive and or functioning might be and machines or something but I'm not I'm not convince alive. Because we haven't seen live video, have we we ve only seen recorded video and they probably have evolved to full of recorded video of places you visited that they just and publish the video, so they re just pulled out something from the archives. Are that areas is his visit? this factory or hear some totally alive. There is some evidence that is sister is gaining power, which might be a tell, but this appalling, feels a little out of character. But maybe not because he is moving toward your friendly relations, I will just keep an eye on it, and I'm gonna put it out there again that well here here
your best clue to remember forget when it was me be a month or two ago, when President Trump tweeted, with no no prompting there was nothing that triggered the tweet he treated their Kim Jong is alive and well, You remember that to it, just came out of nowhere. Nobody was accusing Kim Germano being anything but alive and the present just go? Nowhere tweets, I is alive and well that's, I would very much like a favor for North Korea, a favour that would only have one purpose Which is to have friendly relationship will perhaps if you were to survive. Whatever hypothetical problem we had or whoever takes over,
It may have been just a favour for the current or maybe the incoming administration. Does it look like it? It was just a tweet nowhere, it look like them some kind of a favourable so just keep an eye on North Korea. Then a little of Twitter Twitter survey, and I asked people, our opinion of black lives matter was improved or or less less either empathy. Was our empathy for be alone,
more or less because of the events of twenty twenty. Ninety two percent people who answered my unscientific, pull mostly conservatives, because if you follow me on Twitter, you probably are ninety two percent said that they have less empathy for black lives matter, less empathy and here's. My I shouldn't? What's the point of black lives matter? Is the point of black lives matter to convince themselves the black lives matter? I don't think so. I don't think they're talking to themselves is appointed blacklist matter to give in to progressively to change their mind about something Well, I don't think so. Does the progressive are actually marching with them their there on the same side? So who are they trying to convince if anybody why we think there would be trying to convince conservatives onto the assumption that that
the group will need to be convinced that everybody would be on the same side that some changes need to be made and then we will work for those changes but Ninety two percent of the mostly conservatives who answered my on scientific. Don't a pole said that they feel worse. They have less empathy for black lives matter. Isn't that exactly the opposite direction? that's not just missing the target, those run, we as hard as we can in the wrong direction, while knowing it so here's the key part, do thing black lives matter doesn't know. What do you think that they are that they would be surprised to find em that rioting, looting is making less popular now for further anybody was new year, make an assumption that I'm not afraid idiot. Ok,
So when you hear me say something like black lives matter, rioting including your brain, should translate that into yes, yes, yes, most people are just protesting peacefully. I get it most people by the numbers in terms of percentage of people by far or protest in peacefully, but they also are creating a container which they know continued the bad people. So, if you're part of an intentional process to create a safety container for leaders and writers, I throw you in the same. Say you're insane bag the first few times you do it? Maybe you just need to get something on your system, but if you do, every day.
And the rioters polluters are in your container everyday. Well, it's a bad container and your parliament. So who is black lives matter, trying to persuade if it so obvious that are doing the opposite of persuading well one of his just the obvious. Well, what would be the most obvious interpretation of what you see if you saw a black lives matter say we need these following changes. These are the changes we need and then we were talking about them. They were beating about Maybe there's some legislation about them, then I would say: ok, this is a solution, oriented movement. This is a group of people who know what the problem is I've got a pretty good idea where the solutions lie or where they could lie, or at least whereas worth trying worth trying. Somethin.
And they're going to work on it. I'm gonna put up a trial to going to try to get some funding. Try to get everyone on the same page, really make the world a better place. Where's that is defined the police. Anything like a plan. Oh it's not even that's not even really trying to be a plan, because you would need a way more than that. So what would be the most reasonable interpretation of a group that apparently no interest in solutions they sometimes talk about things gonna be better, but without some detail about a solution. Any kind of a leader is putting together a taskforce, any kind of a document that everyone rallying round. About any of that. What is this I owed I can only give it one interpretation, its revenge is just pure
and when I saw revenge I include envy. You know I had a sceptic of the idea that the income inequality would drive society. Apart because I would say to myself if everybody's better. Why they want to change that situation by killing them overdoing extra good, knowing that it will make the whole system fall apart, and I think the the only conclusion that can come to from all of this is that its high. To have a difficult alive, while you're watching other people have a good life, any kind of hate them. You know, I think, back to my early days when I grew up.
I guess my family would have been considered, maybe lower middle class, some like that. I think we would have called ourselves lower middle class and every day I would wake up, and there was a big window in the front of living room- and looking out, my window was a ski soap and the ski slope is where all the the wealthy people came to ski. So, every day I would look at their ease up and out say every one of those people coming down there. This is an exaggeration, but it felt like this. Those people skiing over there? They are a better life than I do. How did we talk about those rich people We talk about them in glowing terms, but because you man, we sure, we sure do love those rich people who over there have been great time. War were trying to get by. No, we do not know we do not
We spoke of them somewhat dismissive terms like there was something a little bit wrong with them for being rich and happy. Successful? Now it won't. We weren't terrible about it and we weren't. We do you think they should be hungry. I think. But we had a little bit of an attitude that just sort of comes with the fact that somebody is doing much better than you to me. That looks like black lives matter the movement, including the white folks, who were the allies? If you will the anti fa, it feels to me like these. People were hearing, people were doing better and that is not a movement of equality per SE is far more. A movement of revenge against people were living good lives. It looks revenge, I'm seeing in the common someday saying that their bullies well
boy, is quite exactly the right vibe, although that's the b, the output of it. So they are the result of it. Certainly looks like boy, but in terms of the internal intentions, which are always difficult to discern, because you can't read minds but without solutions? It is obvious that is not a solution based movement. I think that power we can conclude and number. It was blowing my mind when I was watching Van Jones talking about their beyond a tailor situation. And when you watch somebody who's clearly, smart is God the knowledge in the world about the situation. There is no no gaps in this understanding whatsoever. And then I watch him realise that the story wasn't what it had been reported earlier.
In other words it wasn't police killing somebody, because there were black, rather it was just an accident. Tragic stupid, terrible accidents have happened. We can say lots of bad stuff about It's all true, but it wasn't accident now. Why should have been the reasonable respond to some one word was a legitimate feelings about police brutality, but they had been triggered by the least lately triggered by this event and then find out that event was not what they thought was well. What would they do if they were legitimate movement who wanted solutions, while I think they would have Ok, we were wrong about that one, but there is still plenty to talk about and sorry we miss that one year you can see why we missed it they made errors when, when they killed her,
we made some errors when we interpret the bullets now get up on that we got lots of other stuff to talk about those bad. Let's talk about that was less just let them go, but that didn't happen. Instead, they double the double down on the thing that we can also the same information This wasn't relevant to the complaint. The One thing that makes sense since they don't care about the facts of the case, and they don't care about solutions. It only makes sense and even vengeance, sort of talked about it as an emotional pain which seems to be fairly a widespread feeling that there is an actual pain that there are experiencing by the other. I guess the fullness of the entire situation, including their entire lives in fact,
Jones was saying that he was getting sick and tired. If I can paraphrase a right that in his own own life experience- and you would expect them to have more of a more of a favor experience because he's he's young talent is smart, good. Looking, as for you expect. The his life would look pretty good compared most people we even these pretty much insane daily wait, racism is like a daily pain that never goes away is just. Always heiresses follow you all day long and I wouldn't do neither that that Chile is true. I have no reason to question that even a little. What does that make you do? Have you ever been anger, angry and
Lashed down, as somebody has anger, every cause you to be mean to somebody who just didn't deserve yeah yeah. That's what it does. That's what anger does it causes you to be angry and their causes you to be mean to other people, so I feel like we need to stop pretending that this is about solutions and we need to stop pretending it's about making the world a better place, because it's so clearly is not, and if any of these people ever wanted to do any of those things talk about solutions. Talk about how to make it a better place. I feel like they would be plenty of people to help them remember the George Floyd thing first happened and I and lots of other people may this observation. This was the one time when the whole country was on the same side. What should have happened if people want a solution?
Then love the black communication said some version of this: Do you see what we mean now, though, community. Having seen the jury for video, one have said, as I did, and many people said. Oh, I get it now I wasn't quite you see what you are saying, but now we ve. This video? I totally get it now now it turns out. The sentinel was part of the story, so even that was faint lose, but at the time All why people were on their side all white people- I mean it was just, universal. You saw that video and you said a. Whatever we thought before, this is different this this this just put on the same page like ok, I get it now we get it. We gotta figure out how to make this never happened again, but that didn't happen. Instead of being on the same side, we were treated like the enemy when when
are you. People were saying. I really want help like this is real seriously legitimately want to help, here. The enemy. How am I the enemy? If I want to help legitimately and seriously. So I'm gonna completely disregard I regard the alarm and Antigua as any kind of a positive movement and society. We have to treat them like their revenge. Movement? And then what do you do? What do you do if you, if you finally correctly diagnose the problem, and the problem is that revenge is what they're trying to accomplish Well, they're gonna have to get revenge. You know that,
The one way that this could be, I won't say, solved, but you could take the sum of the energy end of it. Black people are going to have to get a revenge and, if its not presented as some kind of a package ay. This will hurt us so how about? do. This goes a little hurt us. You know we'll take some pain. If you'll stop protest, I don't know how you could package that up. I don't know any practical way to do that, so my guess is that the way this goes is there to be a bunch of white people, probably police, who just get killed, Just get slaughtered and that the number of white people who were killed- and you saw this happened in Louisville Right- there are two police officers- were shot in. What look like just a target in sniper attack.
I don't see any other way. This goes. I think it goes to some amount. Of slaughter of police officers, probably of various colours, and white people? I think death. Probably way they get to get the emotion out of it, so, that even you, even the black public, who support be alarmed by large. You have to get to the point where even they say, that's not exactly what I signed up for. I wanted? Less systemic racism- I wanted less danger, please? I wasn't signing up for a killing. Why people? That's that's! That's too far on now, probably ass, they get their. Otherwise it can't ever
the result, but if we think it has anything to do with solutions or legislation, I think we can rule that out now feels like that could be completely rule them. I said in a yesterday that a nobler Campaign expert, Isabel suspicion suspicious? That Biden doesn't know his campaign schedule and in advance because it seems to me that if you're gonna put a lid on your entire day, you know that yesterday, when you Are they so unorganised? They don't know what Biden would should be doing today. They have to wake up and assign nine in the morning, and there like I well, I guess there wasn't anything Publican schedule so will put a little. It feels way more like they have to see how he's doing doesn't it
those more like they wake up in the morning they say is anybody? Has anybody check and Joe yet they and they talk to hear at the just imagine he was, but they talk to jail and I say how's he doing. Is he ok this morning and then Jill says one of two things I think he's doing? Ok, let's, let's go ahead with the schedule or she says, noise is a little slow this morning we better put a lid on. I feel like that. What's happening. If there's another explanation for why the lid would be put on at the last minute, instead of knowingly in advance, I like ear Are you also wondering why the Renault insider leaks in the binding campaign isn't that a little suspicious? Don't you think that there are a conversations in the bite, encamped,
in about things that will be embarrassing. If they came out there probably conversations about how they deal with the progressive win that, if anybody hurt those about those conversations that will be news there, certainly or conversations about burdens. Let's say his: mental acuity and even his his general health. You know those conversations are happening because you see with your own eyes as days these better than other days? So obviously, there talking about it behind the closed doors, but nobody except for this one, her fortune, so acknowledging that there are insider leaks, allegedly on fourchan. I'm talking about is whether completely missing in the New York Times. Whereas the Washington Post story about the,
insider and the binding campaign who says you know this is what we are talking about in the campaign scattered missing right. Am I being crazy here or is it obviously message because, Tons of insiders were willing to Nargonne Trump for any. A number of real or imagined things, but there's nobody. Nobody on the Biden Camp is wont to do a little whisper whisper to her to a journalist and not by What I believe is a insiders probably have talked to the press, and I believe that the press is just not running the stories. That's my belief. Turn off is true, but I don't know why else there would be no inside or stories on in the in the major press. That is,
What would happen under the condition that the election is not deemed credible? Now I know that there is a constitutional series of steps, was less egos and the Supreme Court, but the country is still not happy with whatever they can Well, I know others the part where Nancy policy could become. President of things are sorted out by certain days, so I know the constitution has some steps, but suppose, because its twenty twenty one, twenty twenty nothing's clean, but suppose that, despite all the well described steps for solving the stuff, the country is just not convinced we had a real election? What, if forty percent of the country's thirty percent,
it can never at the end of it. You know, I don't trust the result. I just dont trust result. What would happen? Well, let me put this thought into the public mind if it's a tie, the tigers to the incumbent, because it has to now not if it's a second term, not if it's the end of a second term, if, if president serve to terms that's a different situation by in this situation, where you ve gotta presently were served, one term is running for re election. If we don't have a clean result, you have to default the incumbent no. Yes, I would say the same thing: if the incumbent were a Democrat,
same situation just reverse the party, and I will still be consistent. You have to go with the incumbent if you don't get a clean result now, if, at the end of the eight years then you ve got, you can have a brain somebody new one. Where are they but you just gotta go tie has to go to the run, because that would be the most stable situation and anything lesson that would be so this destabilizing, I don't think you'll be worth it and that's in, and I say that again, regardless of which party was involved, you just can inject that much incertainty into the system and hope that it is free. Pbs did fascinating experiment? They should scared the hell out of you and they showed how easily brains can be hacked, and I thank you.
Hacking you mind was the name of the special and swore PBS did. Was the primed people before asking them for their voting preferences and the way they primed them was half of the people got just generic information that no no emotional content and then they said all right, who do you vote for them? They give them some dry unemotional information and then they check later, and they say: ok now, who do you have a foreign and what what topics do favor now the people Scott dry, boring information had this, in my opinion, afterwards, as they had before so You might ask yourself what kind of information could you give somebody that were fairly instantly change? Their voting preferences? Is that such a thing and if there was such a
would it be true and others could he give somebody information? That's unambiguously just true and instantly changes that are voting preferences, yup cause they did it, they did it. They instantly change people's and voting preferences instantly, meaning and a few hours. They change people's voting preferences. Here's the information they gave them. They. Only white voters, so they started with just a white group of voters and they gave them the information that white people were becoming minority in the United States, which is factually true in the sense that the population of white people is dipping below fifty percent of the total population, Having primed a bunch of people who were voting, sort of left leaving ways
people who are less say against the wall once they were told that their group was the implication Is threatened because, while your power is gonna be decreased because now you're, u can be under fifty percent and shrinking, as soon as white people were told that their power was decreasing, their numbers were no longer majority. They voted conservative. Suddenly they wanted a wall suddenly. For a whole range of conservative things, the two whereas earlier they wonder, voted for instance, change. Now remember I've told you that persuasion is not all equal, there's something far more persuasive and other things. Facts are usually not persuasive, but fear is fear, is persuasive. In fact,
nothing is more persuasive than fear. So, the way the information was presented to this, these groups of white people in the experiment. Was that they were there were some can something to be afraid of and I believe they tried to see if they can soften it by just changing the way they described the same set of facts. So if they described the side effects of hey, you know why people are becoming a minority, but if they softened said, but it won't make any difference to your life, because what matters is education level and the non white population. This is far more educated than has ever been before and improving every day they ve got good jobs. Everything's gonna be great melting pot, we're good, so. They can actually keeps the votes the way they were originally left, leaning simply by the
way they describe a fat if they described it just objective way. People were scared to death and they voted accordingly in say fixed. The data by catching it and don't worry about this, you there's nothing to worry about their votes, to engage. Somebody says as a master persuade her. You were not surprised. No, I was not surprised that a Here that is, this direct would have an impact. I was a little surprised, although action to ban, because the book Pre suasion says, is pretty much exactly that that the entire range of conservative opinions change things
Nothing to do with being a wider, not white, even those things ended up being influence, so that was even more dramatic than I would have expected. I think, even though the science suggests that that would be the case, somebody says the left doesnt want a melting pot and unity, they want destruction and division. Well, I would not aligned with that. I don't. I don't think that anybody wants destruction. What they want is what comes, after the other, rebuilding or they're, just angry and just jealous they're, just they just awful eight, and I think that explains it better. There's videos of black in
If a beating up, why antifraud members? Well, I'm sure there will be more in fighting among the protesters yesterday also the year the Crenshaw add so representative trencher taxes did did a campaign. Add that such high production values that looks like a trailer for a bad action movie. Now they did a kind of Campi, so they were trying to make it look to serious. It was all tongue in cheek, but man was at high production value. Its is probably one of the best campaign, agile ever see just in terms of quality of production and stuff, and it did make you feel it
You actually felt something when you watched it and you liked all the people in it. It may do you like them and whose good it was a little awkward with the male female part of how they handled it, that the problem that they had when they made the video apparently is it started out with several ex military people were running as Republicans. And there were men, so the men who were first introduced were Ex military, and so they were there. Presented as awesome fighters and stuff. But there are two
that they wanted to include part of the republic and family of candidates who did not have military experience, so they tried to make them seem awesome to a little cringe worthy, but they did the best they could still. I would say that I would say that they did a great job on. It was very fun and it was very viral Sunday. I think they had all the right had already notes. Yes, my hearing from a number of people who really like my hold my beer, video geography, treating the other day. I am surprised that didn't get wider play, because the people who saw it seemed like a lot by the way, I'm getting lots of ideas from people who are suggesting the things about my idea for a small but
some house, I will remind you that my idea for building a small, cheap, inexpensive dwelling for a people is all I'm only interested if it's cheaper and better than regular houses, if it's just cheaper but way worse. I have no interest in it. So don't send me anything like that. I don't care about these all small homes. I don't care about. Factory belongs. None of that is interesting to me, because I'm not better there, just cheaper, it's gotta be cheaper and better. I think we can gather right how to break the news silent Somebody says pop music says. Well, I don't know they again. If I could come up with a way, I would certainly do it. I've been asked often
as you might imagine, how can you? How can you beat travel arrangements syndrome? Are you on programme somebody? I think that users, we really can't do it unless you're one on one. If you give me somebody one on one, I could work on and maybe I can confer one person if I spend all afternoon, but I don't know there's a better way to do. It accepts that the PBS experiment, I told you, the PBS Experiment- would change your vote. North with curiosity, tedious somebody says dwell magazine has great designs for small structures. No, they don't. So that's what I was warning you about. If you look in dwell magazine or pretty much anyplace, it talks about smaller structures there just worse there
source it's gotta, be better than irregular house. It's gotta be better. That's the only thing, I'm interested and there's no reason cabbie. Yes, the Amy could we bear it announced well, if she's the one starting to sound way. She will be. One of somebody says that the tiny home pickup truck idea rests on sips essay peace that are structurally integrated panels. Big chunks of things that you can easily build things with. I just saw an australian company. Somebody sent me on Linkedin a link to a company that builds walls and solar panels. They frame it with metal structure, and I guess the metal structure parts to people can assemble themselves but the outside of the home is mostly solar panels,
actually figured out how to make solar panels way for this? This is cool. Plywood, now costs more than the solar panel. So if you have a choice, of making making your home with a wall of plywood or just using, solar panel that wasn't even hooked up to the grid. The solar panel would be cheaper that, for the same physical square, footage a solar panel is cheaper than plywood. Now that was the claim I just read from funny. That's making these things and they figured out how to get the solar panels structurally hard enough using the metal backing that metal frame they just build the also the wall was with us all events, I'm not sure if that ideas less expensive, but it's interesting that's all I got for now talk you tomorrow.
Transcript generated on 2020-09-25.