« Coffee With Scott Adams

Episode 681 Scott Adams: Frickin’ Alligators and Snakes in Border Moats, Leg Shooting, Kamala’s New Staff

2019-10-02 | 🔗

My new book LOSERTHINK goes on sale 11/5. Pre-order: https://bit.ly/2NRammu


  • Does Kamala have new/better advisors now?
    • Kamala’s major problems…are ALL fixable
  • Snakes and alligators in a border moat? Oh my!
    • Shooting people in the legs to slow them down? Oh my!
  • The Office of Nuclear Energy @GovNuclear, good follow
    • Interesting note…they follow Mark Schneider
  • Whiteboard: revegetating the Sahara to prevent hurricanes
  • Nature journal paper on climate change…RETRACTED
    • Mathematician Nicholas Lewis challenged the math
    • NO climate scientists caught the error?
  • President Trump congratulating China on their 70th anniversary
  • Secretary of State Pompeo on a call to foreign leader? So what?
  • “Rebranding impeachment as a coup”…is that fair?

If you would like my channel to have a wider audience and higher production quality, please donate via my startup (Whenhub.com) at this link: 

I use donations to pay for the daily conversions of the original Periscope videos into Youtube and podcast form, and to improve my production quality and search results over time.

The post Episode 681 Scott Adams: Frickin’ Alligators and Snakes in Border Moats, Leg Shooting, Kamala’s New Staff appeared first on Scott Adam's Blog.

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Bump bump bump bump bump- come on, bump bump bump bump bump hey everybody come on in here, come on in here and enjoy the unparalleled pleasure of the simultaneous sep Yes, it's going to happen right here and you're part of it. Think of all the billions people in the world who are not? enjoying this empathy is in order. Let us feel sorry for those who are not enjoying the simultaneous step as you. Why and punctual people will enjoy momentarily. And you don't need much. All you need is, is a compromise, her glasses trying to tell us what the taper thermos, flask, canteen, grill goblet of vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite beverage. I like coffee and join me now for the dopamine,
what is the day the thing that makes everything better you're going to have an amazing day today, thanks to the simultaneous sip go, oh yeah. So let's talk about a few things, so kamala harris suddenly sent her first interesting tweet, to which I said, looks like maybe something happened with her staff and sure enough. She shook up her staff. So simultaneous with shaking up her staff. Kamala harris has her first that I can remember anyway interesting tweet,
Now by interesting I mean it made us talk about it, that's the entire test. If you're talking about it, she is winning. Now I've explained this until I am, you know blue in the face, as they say, I explained it with trump, taking all the attention it doesn't matter what they say. I explained it with a see when you thought she was a flash in the pan, but it turns out she's running the whole. Show I told you they getting attention
is fifty percent of persuasion. If you don't understand that point, there's almost nothing else, you're going to understand, I'm not talking to most of you, I'm talking to these several people who will come to my twitter feed today and say what what do you say? It's a good tweet, why you saying this good, tweet and then I'll say back to them because you're talking about it and then the next person will come and say scott, why you said yes, but we just not a good tweet. Is such a boring tweet. It bores me so much and then I'll say but you're talking about it and then the next person will come and guess what they'll say you probably had to be. But it'll look something like this. Why you say it's a good tweet is not a good way to such a bad queen. We see bad tweets, I kept I. What do you say? That's not and then I'll say for the third time, because you're talking about and no matter how many times I say that there will still be a fourth person who will say well, you know how it goes. For some reason that
message doesn't can act, I don't know why doesn't connect with everybody? Most of you are on board with but there's some minority people who simply can't hear the getting. tension is pretty much always good and that look around, I mean you have to. You have to be saying things so bad well, let me give an example, a representative to lamp. I don't know, I never know if I'm pronouncing your name right, so I apologize. If I got that wrong to labor, she fox news is reporting that she has now tweeted a total of four
separate race hoaxes, all of which you know were were discovered to be hoaxes later and and she hasn't corrected a she's, never tweeted aug at the wrong. I guess I guess so was a race hoax. Now, who are we talking about to label she still in the news? No matter what she does. Can you think of something that would be worse Then tweeting four separate race, hoaxes getting the world all worked up with stuff then? Apparently, yesterday she was touring some of police facility that had they were showing off their facial recognition, and I swear I'm not making this up. She said you know, public to people who can record her and and witness it she said, maybe
should only hire black people to do the facial recognition, because white people can't tell black people apart. She actually said that that actually came out of her mouth now. Did it hurt her? Probably not probably not apparently there's nothing. She can say that won't make her just more famous and somehow that works now, if that, if that example doesn't make my case, I don't know what will keep in mind that if you were a democrat or an anti trumper watching trump's entire act, you would have been screaming the whole time. There's no way. This is going to work, sure he's getting a lot of attention, but look the things he's saying come on the sorry cats in acting The things he's saying will disqualify him. No, they got him all the attention he became.
And most important person in the world. That's how it works so getting back to come along. If we're talking about it is working and the tweet was. She was tweeting that the president should be kicked off. A tweet tweet. for his outrageous tweets and then she I think it was two of them. Second one. She she tweeted to jack dorsey, saying jack. What are you going do about this kick off of twitter? Now, let me ask you This do you think the caramel airbus believes that there's any chance that trump would be kicked off of twitter
Ok, we agree that she doesn't think that's actually gonna happen. 'cause, that's important! You have to know that she doesn't believe now, I'm not reading minds, but you would have to have an iq of about six hundred to think that anything will happen to the president in terms of getting kicked off of twitter. You know that's not going to happen no chance. So, given the daycare happen, why would somebody suggest it twice? Well, probably because she got better advisers, so whoever advised her? It looks like maybe there's a better advisor in the mix here 'cause she didn't shake up her staff yesterday, whoever advised her certainly was not thinking hey. If you send a couple of tweets twitter might take the president off a tweet twitter. No, nobody thought that
nobody thought that they thought that it would be a provocative. Tweet, though, allow her to get back into the news cycle where she has disappeared. Did it work yeah? The only worked? It was a headline all yesterday. That's all we talked about not at all. We talk about other things, but of all the other democrats that were running how much attention to that they get yesterday last the tension so keep an eye on kamilla I've been saying for a while and this will be the point that you will- that will be ignored unless it becomes important sometime in the future all those things you can't hear when, when his first said you can hear-
in the past. When you go back and say all he said that here's what I said the top three polling democrats are unelectable and I think a lot of professionals and people in the base, no that for different reasons there on electable. If, if you were to turn the polls around and put you know, someone like delay, anne and yang and on the top, you would end up with a more electable group. It's just the weird ideas. The system allowed, the least electable people to be the top three. Now, as the professionals start to exert her control over the system- and I think that happens, especially as a as a crowd thins out a little bit. The professionals a more influence over everything. I believe that they will start looking for somebody who could win and what's unique about kamala harris. Is that her
problems well enormous, are easily solvable. She has the most solvable problem, I'll. Let me give you an example: when she talks she, she gets jumpy like her shoulders go up and it doesn't even look. It doesn't look leadership like how hard would it be to learn to calm your body while you talk and to maybe not hold your hands together like this in front of you, like you're nervous? How hard would it be to learn that one minute sixty seconds, if you just have to be aware of it and then, if
started to do it. She don't do that. She she would probably fix your posture, stand up straight and just put her arms and hands in whatever position. Look more leisurely. How hard sixty seconds undertook correct. Probably one slash three of her problems, which is her body language. How hard would it be for her to learn to not laugh at her own jokes? Well, it's a lifelong habit? So you don't break it immediately, but how hard would it be to learn to start doing it sixty seconds? Somebody says to, or you know people are talking about this. It makes you look less like a leader more like a fall or don't giggle like a schoolgirl at your own jokes, the first. I you hear that I tell you it's so chilling that you would remember it
If somebody, you trust and said, look you're, nervous, laughter yourself. Just looking makes you look like you could never be pressed just stop doing that. How hard would it be? to stop not really hard cuz. Once it became a priority and you're running for president. You just put a little attention on it and it would stop right. So she can fix your body language. She can fix her nervous. Laugh, that's sixty percent of our problem right there, who else can fix their biggest problems in one hundred and twenty seconds. That's unique right, then. The last thing is how to be interesting and how to have good policies and stuff that people care about that part has a lot to do with our professional staff. So if she is, if she's moved out of the way, whoever was boring us to death with their advice and if she moved in somebody who can get some attention
Which wouldn't be the hardest thing in the world I have to do, is hire a better advisor or get somebody out of the way who is may be blocking the good advisors. You already at looks like that. Just happened so of the biggest problems to solve looks like looks like she has a very solvable problems, and the first thing you would imagine that would happen to solve those problems would be a shame
up in the staff, and that happened yesterday. Well the odds, the odds of for pulling up from three percent the leadership. I love all right. I think we would all agree. You know when you get down to like three percent. The odds of coming back, I don't know, has that ever happened to be hard book. The next thing is going to happen is some consolidation, and by that I mean somebody in the top three is going to drop out and when the first person in the top three drop sounds, will there only be three left at
support another words: will the touch will the one of the top three drop down to only when it's down to three well? Well, one of them drop out, while they're still stragglers in three percenters and arrests. That's support. I think biden my drop out before the the group when I was too much if biden drops out early and I think you have to say the that's a good five thousand and fifty chance, wouldn't you when you say, there's a good five thousand and fifty chance that biden will find some respectable rees
up? I had a health problem, something like that. There will be some reason that will look natural, why he has to drop out because you figure at this point. The professionals are encouraging him to do it, or at least not supporting him enough to get to the finish line. So when biden goes, where does his support go? Does it go to radical bernie and radical warren, or does it go to the next person after the two radicals who at least has some chance of finding something like a reasonable middle. That's the play! So that's the play that would be looking for! I'm not going to say. I predict it. I'm going to stick with my prediction from over a year ago, in which I said calm low would be the how but then lose to trump in the general. I'm going stick with that. Only because it's interesting yeah,
I did lay out the reasons. The reasons haven't changed. The only thing that did changes that we learned she's, the worst campaigner we've ever seen, but is fixable the things which make her the worst candidate I've ever seen, are actually really easily fixed. So watch out. For that, let's say, oh and of course, people are saying how kamel kamala harris ask a social media giant to silence the first amendment. That's exactly why the tweet works, because people falling for it they're just totally falling for it like it's a like is a serious suggestion. You know what else is not a serious suggestion. There's a book out now the claims, the trump. What wanted to dig a water filled trenches the border stocked with snakes and alligators,
Now, there's no mention to whether about whether these snakes and alligators would have fricking lasers attached to their heads because there's no point in building it aboard remote with just snakes and alligators. If you're not going to take it. The next all and put some friggin lasers on the alligators hats stakes. A little harder as they're smaller at the very least, put some friggin lasers, on the alligators heads. So they can just look at people and try am. And then there's also also in this book, is they say the trump suggested migrants be shot in the legs to slow the I'm not laughing about shooting migrants? Let me be clear: a laughing at the ridiculous
says the report there's nothing funny about shooting people at the border and we shouldn't make fun of it, but it's also not going to happen in the way. The way it's described now do I think that trump has ever said anything that other people could interpret as asking about shooting people in the leg and asking about building a moat with snakes and alligators? I think he probably did ask those questions. How seriously should that have been taken, probably not to serve his it doesn't sound a lot different than
three of you were sitting in a room having some beers and just talking about stuff. The way he talks, apparently in professional settings is not a lot different than an ordinary person talks all the time. It's just that he does it in a in the white house. Now. Do I think, there's anything we should worry about in this reporting in this one book that took it took because it took us until now to hear this. Obviously anybody else who heard this I think it was serious enough, yeah, even even mention, so if it took this long for it to come out in the book. One thing you could fairly. Confident about is that it's out of context and other words, all the people who didn't complain about it problem because I heard it in context and just laughed or thought it's just you know it's just him talking he's just stirring up the room. It's not real
Right now, the shooting, in the leg thing I have to think was because of something specific. I don't believe, there's any chance that you thought you know just as a general policy. If you see, somebody crossing the border and say see. Family with their children in their arms? You know doing their best to make a new life leaving a dangerous situation. Maybe we should just start shooting them, but not them just just shooting in leg. He never said that. I think we can agree that nothing like that actually happened. Now. Did he Say that there might be some special case where she being somebody leg was better than whatever the alternative was. Maybe you may thrown something out there just to see how people react, but I don't. Take any of that is seriously, and I think you just have to look at you know where actual policies end up to know that
This was it's just another fake news story, but a funny one. If you believe that the president seriously wanting to build a moat was steaks and alligators, I think that's do you, if you think the president literally wanted to start shooting with some of the leg, as some kind of you know, general policy or something I think that's on you. I think that's on you because that's not really a credible report here's something interesting, you didn't know about. There's an office of nuclear energy in the government. Did you even know that I didn't have? I knew there was a depart, energy and I knew that they were doing some pro nuclear stuff, rick perry's group, but I didn't know there was an office of nuclear energy. I found out yesterday when mark schneider. Who's are seamus. Nuclear energy,
as advocate mark snyder, said that they started following him, which is great because he's these one of the most effective advocates for nuclear energy. So they should follow him. So I followed in two just to see what they're about and man that was good. Follow I'll. Tell you what they are there at at to go nuclear geo's, a nuclear goes nuclear on twitter end worth following. If, if you want to follow, if you're interested and climate or energy or nuclear energy or any of that? That's a good follow. They have don't have many followers yet. So they tweeted she they they tweeted. This are you ready? There are three advanced reactor system Meaning three different new technologies for nuclear power could be coming as soon.
thirty and are expected to be safe, cheap etcetera. So there is in there is an international consortium led consortium consortium that we are part of. We being the united states and the office of nuclear energy is talking about it and their generation for cem for stuff that won't won't melt down. And then we know how to make them less expensive, it's easy to make nuclear less expensive If you don't know that you're not paying attention a lot of, nuclear is too expensive. Well, the old way is the old ways really expensive. The way we know how to do it in the future is the way make anything less expensive you xander it to you, build them in factories you You agree on. You know one design, so everybody knows how to make that one design and you test it until you're one design is pretty
solid, and then you reproduce it so its mass production is factory built, it's making them smaller. In some cases, you get some economies that way 'cause you can ship stuff on trucks, etc. Building in a factory ship it on a truck, assemble it. So because economics is such a mature science. I guess, if you want to call it a science is not quite not a science, but it's a mature field. We know exactly how to make a nuclear power plant less expensive. We just make it smaller, standardize test it. You know make sure that anybody who knows how to work at one sort of automatically knows how to work at another 'cause, it's the same technology, so the government is well on his way, working with other countries to have advanced designs working by two thousand and thirty, and then once you have them,
how quickly can you roll that out? Are you thinking of the old way? If I told you in twenty thirty will have these really good, safe, small, economical nuclear plants, you're probably gonna, say to me if you're a if you're a climate alarmist, I'm not sure. I love that term. But let's say you believe that the climate is a big problem. You might say yourself too late, scott, it's too late. It takes so long to approve and build a nuclear, a plant that if we don't start building these safe ones in twenty thirty, it's already too late. Well, no, it isn't because you're thinking of the old way the old way of getting something approved and built was way too slow and too expensive. They had two things not working for it by two thousand and thirty. If we're serious about this, and if we still care about the planet and let's say worst case scenario cee lo,
apple- is rism similar to the predictions could happen. You might happen on its own, not for human warming, but maybe it just happens. Then people are more panicked. So it's the panic. I'm talking about not the truth of I'm a science in twenty thirty were likely to have a little warmer planet and paper. We're going to say whoa. Let's do this, I didn't know you could make these small and cheap and safe as soon as the public understands that small, cheap and safe has been accomplished and lou it's very doable. There are some engineering testing, iterating challenges, but they're all within the realm of just engineering. We don't have to you know you don't need einstein to invent something new. You just need to engineer interested in a trade until it's working just the way you want for the most part
in all likelihood we could roll them out pretty quickly once they're safe, because that's the trouble right. Nobody wants one near them if it's got a potentially even in their mind to be on stage now. You should know that the current generation that we can build today is already the safest power that we have. The things that have had problems in the past were earlier generations, which were less safe for reasons we understand really well. So
the current newest generation of nuclear has never had a major event. Alright, if and meaning somebody dying or that sort of thing. Here's my idea, four, I'm getting rid of hurricanes and making the world better place. This is my white board that you can barely see, but if you could, you can see that this is a very bad map of africa with the top part of of africa being the sarah. So it's all desert up there. Suppose you put together three technologies that we under stands. We know how to build nuclear. She put a nuclear power plant right on the on the coast, we're close enough to the coast, the you can get the water from it, and then you put a d cell in the station ge plant right next to it to take advantage of the energy, because dieselization is an energy
So thank thank you, diluted to hearing age, but you're getting a desert is enough. You would also need nutrient. Dense so turns out. We know how to do that too. If you put a bunch of free roaming livestock on the border between vegetation and desert, those livestock will wander over into the desert part now and then and poop, and their activities of eating plan simple concedes that end up being the you know, the fertilizer fairly quickly and faster than you would imagine, would be the case, meaning over just a few years, actually move the border of the vegetation into the desk. So you can actually expand. You can expand vegetation into a desert it just by having a livestock wandering around on the border. So if you combine those three things, you could target the so heroic
one of the hottest places on earth for a specific and targeted cooling. Why does that matter? Oh I'm! Not even going. How many of you know why that matters? Why would it matter so much to do it there versus somewhere else? Does anybody know the answer that the answer is because that's where hurricanes hey hurricanes are born because of the difference in temperature between and so we'll have to fact check be on this? But I'm pretty sure this is approximately true that the ocean is relatively cool. The desert. The desert is relatively hot and there's a certain time of season when that difference is enough to make the wind turn into a storm configuration. If you could cool. Just a
degree is off of the you know the coastal, so here apart, there are smart people who believe and again I'd have to be fact checked on all this. I'm not I'm not the climate scientist, but I believe you could actually weaken hurricanes. Now we can, in hurricane things, is not an answer to climate change, because hurricanes and storms are just one thing that people are worried about. You know they're, worried about this super storm, etc, but we could somewhat directly go after it. We could find the hottest spot and just take a couple of couple of degree is off at over time, so that now we're forty years in the future when they would be super hurricanes. Assuming climate change, yeah, I'm to say the scientists say.
Now what? If climate change is a big old folks? A lot of you believe that right, so so you believe climate change is a big old folks. Isn't it still a good idea to get rid of that desert and turn it into something useful? Arson is that is never going to be a bad idea to have d, salinization and fresh water, and Cheap energy- and you know place you- can plant more stuff, so I just put that out there as possible speaking of I'm a change. There was a study published in the prestigious prestigious journal called nature. There was retracted and it was a study that said that the oceans were warming even Even more than we thought so is going to be even worse than we thought
and that paper got retracted, but here's the interesting part it was retracted, because somebody named louis a mathematician at who is a critic of the climate change consensus. He looked at the paper and after it was published so remember he was not an initial reviewer. He sought after we published and he posted a critique and then the scientists looked at his critique and said: oh darn, it you're right and they withdrew the paper. Now, let me let me let me tell you how they describe the discrepancy. So the quote shortly after a publication arising from comments from nicholas lou
so he would be the climb a skeptic, but we realize that are reported. Uncertainties were underestimated owing to our treatment of certain systemic errors as random errors willow. So the problem was that they treated systemic errors as random errors. I don't know what any of that means, but here's the here's, the punch line of the story, a hundred percent of climate science, this didn't catch. This mistake. The only person the car at was not a climate scientist. Let me say it again: a hundred percent of all the climate scientists in the world didn't catch. The obvious mistake. The only person who caught it where somebody who's not a climate scientists, is a mathematician.
Now he knows about climate science 'cause. He follows it, but he's a mathematician. Now. Let me ask you this: how unusual is it that all of the experts would be fooled and the one person is not an expert, would catch it and remember now all the experts have agreed that the guy who caught it was right that that it would just had an error in how unusual is that, unfortunately, that's not unusual. So let me ask you this: how unusual is it that an outsider, a mathematician could have enough information to debunk a study that has been published in a prestigious man prestigious publication, it's kind of unusual right
'cause. The error that he caught was, I think, in just the math in the statistics of it. So in other words, it was a rare situation in which the outsider had everything he needed. 'cause, it's just math and statistics, and they gave I guess the raw data was there, so he could just look at it. So now I'm a mathematician! You got this wrong. That's not that usual! Let's, let's compare that to somebody who said we went to all them measure stations around the world, and we came up with this estimate of what the warming is. Let's say you read that read that paper. Could you and I or anybody else, no if they did the measurements correctly. Well, not really, because you'd have to sort of do what they did travel there and see if there's anything interesting wrong with the with the measuring state stations.
Most things I would imagine, are not easy to check if you were, if you're, just an observer of the paper. If all you have is the paper, what are the odds that you could debunk it even if it's wrong, probably not because all you have is what's on the paper not gonna, go reproduce the stuff, I mean, if you're just reviewer you're not going to try to reproduce it, other people might try to reproduce it later. So here's what experience get you the inexperienced does- and I talked about this a lot in one of my chapters in loser thing, which is my
a great book? That's almost down to you can buy it on pre order right now, old, loser! Think in seville, ball, wherever books are sold, audio book will be available to at the same time. November. Fifth is when it comes out, but you can pre order. It now be a good time to do that, and I talked about this effect where, if you're experienced it isn't, it would not seem unusual. for the consensus of reviewers to be so wrong so often that the public would have an incorrect view about climate change. That wouldn't even be that weird if you're experienced, because if you're experienced you seen this situation a whole bunch of times, if you're twenty two-
and it is the first one of the issues in your like there's a publication and then it they got there. It was criticized that was pulled out. You'd, probably save yourself. Science is working really well, because that's how it works, you reviewed nobody expects science the right on the first try everytime. Nobody expects every paper to be true, yeah that that's how we're you're, transparent people criticize you you fix it. So if you're, twenty two, you could read the story and say everything is working fine. It was just one paper right this one time an they caught there they fixed it doesn't really change the big picture. Everything is working, fine if you're experienced. This is the 100th time you've seen something like this or whatever you seen it over and over again. If you've worked for a big company, you seen these blind spots and you've seen lots of situations where the majority are all.
All if you've never seen situations in which the majority were blinded to the wrongness even for years You would assume it's unusual and would assume well, it's not happening in this case What are the chances that so many people could be wrong. Well, if you're experienced, you would say totally feasible, doesn't mean that's what's happening, and I want to be very clear here: I'm not telling you that all the climate scientists are wrong. I'm telling you that if the wrong on the big picture, you know that the level of risk, if the wrong I would conclude, based on my longer life and faster experience and different large organizations, etcetera, I would say,
can't, say I didn't see it coming now. I'm not saying is true that I'm not saying that climate change is all alarmists and no science. I'm not saying that. How would I know I'm not a scientist. I will say that if someday we find out, it was not valid, I would say yeah, that's system. With my experience that wouldn't be surprising at all, even though- and let me say this is clear as possible, the scientific community is pretty unified sure there is five percent or whatever it is. That is on the other team, but they're pretty sure, and still it would not surprise me if they were blind to see
you know certain types of errors, all right, and I don't believe the science word that the scientific process is robust enough to catch it within any time frame. I will say this science. The scientific process probably is robust enough that it would catch any major error with climate science eventually. But the problem is you don't know when eventually starts right, could it be a year could be five years could be? Ten years could be twenty years before some major errors found in the scientific consensus easily yeah is all you can go twenty years and then find out all my and we got all this wrong.
That would even be surprised, but I'm not I'm not saying that's the case. I'm saying it wouldn't be surprising. All right trump offered at congradulations on china's communist party anniversary, their seventieth anniversary in and people criticize the president, they would say. Are you kidding me? How can you criticize or how can you compliment president? She, for this regime of seventy years. That's done all these bad things, and so mister president you're doing it all wrong. Why can't you learn to Deal with leaders the right way to which I say. Who taught you how to negotiate? You critics.
You're saying the negotiate with china, you show them complete respect at the leadership level ' which eliminates any reasons they have to to work against. You eliminates any ego brand reason to work against you so by showing the leader maximum respect, the president takes off the table, any problems that would cause by not doing that now he can talk to them now, at the same time, that only works. If you're, if you're tough as nails on the actual deal negotiating, which apparently we are otherwise we would have by now. We would have a deal if we were not being pretty pretty tough, so the perfect negotiating stance is complete. Rest,
check for the person you're dealing with, even if you don't feel it on the inside. You might not feel it on the inside, but it's a good strategy to show respect. You the best communication that way, the best level of trust, etc. And then you go hard as nails on the negotiating now, as I've said there, no chance that we're going to have a trade deal. We are heading toward asoft d coupling and I don't see the slightest chance. That's going to change. Take that as a prediction. He used to be a preference, but now it's a prediction. I think it's the first time I predicted it summer. Prediction is asoft, decoupling, softap, meaning we're not going to have some kind of law that says everybody get out in china. Stop doing business with china, rather will be something like simply not do
any more business with china 'cause. All we have to do is stop the trend. That's all we have to do we just we just say alright. If you're already there, it's going to be hard to leave, we get that, but you're next factory, your next factory kind of needs to be a little closer to home, doesn't have to be. It doesn't have to be america. That would be great if you're like out computer and your bill, your plant in texas, I'd be great but doesn't have to be just shouldn't be in china. So de coupling is coming at because- and I say that, because china is never going to act on functional, there are never going to give up on squashing han kong they're, probably not going to stop the holocaust against the weaker community and they're, never going to stop stealing ip they're, never going to be trustworthy on any kind of in the technology
deal or really anything. So we should just stop pretending that that that could ever be a deal. All right, here's the other news, fake news, fake only because I thought it already happened this. So it's not fake news in the in the in the sense that is false is fake news, in the sense that why is this news and the news is that the secretary of state, mike pompeii, admitted he was on the call between trump and the ukraine president, to which I said I thought we already knew that. Are you telling me that the president would call the president, ukraine and he wouldn't have mike pompeii with the call in what world is mike pompeii. Not on that call. Did you assume
things on the call yeah and I'm watching the comments people are going. Who cares? That was his job? Why are we even talking about it? You know what else might pampai? Oh did I swear I'm not making this up mike pompeyo and I I hate to be the one to break this news to you, but mike pompeyo once put on a crisp looking suit with a necktie an went to work. I swear I'm not making that up mike pompeyo and you could probably get him to admit it. He once put on a good looking suit, put on a neck tie and went to work one day.
That's the same story? Mike pompeii went to work? That's it it's ridiculous! All right! I saw it cnn in one of their headlines to a story. They said trump is branding impeachment as a co. I love the way that they worded it these branding. It is rebranding impeachment, as echo now. Is that fair? Is it fair to call impeachment echo? Well general, you know impeachment as a general kinds, certainly not. Certainly not a coup is almost the opposite of a coup. It would be under normal circumstances. The impeachment process would be part of what keeps the republic healthy. It would be more like a a cure. The disease
in normal circumstances. What we're saying is not normal circumstances. What we're seeing is people who started with impeachment and then figured out the reasons after the fact. That's pretty well established at this point. So is it fair in terms of being close enough to true when trump is saying that impeachment is a coke? I say yes, I say yes, no. I think you watch me long enough to know that I will disagree when something doesn't make sense. I mean, I hope you see me in a, To know I don't just reflexively agree with everything the administration to us, but they do a lot of stuff right and I do tend to focus on the things they do right, because that's where the interesting stuff is that's where you learn something when they do something right
and trump branding impeachment as a coup is right. It is right because it fits the facts. It's a completely fair description of the intentions of the people involved and the intentions are to undo an election and not for a legitimate reasons. What would you call it. I think, calling it a coup is actually factually ethically morally completely fair, completely appropriate. Now I can see why they don't like it, but I think it's fair now that and then, of course, the the people who are going to complain about trump bread
King at aku, no doubt we're going to say: oh you starting a civil war, you starting a race war. I talked about this yesterday. Do you know what I don't see if I walk outside I'm not going to see any race war? If I talk to my neighbors and I can see in a race war. I don't think there's gonna be a race war because, first of all nobody wants one and that that's all you really need is nobody wants one. That's probably sufficient, you don't need more than that. Literally nobody wants one period. Nobody wants one, it's not going to happen all right, uhm, let's see what else we got going on here now. I think that was most of it. I had all the hype
got any questions bernie in the hospital two stents put in? Is that true. did bernie gasp launched, because that would end him. I don't know that that's true. Can somebody confirm that bernie stents I'm just going to search it while you're. Here, I don't think that's true. Cancelled events until further notice. Oh, it is true. So abc is this current yeah october second bernie sanders age. Seventy eight cancelled events until further note,
Just after being hospitalised a medical evaluation, you found to have blockage in one artery and two stents were inserted, he's conversing and in good spirits and he's done is done uh. So, oh, let me let me wish bernie sanders well. This is no time to be political, but you he can help it causes running for president. You know everything's political if you're running for president. She clearly you know take that out of it. But let me just say: bernie sanders has been a national treasure. Even if you hate everything he's ever said 'cause, I think you could respect people for their passion and for fighting for things. You certainly change the conversation. These change,
the entire democratic party, he's moved things which he thought were crazy into the well. Let's talk about it. Realm he's been a good fighter. He's had infinite energe he's inspired people. I I think, use a patriot. I think he's a patriot. Even if you disagree with everything he's ever said or done. I think he's a patriot, and so I wish him well, but at age, seventy eight. If you are hospitalized during a campaign with a fairly serious heart condition, even though the treatment of it seems fairly trivial, I think you're done as a candidate. Is that too harsh tell me in the comments. Do you think that's the end of it, because if you had a choice of warren or sanders, and one of them didn't look like he could make it to the finish line, 'cause he's seventy eight and now he's got a medical problem. It would be.
ok, be seventy eight with no medical problem. Well, I don't know how okay. That would be, but I mean it wouldn't be okay with me. But apparently is supporters didn't care but I don't know how you could have a major cardio situation at age, seventy eight- obviously you'll have to pull back on his schedule for a while it. So we wish you well, but that should end his campaign in a sense now I was expecting by then to come up with this kind of an excuse. First, it's not an excuse and burns case. I'm sure you'd want this to happen, but I was so biden to have some kind of a a health event, whether real or imagined, because it once you reach a certain age, you're pretty much in and out of the doctor's office. Once every two weeks are you I'm using right
a certain age and you get pretty acquainted with your doctor, so I feel sorry for burning it. Well it apparently the operation was completely successful, so there's nothing to feel sorry about in terms of his health looks like medical community did its job, so good job for the medical community and we wish him well. He is a communist to wants us all in chains chain. As I say well, I think that might be a slight exaggeration. I'm now you don't get a sympathy vote for president there's no such thing as the sympathy vote for president. Now that the impeach, the impeachment thing there were some poll, they showed that a number of people were against impeachment. Just because they know would be bad for democrats. The democrats
against it because I knew would be bad for democrats, so the basement is not as simple as the situation is more anger situation, anna strategic political situation and here comes comma, I don't think come layers would be the natural recipient of bernie's voters. I think they go to war if worn takes up arms. So here's the sequence of events bernie will drop in the polls is available. His support will go to elizabeth warren. Elizabeth warren will become the uncontested front. Runner,
If you're behind, what is your one claim for being in the race that you're the one who can win? What's it look like if biden thinks he can't win the nomination once worn his commanding lead and once warm absorbs bernie's people? I think that's going to happen. I don't think they're going to biden, especially if your candidate had a age related health problem. Are you going to move here vote to the other guy who's that age? If that's the seems like a stretch, so. The logical thing that's going to happen is a bernie. Support will go down. Warren support will go up sufficient issues, the front runner and then the entire reason for biden disappears. Widens reason for running will disappear. If he's not the front runner, he only makes sense as an unquestioned front runner. The moment he's not.
Is completely irrelevant in second place in second place, he has no relevance to anything and he's going to know it and anybody who might give them money or sport him is going to know it as well. So the likely sequence of events warren goes to number. One biden no longer has a reason to be in the race. Bernie becomes irrelevant in the race whether he stays in or not. He might. He might drop out if warren ghost, and then you can start looking around for the next level down and you'll see a bomb for yang and to judge and maybe harris maybe harris and maybe others so it looks like that's the way it's lining up. Let me tell you if I get my kamala prediction right.
You have to admit now, I'm not saying I'm not going to say it will be right, but I'm sticking with the prediction 'cause. All of the reasons for the production are still in place. I just have one additional fact that she's a bad campaigner, but it looks fixable, So that's what we got going on right now, it's all fun and remember, snakes and alligators and boats. There are no good without freaking lasers on their heads. That's a reference to doctor evil and well mostly do that reference. The doctor evil with the frickin lasers somebody says: hillarys goes lighting. I say zero chance of hillary. The reason I say zero chance of hillary is because number one and she would not take a second beating and I don't think she could handle the risk of losing.
second time number. Two. Nothing would motivate trump supporters more than hillary in the race it would be. the best thing ever, two or three or whatever up to Hillary does not strike me as a spontaneous personality, meaning that if she were planning to run or even if she had a secret desire to run We would have seen it. She would have already had a meeting with ex somebody would have I I you know I just talked to her. It would be something like fundraising. You would see signs of it. She's not going to just go From zero to a hundred miles per hour, without all the stuff in between hillary does not strike me as an unprepared. the date. Should I don't think she would run unprepared uh. That's part of the reason people like her right. I mean she was you
sirius detail oriented person, so I just don't see respond. Klay getting, and it would be so out of an of brand all right, that's enough for now, so he says you are underestimating booted edge. Maybe I think going to judge and. Who else is down there cory booker? You know that you can see somebody who is six place or whatever rising up to Third, I can see that happening in an bye. For now