Episode 528 Scott Adams - Manufactured Word-News, China Trade, Russia, Iran

ba-bum ba-bum ba-bum Papa Papa Papa bum hey everybody hello Kevin Robert come on in here it's time for coffee with Scott Adams we've got lots to talk about been saving it up over the weekend I'm home and I'm ready to go are you ready to go if you are grab your cup your mug your glass you sign your jealous your service your flasks fill it with your favorite liquid and don't forget your tankers I like coffee enjoy me now for the simultaneous it well there's a lot of so-called news today let's get right on it as you're watching the tensions flare with Iran and the United States are you having the same feeling that I'm having which is that I'm glad that Trump is president and not really anybody else and I'm not sure we could have said that two years ago to you know two and a half years ago we would all sort of be guessing what Trump would do if he were president but now we have a better idea and we know that the last thing that Trump wants to do is start a war with Iran it's just the last thing but we also know that he's famously unpredictable so there's one thing that Iran can't be sure about Iran can't be sure that he doesn't want to start a war with Iran so do you remember the days when people would say that dumb old unpredictable Trump he'll be no good in the international stage because he doesn't know anything he'll start a war or he'll be impulsive all the things that they said about him but now what do we say about him the things we can say about him now is that he seems pretty consistent about not wanting to get into unhelpful Wars and war with Iran would be pretty darn unhelpful so he's created a pattern where the country actually trusts that the last frickin thing he wants is to get into a war it doesn't matter if it's Iran doesn't matter who it is the last thing he wants is to get into a war now you know John Bolton is part of the administration you people of course are saying well we're not so sure about John Bolton you might want to get into war he loves war they say about him I'm now saying that but people say that I don't know that they're wrong I'm just saying that people say that but don't you feel comfortable that John Bolton cannot convince President Trump to get into a war unless Trump really wants the war on his own and I don't think he does do you see any chance that John Bolton times 10 other John Bolton's could change this presidents mind you don't right it doesn't even seem you don't even hold that as as a fear I see zero chance that John Bolton can change Trump's mind to make him get into war that you did not want to get into it's just I can't hold those thoughts in my head that trumps mind can be changed by John Bolton but I don't know that I would feel the same about any other president I feel as though any any president we knew less well you'd say I don't know maybe they can maybe get talked into it at the same time we also feel confident that if President Trump needs to take some kind of military action should events transpire that makes that more more obviously a good choice you also you you also are positive he could do it you know the president Trump could pull the trigger if events require that so it's sort of the perfect place today at the moment and everyone's well you have to step back and say oh yeah he's sort of exactly the right President for this time in space he might not be the right president twenty years for them might have been the wrong president twenty years ago but for this exact time he's sort of perfect in this this one area there hi we're hearing rumors that Biden might be considering Harris as his running mate to get that balance looking ticket put a woman on there put a person of color on there and I say to myself there's no way Biden can win this is there am I wrong because no matter what Biden does it's kind of not going to sit well with his own team because if he does pick a woman and or a person of color for his running mate yesterday going to look like that's the only reason he did it because it would be I mean assuming that they they meet the minimum qualifications and most of the people running do where all of them as far as I know but it's not gonna look right it's it's not gonna look like progress isn't it's gonna feel it's gonna feel like Mondale and who is his running mate I can't remember it's gonna feel like yeah yeah the white guy the old white guy is gonna be in charge if they win but we'll throw you a bone you know we'll just we'll give you a little something just to make you feel good yet Geraldine Ferraro was Mondale's running mate it feels like Geraldine Ferraro in other words it feels like the past it feels like something you would have done thirty years ago but that you shouldn't even be having the conversation in 2019 the conversation you should be having in 2019 is either the the top top part of the ticket is a woman or person of color or LGBTQ all right that would be a 20-19 conversation or or Biden is just the most qualified most likely to win and he picks whoever is the most qualified to be vice president and you don't care what that person yes you just don't care it's just not part of the conversation that would feel like 2019 but what doesn't feel like 2019 is let's run an old white guy and man will make the base happy by throwing to the vice president just to just to give them a little treat that just it just doesn't feel like 2019 does it it just doesn't sit right I don't know I don't think it'll work with his bases either so he's got a real problem because whichever way he goes with a vice presidential conversations it's gonna look half wrong to half the people there's no clean win there all right let's talk about conservatives being kicked off of social media platforms have we not seen several conservatives who were temporarily suspended get back on Twitter we've seen that right so who saw a car paid anthem he had a brief suspension it was it was reversed and he's back we saw that with James Woods his his tweet was an emerson quote hang them all but all he had to do was delete that quote or I imagine I imagine Twitter would have been fine if he if he did the quote again but add in the context if all he did was delete the original quote and retweeted it with I was trying you know I meant to quote Emerson I don't mean literally hanging anybody he could have made the same statement but in a clearer way would have totally been back on Twitter if you wanted now it turns out that James Woods has chosen to make a would say a principled stand for free speech meaning that he will not go back on Twitter unless he can say the tweets exactly the way he said it I would say he's dying on the smallest little hill so you know James Woods can do whatever he wants to do it's his decision Ike so I'm not gonna second-guess it but it's a very small hill it's not really free speech it's about clarity it's about saying what you mean in a clearer way that's sort of all Twitter is asking of him isn't it if you think about it is Twitter asking anything beyond could this be a little more clear so we know you're not asking for violence that doesn't feel like the biggest problem in the world it feels like the tiniest little problem but James Woods for whatever reason and I'm not going to second-guess him would like to make this a stand that that he wants to take I don't have a problem with that it's just it's the tiniest tiniest little problem I personally wouldn't take a stand on such a tiny thing and I think there were a few other conservatives who had their bands or suspensions reversed so the thing to look for here is the slippery slope I always tell you there's no such thing as a slippery slope because there will be counter forces that that emerge to stop things from sliding forever unless we want them to slide forever and then of course that's what we want to happen so if you saw that none of those none of those suspensions had been reversed that would be DEFCON 25 worst thing in the world you should be worried about that but if you see if you see things you think didn't seem right and you see some number of them get reversed you started to see something that looks like balance returning to the system it's sort of a system that will get out of balance probably on a regular basis but the public will weigh and balance will be found there will always be a few people you think should not have been banned but that will just always be the case we live in a world where people don't have the same opinions so I would say continue to watch this you should continue to be very concerned about it but at the moment it's showing signs that the slippery slope is not some direct March to getting rid of all conservatives and that doesn't seem to be the case based on the evidence all right I almost don't want to talk about this next topic but I'm forced into it I really don't want to talk about this I can't tell you how much I don't want to talk about the thing I'm gonna talk about next but I have sort of an obligation to do it uh it's it's actually just painful I swear to god it it it hurts me and I don't mean that as an exaggeration I feel I feel physical discomfort on this next topic I have to defend a OSE it gets worse wait a minute it gets worse I'm also going to defend rasheed to lie to lie B I don't know how to pronounce reveille both of them are getting the fine people treatment this week do you know what the fine people is that's where people took presidents Trump's quote about the fine people in Charlottesville they drop out the second part of his statement where he said I'm not talking about the the Nazis and the way supremacist so they cut that part out and then people think that he's saying the opposite of what he was saying now when I point that out to people who believed that the president called races fine people what do they do let me give you some context so you see the puking already people will be signing off like crazy here in a minute when I point out to people that they just didn't read the transcript totally and when they do it's obvious that what they believed about the president was a hundred percent wrong and is completely clear because it says so right in the words what do people say do they ever say ever even once do they ever say oh my god I guess I read that wrong the whole time I've been duped I changed my mind to the opposite of what I thought for three years nobody does that or two years whatever it is nobody does it I'm watching exactly the same thing happened with AOC with her the world is going to end in 12 years because of climate change when aoc said in whatever interview that that if we don't do something about climate change the the world will end or be destroyed in 12 years I read that and I heard it when I listened to it and I said to myself oh she doesn't mean literally the world is ending in 12 years it's obvious in context that this is just hyperbole and that what she really means to me it seemed obvious in context that what she meant was if we don't get really really serious in the next 12 years it'll be too late 12 was sort of a random even number it could have been 10 could have been 15 I don't think that part was important she was just saying if you don't do something super super aggressive in the next decade ish it's gonna be the end of the world and the world meaning bad things happening with climate change doesn't really mean the end of the world okay so when she says the world is good man she doesn't mean literally we all die just bad bad things are gonna happen when she says 12 years she doesn't mean 12 years it should be obvious to anybody who heard that that she was using hyperbole now when I point that out what do people say to me they say exactly what they said on the other side when they heard the fine people's statement wasn't true did they ever say oh well now that you explained it to me I get it he didn't mean fine people were racists he meant the other people no they never said it they say I heard it with my own ears it was literally what she said Scott stop trying to Gaslight me she said clearly and unambiguously in these words that in 12 years the world will come to an end because of climate change how can you say she didn't say it she said it directly in exactly those words it's just the fine people thing in Reverse mister the other side having the same mental breakdown as as the Liberals do when they hear the fine people think so here's what a overseas had been so that was that was my original interpretation I think those of you who've been watching me on periscope know that I'd never took the bait on that twelve-year thing I'm not the one who ever thought that was ever serious I didn't think she meant it seriously I thought she assumed people would you know understand the context but not so here's her here's her tweet of it so AMC says this is a technique of the GOP to take dry humor plus sarcasm literally and then quote fact-checking and that's exactly what people were doing they were taking her statement which was not a serious literal statement and their fact-checking it as if it could have been meant literally it's embarrassing it's really kind of embarrassing because that's exactly what's happening and she's so right now let me stop for those of you who don't know this I'm no fan of a overseas policies and I think she's a racist I don't like her at all but it's also true that she's good at persuasion so I'm willing to say that she has some qualities which are high-end well I can disagree with other parts because I'm an adult I can do that so she that she gives her examples she goes like the quote world ending in 12 years thing then she says you'd have to have the social intelligence of a sea sponge to think it's literal kind of agree that's exactly what I thought when I saw people taking it literally I thought to myself subversion of are they joking are they pretending they're taking it literally you couldn't really be taking this literally and then I know that I observe that people are at least acting like they're taking it literally and people are piling onto me on social media like exactly the same way the left piled on to me about defiant people thing and they have the same attitude and they say it the same way it's like it's Groundhog Day yeah all we did is change the topic but the way people are responding is identical I heard her say it oh let me get the quote for you are you confused about the quote let me show you the exact words Scott how could you say there's something so clear these exact words how could you possibly say she doesn't mean it well here's how I can say that I know how words work if you know how words work in my case I'm a professional writer so it's sort of my professional career responsibility to know how words work and in particular I'm sort of a world expert at knowing what a joke is that's thirty years has been my job I know what a joke is I know when somebody's serious I know when they're exaggerating because I know how words work apparently and I've told you this before at least a third of the country doesn't have a sense of humor and I mean that in the literal sense the same way some number of people don't have can't carry a tune I would be one of them the same way some people are blind you know people have all kinds of different capabilities and about a third of the public literally can't recognize a joke unless it's unless it's really you know obvious and so she calls it dry humor and sarcasm I don't think those are exactly the right words she should have said hyperbole but she doesn't want to say I probably because she doesn't want to lose the urgency that she put into the original statement because people sort of believed it and then and then what happens next when people realize that oh it is kind of obvious that she didn't mean this literally what do people do do they say oh oh god I took that literally you got me I completely thought she meant that literally but now that she's explained it was not litter and now Scott that you've explained that you took it that way the whole time and will you see it in context yes yes it's on me why did I ever take that literally what was I thinking did anybody do that no nobody did that they all mocked me for not understanding that she must be serious and then they start asking questions well if if she didn't mean it what why did other people repeat it because I guess Beto and other people started using that 12 12 year thing well I don't know why other people repeated it it's probably a combination some probably believed it some were probably using it as for hyperbole some maybe didn't care they just thought it was a convenient thing to say and then she said the GOP is basically this is a overseas tweet GOP is basically Dwight from the office so who knows okay that was pretty good all right because you we all know Dwight from the office and it's it's a pretty good tweet so again I think Ames he is a racist I don't support her policies but when she said the world is going to end in 12 years you should have interpreted that as we'd better get really really serious in the next decade or so super serious or else were in big trouble if you interpreted it any other way that's sort of on you but in our political world we'll make news out of it and turn this nothing into news all right this gets worse if you hated that you're gonna really ain't this yeah I expect to see my numbers just like drop to zero on this next one so there's reporting that what's-her-name representative where did I put that okay representative to lie B I don't know how to pronounce it so it was reported that there she said that she feels a calming feeling when she thinks about the Holocaust she has a calming feeling when she thinks about the Holocaust now given that she's Pro Islam I don't know if that's what great way to describe her but she's she has been accused of being anti-israel that's the accusation I won't read her mind but that's the accusation against her now do you think that she said that she has a calming feeling about the Holocaust because it makes her feel good do you think that's what she was me that she intended to say it doesn't doesn't you're the smart part of your brain tell you maybe this is at a context ah nobody would say that in public are you just automatically don't you see something wrong with us even before I tell you what's wrong with it don't you know this can't possibly be true and of course it's not true because exactly like the fine people quote where the the the clarification was left out when he said I'm not talking about the racist when this is reported they report the clarification but they bury it so the headline will be this you said this terrible thing which you figured a little bit out of context you just can't figure out how in the world this could mean anything except something terrible your imagination can't get you there you hear it and you say okay even if I'm being charitable I can think of no way to interpret this other than the worst possible thing that she somehow felt good about the Holocaust well here's the rest of what she said without any prompting all right so this is her statement with no prompting the other thing she said was she talked about it being the Holocaust being tragedy horrific persecution of Jews across the world etc so she says in direct language that the Holocaust was a tragedy and horrific persecution so she's not a soft battling it this is her own statement with no clear nobody asks for a clarification she was just continuing to talk so is there any doubt about what she thinks about the Holocaust I think that's very clear it's a tragedy right and then she gives us some context and it's clear that what she meant was that here's my interpretation that the Holocaust was this horrible tragedy everybody agrees she agrees you agree we're all in the same page nobody's questioning that but when she remembers it she understands a time when the Palestinians and it hurt in her telling of the story I know this is not my telling to the story but in her telling of history the Palestinians and the the Jews essentially worked together to find some way that the Jews could be safe with their own their own land and she said well this was bad for the Palestinians but she feels some calmness that some good came out of it which is that the Jews were safe after the Holocaust now that's how I interpret it to me that's what she said but it's very easy for the news to turn this into she was she has a good feeling about the Holocaust she didn't say that she said the opposite of that she called it a tragedy etc she just said that it was a time when the Palestinians of the Jews had a productive relationship and that gives her a calming feeling about the potential for future potential for a future working together because there was a time when we worked together we meaning there was two groups now so that turned into news this is what I call the word news where somebody just says something in a in artful way and then somebody says well that's sounded to me a little like you were saying something terrible so let's pretend we think that's what you said and act as though you really meant it when obviously you didn't mean that obviously she didn't mean that all right so I'll put this in the context of if you watched how people squirmed and struggled and went into cognitive dissonance when the fine people hoax was revealed to them you can see much of the same thing in Reverse when people find out the aoc never meant that the world is going to be destroyed in 12 years the obvious interpretation is that we have to get really serious with in 12 years according to her or or there will be massive consequences which you could argue is true or not but at least that's the correct interpretation all right here's here's news that makes me laugh Schumer Chuck Schumer said he was telling Pompeo who's gonna meet with Putin I guess he said quote during your meeting with Vladimir Putin it is critical that you warn him that any action to interfere in our elections will be met with an immediate and robust response to which I say are we to believe according to Chuck Schumer that the government of the United States has not yet told Putin to stay out of our elections or else something bad will happen are we to believe that that message has not yet ever been delivered what now I I don't know that it has been delivered I wasn't in the room I haven't you know haven't listened to any private conversations between Russians in the United States but nothing would surprise me more than to find out that against all common sense against all logic against everything you know to be smart there's somehow that never came up nobody mentioned that there's nobody in the United States who ever said to Russia if you do this again this is gonna be really bad for you nobody said that to them maybe maybe I mean anything's possible but it seems to me that that's pretty much what we would have told them and and even if we didn't tell them that second question do we really need to tell them that is it not obvious as pun as Putin not paying attention to the United States for two years he hasn't noticed that this would be sort of a sticky point with us I'm sure shimmer says this to make us think that the administration never had that idea it's like Oh Thank You Chuck Wow we were just gonna go over there and drink vodka but now that you mention it maybe we should talk about some political stuff while we're there what oh yeah the election stuff let's talk about that anyway I found that funny I'm watching the Trump apparently quoted Tom Fenton and the quote was that the director of the FBI is protecting the same gang that tried to overthrow the presidents do any illegal coup so I kind of like the fact that the president and his supporters are referring to the whole Russia hoax thing as a coup because it I it feels fair you know I'm the one who's been having a great you know a history of saying that you know words matter and you have to understand what it's hyperbole and what it's not but this you look like a coup we just don't know who was thinking of it that way and who was thinking of it is I just better do my job and check on this because there's some question about Russian connection I think some members the FBI were just doing their job didn't think there was anything there but they figured well we'd better check so I think some of it was that but clearly there was something else going on so there were some people who had different intentions we know that for sure look at all the news that we've had lately that turned on the meaning of words now I've told you before that one of the ways you can you can know you're entering the golden age an age where a lot of our big problems are solved or on the way to being solved is that we run out of problems but the news still has to fill the news with stuff and if you don't have problems what are they gonna do well they're gonna manufacture so listen to the things that would have been news and it's all about words was the Russia collusion thing a coup or an event or not was as spying or was an investigation was it a hoax is is the climate change a hoax a chinese hoax or is it science was there collusion or was there conspiracy was there obstruction or was there just somebody doing his job I mean almost all of our news is about somebody interpreting words did the president say find people did a OSI say that bla bla so pretty much the news is people acting as if they don't understand how words work that's that that's something like 80% of all the news is that somebody has to pretend they don't know how ordinary words work and so they misinterpret it it's like oh I get it you only read the first part of the sentence let's make some news out of this well if you read the second part of the sentence you'd know that the first part wasn't misleading well let's just ignore the second part somebody says look at all Taleb comments why would that matter it wouldn't matter to this so apparently as the the Democrats continue to self-destruct Nancy Pelosi asked she invited an anti-israel mob to deliver the prayers and in the US House just think about this Nancy Pelosi I assume accidentally I think she just didn't know who she had invited invites him to mom to give the prayer and he's got a pretty solid record of being anti-israel I saw some of the quotes and it's pretty hard to imagine they were taken into context and I thought it's like they stopped trying or something I mean are they are they trying to lose this election I'm starting to see people and speculate that the reason running Biden is that they know they won't win and then so Biden is just the sacrifice sacrifice all politician everybody's thinking okay Biden is not going to ever want to run for president after this election I mean you'll be far too well then so we can we can burn one use the old white guy we can say see old white guys don't work and then we go back to what we wanted to do if you're a Democrat and so people are actually talking like this whole Biden thing it looks like they're not serious I mean it's starting to look like they don't even they're not even playing to win but here let me give you a prediction the news business relies on exciting news so if you're CNN you you're Fox News what do you think about having a president Trump well you love it you love him or you hate him but he's interesting all the time President Trump is interesting from the moment he wakes up to the time he goes to sleep if he ever sleeps we don't even know if he sleeps but he's interesting all the time he is gold for the news business and everybody would acknowledge that what is Joe Biden Joe Biden is whatever it kills the news business Joe Biden is so freaking boring you know except for his his gaffes and whatever that I think the news business looks at him and thinks oh my god he might actually get the nomination this election will be horrible it just won't be fun at all because most of the things that they want to say about the president don't work if he's running against Biden here are things that don't work hey we shouldn't have an old white guy as president well that doesn't work hey we can't have somebody who long ago said something that you know 32 years ago sounds terrible to our ears in 2019 well that's what they say about Trump right it's the same thing we can't have a guy who is always giving shoulder rubs and trying to kiss women may or may not like it well that's like the main thing they say about Trump some version of that you've grabbed him by the whatever so Biden is the worst matchup because all of the fun stuff that they want to say about him oh and what about Trump has business dealings with you know whatever he's in it for the money and then you've got this hunter Biden story in the Ukraine completely ruins all of the attacks there's nothing that the news can use that's juicy and fun that you can use if Biden runs against Trump there's just he just it's just empty so here's my prediction the news business can't let Biden get elected that's my prediction and I'll go further than this I'll go way further what and and I want you to observe how far over my skis I am I'm Way over my skis now meaning that I'm making a prediction this should sound crazy to you and that is that the the professional news organizations that are anti Trump are gonna start trying to suppress Biden's run it may not be obvious but I think he's gonna be starved of attention and I think they'll start promoting whoever they can figure out might give him a run for his money maybe not Bernie I think they're gonna have to look for something to make it a horse race on the left to make it interesting at least in the primary season and also to make it interesting in the actual election so I would expect that you're gonna stop hearing about Biden as much as you think you ought to for him being such a front-runner let me ask you this is Biden still campaigning think about it when was the last time you saw Biden interviewed on CNN laylee who is the most important politician in the world who was not present in trouble Biden because he's the you know the the standard-bearer in terms of the polls anyway he looks like he'll be the standard-bearer shouldn't we be seeing non-stop Biden coverage shouldn't CNN and MSNBC have it have him on and his surrogates on all the time shouldn't we be seeing clips of his speeches shouldn't he be giving what did they call them sprays and gaggles and whatever look like doing what Trump does all the time which is answering questions informally with the press where's all that doesn't it seem to you that they're already starting to downplay him and when they talk about him do they ever talk about him with interest when he's being reported on they act like they're going to sleep just talking about it so my prediction is this that the news industry will start to look obviously anti Biden and it will become more and more obvious but probably not unless they can they can a be test some other competitor to to get their get their visibility up a little so you may you may see them testing all the lesser candidates to see if they can get somebody anybody who would be interesting that they can sort of promote next to Biden and maybe take his place all right that's my prediction I listen to an expert on Chinese trade they use actually a China China expert he said that the real problem with the China trade deal and the reason that China backed out or at least a big reason that may not be the only reason is the way it was written and that the trade deal the one we thought China was almost ready to sign apparently the language was humiliation so the deal was and was written in the form of China if you do this we will punish you this way China if you do this we will hurt you this chyna if you do this we will you know will treat you like a chill a child will punish you and and the China expert said it doesn't matter if it's a smart deal a good deal it doesn't matter if it makes sense doesn't matter if the numbers work none of that matters because it's just a humiliation and that the the hardliners in China looked at it and said ah I don't care about what's fair or anything else why we can't sign this this is completely disrespectful it'll makes us look like children who needed to be scolded and I don't know I'm not a China expert so I'm not going to put my own opinion on that but if that's what's happening then the only way we're gonna get past it is some kind of a deal that makes it look like they won well at the same time it looks like we won so somehow this has to be recast maybe they need to add variables for example there may be something else outside of trade that China wants something that you know we wouldn't have as big a problem giving them so there might be something might be something that we could widen this negotiation so that would be something in the deal where the Chinese could say oh yeah we got that now there may also be a way to word the deal so it's not humiliating in other words it could be just the way it's presented so you could say for example if either side does acts the penalty will be why knowing in advance that only one side is likely to do that thing so for example if we said if either the United States or China steals the intellectual property of the other the penalty will be X even if you think that that will never happen that the United States will never to steal their IP in any important way and that really the only problem is that they're stealing arms even if you believe that's true you could certainly write the deal so that you disguise that so that that China will sign the deal that says yeah finally we Chinese got a deal this says China will that says the United States will stop stealing our intellectual property maybe they just need to be able to say that so I certainly hope that our negotiators are smart enough to frame a deal so at least on paper doesn't look like a humiliation I hope we're smart enough to do that but at least one person who knows more than I do thinks we're not smart enough to do that so we'll find them I saw a news article that I like to point out positive scientific news just so you know what's coming apparently some researchers I think it was that Lawrence Lawrence Berkeley labs figured out how to make a type of plastic that is easy to recycle now that might not sound like a big deal but apparently current plastics or have lots of different forms and they've got you know they've got a coloring dyes in them and and other chemicals in them and if you try to recycle them it's sort of a mess it's hard it's hard to sort out and repurpose plastic the way it's currently made but in this lab they came up with a form of plastic which apparently used as good as any other plastic but it has the unique quality that you can break it down to it's what do they call it - its smallest level and then reconstituted and it becomes a perfectly new good new product so there's a new kind of plastic that could change forever the you know the plastic that's floating in the ocean it could change forever how much oil we need to use to turn into plastic it could be yeah at the molecular level yes so it's something you can reconstitute at the molecular level thank you for those that work anyway who knows if that will be a big deal or not but when you see that kind of development you have to say to yourself mmm there we have a very resourceful world and and maybe plastic is another one of those things we just solved or is on its way to being solved all right let's see we have to talk about Alyssa Milano's sex Reich I told you that I gave Alyssa Milano and a +4 persuasion and getting our attention with a the so-called sex Frank the idea is that she was suggesting that women stop having sex with their boyfriends and husbands until women have control of their bodies meaning the abortion debate and of course she's getting pushback even from our own side so this is another example of how the Democrats are eating themselves so even even feminists are saying Alyssa Milano the way you frame this it's as if you're saying that sex is something that women give to men like a gift instead of saying instead of saying we both like sex which would be the more modern interpretation and I don't really have much opinion about the pushback of this I you know I I think that I would say that Alyssa Milano is probably more woke than the people who were criticizing her for being under woke and I think that you can't tell when I say that she's more were more woke I think that she's beyond beyond the old stereotype of sex is something that women give to man I think she's beyond that to the scientific level and at the scientific level men really like sex they'll do a lot to get it all right so people are trying to treat Alyssa Milano as though she's somehow taking this backwards it's like oh it's like the old days when it was like you know the the thing that women have to offer is just making babies and giving you sex you're taking this back to the past Alyssa Milano now I'm no fan of first by the way not her political politics but I am a fan of her political activism because I think she's sincere she is putting the work in I always respect it when people work hard no matter what it is and she's getting attention for a cause those are all very effective things so you can disagree with her all you want but it's hard to disagree with the effectiveness of it she got her attention anyway so my point is that I think Alyssa Milano was taking a scientific point of view in a more modern view than her critics and the more modern view is yes obviously women have more to offer than just sex we should already be past that question but it's also true men really like sex and they'll do a lot to get it so this might work from a political standpoint it's not it's not crazy it's funny it's funny but it's not crazy somebody says LMFAO you tried to say she's smart now that's funny well I have not offered an opinion on her intelligence I have said that she is working hard I've said that she's sincere neither of those have anything to do with intelligence and that the effect of what she's done is that we're talking about it that's just the fact we're talking about her she's in the news she's a headline she got attention none of those have anything to do with intelligence I'm just saying that what she did was all what she wanted to do if somebody says I'm going to do X and then right in front of you they work hard and they accomplish acts why can't we just say so she's trying to do X it looks like she's succeeding at that that's that's the beginning in the end of the story I just don't think it's helpful to just automatically hate everything about the people that are on the other side yeah you can say they're doing some good stuff you just don't like the other stuff it's okay you can do that the book there was a book I was recommending yesterday called invisible influences it's about how easily people are are brainwashed and persuaded and one of the tests that they do is one you've seen before in these Street interviews how many times have you seen somebody do these one of these gotcha Street interviews where they will pretend that a Democrat policy is a Republican policy and vice versa and they'll try to get people who say they're in one side to back the policy of the other side just by not telling them it's the other side's policy and how often does that succeed almost every time almost every time you can get a Democrat to strongly back a Republican policy if you fool them and told them it was a Democrat policy and vice versa it works both ways now that has been demonstrated scientifically in other words they've done tests where they'll present information without context and see what people think and then they'll present it with the context of a different group and they'll say this is the Democrat view what do you think or this is the Republican view what do you think and what you find is that it doesn't matter what the facts of the case are it doesn't matter what the situation is doesn't matter what the argument is completely doesn't matter it only mattered to people which team it came from the moment they heard that it came from their own team or the other team they took aside and then they argued why it made sense but that argument why it made sense was an afterthought because they didn't make a decision based on it making sense they simply heard which team it was and then they joined the team and by the way many of these studies they're looking for a statistically significant effect right it's like a lot of studies would be like well yes we move people by five percent so we think this is pretty valid this isn't a five percent effect this is closer to a hundred percent you can move almost a hundred percent of Republicans and Democrats to a view that's the opposite of their own view simply by telling them that that their team agrees with it that's it almost a hundred percent think about that do you believe that you have free will it's been disproven your free will in terms of political opinion has been scientifically conclusively disproved you can repeat repeat the experiment in a hundred different ways and 100 different varieties and do you know what happens it's always the same people don't use any kind of common sense or facts to make political decisions now I think it might be different for the professionals because they've got a lot going on but for the voters we're simply watching the news and then forming opinions none of it has to do with the reason none of it has to do with the fact people simply take sides and then argue why it made sense for them to take that side anyway that explains all the the word news that you see the reason that each team is making news and of the way somebody worded something this is because they can and because they actually talked themselves into believing everything the other side says is crazy and stupid all right ah free will does not exist that is correct it is an illusion how do we get our team on our teams in the first place that's a good question so there's also research that shows that there's a genetic component to whether you're conservative or liberal and that has been pretty well established so so there's a big part that you're just born with born with some kind of impulse one way or the other beyond that you're probably born into a family that shares those same impulses because DNA so you're probably born into it with a natural inclination to lean one way it's reinforced by the fact that your family leans that way they have a similar DNA so it's a combination of genetic and social forces now there are people who change sides but I'll bet they don't change sides often unless at the same time there's something else changing in their life in other words they may be less close to the people who they used to agree with and they may have met a few people that are influential on the other side and so it's it's because the people change them not because the argument change them might be because they get older my they have discovered something but for the most part people just join the team and then argue why they white made sense to be there now I've told you for a couple years that one of the tricks I used to remain independent and thought as much as a human can is that I don't vote and I don't identify with either party and part of the way I do that which is hard it's hard to not identify with the left of the right is I spend most of my time saying good things about Trump's skills as a persuader but I also identify myself as left to Bernie which is sort of a category that I'm not even sure exists but because I brand myself as ambiguous in theory according to everything we know about science and persuasion you should give me a more clear opinion of both teams because I don't say I'm not on the team and I don't say I am on the team I observe very few people in the United States are actually observers somebody says now you're lying I'm not sure which part you think I'm lying about but you can put it in a comment if you want I'll be happy to comment on it so the the part that I would say for sure and those of you been watching me can say this with you can confirm this I do take opinions on both sides so you have seen me spread my opinion across various political ideologies so when I see President Trump say the fine fine people think I'm not predisposed to think he's a monster so I can see it more clearly when aoc were to lobby Slaby I wish I knew how to pronounce her name I feel bad about that but when they say things that I may not agree with but I can at least understand what they intend to say because I'm not on a team and I do believe it gives you some ability to to see the world more clearly by not being associated with the team it's like a superpower - liebe I see lots of different people helping me pronounce that but none of it's helping could you change the impact of a speech with a laugh track yes you could yeah you can change how any communication is how it is received by changing the context and a laugh track is would be part of the context so yes you can absolutely change communication by changing the context these are the disingenuous arguments that cost you credibility do you notice there's no reason there so if whoever just said your argument is disingenuous and it's costing you credibility that is a sign of cognitive dissonance it means that I've said something that's triggered you and you have no unit you don't know and your response is to imagine that you can read my mind so somebody here believes they've read my mind and that's something I said is disingenuous in other words that I'm intentionally misleading or lying why would I do that it's exactly the opposite of all of my ambitions my entire ambition is that I can disagree with you and and do it honestly let's look this is my entire brand my brand is not to convince you of something that isn't true or useful I don't have what what possible incentive would I have for that I don't get paid by anybody to do that I have no financial interest it doesn't help my reputation it doesn't make me feel good I have no interest in being disingenuous about any of these topics I don't have a personal stake I'm not running for office I just don't have an interest if I had an interest then you would be I think you would be it would be reasonable for you to say I think he's he's got a self interest here he might not be saying the truth because people who have self interest do not tell the truth my entire ambition is for people to think that I am willing to to tell the truth on both sides that's all I want to accomplish because that's what gives me that's what that's what would give me value all right to have value I have to be legitimate on both sides and if I if I were to say something that you could sit there and say oh that's obviously a lie he's not saying what he means if I did that even for a second it would completely ruin everything that I'm trying to do all right there's a Forbes article about me that says I have an agenda yeah whenever you see anybody writing about anybody whether it's me or anybody else and they purport to know what you're thinking or your your real intentions sometimes they're right but you should assume that by by a large margin they're usually not maybe 60% of the time somebody says you want to be recognized as the smartest person in the room not smartest that that would be a that bar would be too high because you know the smartest people in the world are so smart that they're almost alien creatures and I'm not going to make a play for being the smartest person in the world that's a completely enter and a reach I would like to make a play for developing some systems and techniques to keep one relatively open-minded and and free from the bubbles that we get into so I would like to stake out that I have some technique and it's just technique something anybody can do that keep me relatively free from bias not free from bias because people can't do that nobody can be free from bias but you can use some tools to put a control on it and and I tried to demonstrate that through prediction so if you've been watching you know that my claim is not that I have been right about something but rather than I'm predicting something and you can see that if this filter on the world that I present the persuasion filter as I like to call it then if it's accurate you'll see that the predictions are accurate so that's that's the only standard that I'd like to be judged on all right I got other things to do I'm gonna go do them right now and I hope that you have an amazing day talk to you later

ba-bum ba-bum ba-bum Papa Papa Papa bum

hey everybody hello Kevin Robert come on

in here it's time for coffee with Scott

Adams

we've got lots to talk about been saving

it up over the weekend I'm home and I'm

ready to go are you ready to go if you

are grab your cup your mug your glass

you sign your jealous your service your

flasks fill it with your favorite liquid

and don't forget your tankers

I like coffee enjoy me now for the

simultaneous it well there's a lot of

so-called news today let's get right on

it as you're watching the tensions flare

with Iran and the United States are you

having the same feeling that I'm having

which is that I'm glad that Trump is

president and not really anybody else

and I'm not sure we could have said that

two years ago to you know two and a half

years ago we would all sort of be

guessing what Trump would do if he were

president but now we have a better idea

and we know that the last thing that

Trump wants to do is start a war with

Iran it's just the last thing but we

also know that he's famously

unpredictable so there's one thing that

Iran can't be sure about Iran can't be

sure that he doesn't want to start a war

with Iran so do you remember the days

when people would say that dumb old

unpredictable Trump

he'll be no good in the international

stage because he doesn't know anything

he'll start a war or he'll be impulsive

all the things that they said about him

but now what do we say about him the

things we can say about him now is that

he seems pretty consistent about not

wanting to get into unhelpful Wars and

war with Iran would be pretty darn

unhelpful

so he's created a pattern where the

country actually trusts that the last

frickin thing he wants is to get into a

war it doesn't matter if it's Iran

doesn't matter who it is the last thing

he wants is to get into a war now you

know John Bolton is part of the

administration you people of course are

saying well we're not so sure about John

Bolton you might want to get into war he

loves war they say about him I'm now

saying that but people say that I don't

know that they're wrong

I'm just saying that people say that but

don't you feel comfortable that John

Bolton cannot convince President Trump

to get into a war unless Trump really

wants the war on his own and I don't

think he does do you see any chance that

John Bolton times 10 other John Bolton's

could change this presidents mind you

don't right it doesn't even seem you

don't even hold that as as a fear I see

zero chance that John Bolton can change

Trump's mind to make him get into war

that you did not want to get into it's

just I can't hold those thoughts in my

head that trumps mind can be changed by

John Bolton but I don't know that I

would feel the same about any other

president I feel as though any any

president we knew less well you'd say I

don't know maybe they can maybe get

talked into it at the same time we also

feel confident that if President Trump

needs to take some kind of military

action should events transpire that

makes that more more obviously a good

choice you also you you also are

positive he could do it you know the

president Trump could pull the trigger

if events require that so it's sort of

the perfect place today at the moment

and everyone's well you have to step

back and say oh yeah he's sort of

exactly the right President for this

time in space he might not be the right

president twenty years for them might

have been the wrong president twenty

years ago

but for this exact time he's sort of

perfect in this this one area there hi

we're hearing rumors that Biden might be

considering Harris as his running mate

to get that balance looking ticket put a

woman on there put a person of color on

there and I say to myself there's no way

Biden can win this is there am I wrong

because no matter what Biden does it's

kind of not going to sit well with his

own team because if he does pick a woman

and or a person of color for his running

mate yesterday going to look like that's

the only reason he did it

because it would be I mean assuming that

they they meet the minimum

qualifications and most of the people

running do where all of them as far as I

know but it's not gonna look right it's

it's not gonna look like progress isn't

it's gonna feel it's gonna feel like

Mondale and who is his running mate

I can't remember it's gonna feel like

yeah yeah the white guy the old white

guy is gonna be in charge if they win

but we'll throw you a bone you know

we'll just we'll give you a little

something just to make you feel good yet

Geraldine Ferraro was Mondale's running

mate it feels like Geraldine Ferraro in

other words it feels like the past it

feels like something you would have done

thirty years ago but that you shouldn't

even be having the conversation in 2019

the conversation you should be having in

2019 is either the the top top part of

the ticket is a woman or person of color

or LGBTQ all right that would be a 20-19

conversation or or Biden is just the

most qualified most likely to win and he

picks whoever is the most qualified to

be vice president and you don't care

what that person

yes you just don't care it's just not

part of the conversation that would feel

like 2019 but what doesn't feel like

2019 is let's run an old white guy and

man will make the base happy by throwing

to the vice president just to just to

give them a little treat that just it

just doesn't feel like 2019 does it it

just doesn't sit right

I don't know I don't think it'll work

with his bases either so he's got a real

problem because whichever way he goes

with a vice presidential conversations

it's gonna look half wrong to half the

people there's no clean win there

all right let's talk about conservatives

being kicked off of social media

platforms have we not seen several

conservatives who were temporarily

suspended get back on Twitter we've seen

that right so who saw a car paid anthem

he had a brief suspension it was it was

reversed and he's back we saw that with

James Woods his his tweet was an emerson

quote hang them all but all he had to do

was delete that quote or I imagine I

imagine Twitter would have been fine if

he if he did the quote again but add in

the context if all he did was delete the

original quote and retweeted it with I

was trying you know I meant to quote

Emerson I don't mean literally hanging

anybody he could have made the same

statement but in a clearer way would

have totally been back on Twitter if you

wanted now it turns out that James Woods

has chosen to make a would say a

principled stand for free speech

meaning that he will not go back on

Twitter unless he can say the tweets

exactly the way he said it I would say

he's dying on the smallest little hill

so you know James Woods can do whatever

he wants to do

it's his decision Ike so I'm not gonna

second-guess it but it's a very small

hill it's not really free speech it's

about clarity it's about saying what you

mean in a clearer way that's sort of all

Twitter is asking of him isn't it if you

think about it is Twitter asking

anything beyond could this be a little

more clear so we know you're not asking

for violence that doesn't feel like the

biggest problem in the world it feels

like the tiniest little problem but

James Woods for whatever reason and I'm

not going to second-guess him would like

to make this a stand that that he wants

to take I don't have a problem with that

it's just it's the tiniest tiniest

little problem I personally wouldn't

take a stand on such a tiny thing and I

think there were a few other

conservatives who had their bands or

suspensions reversed so the thing to

look for here is the slippery slope I

always tell you there's no such thing as

a slippery slope because there will be

counter forces that that emerge to stop

things from sliding forever unless we

want them to slide forever and then of

course that's what we want to happen

so if you saw that none of those none of

those suspensions had been reversed that

would be DEFCON 25 worst thing in the

world you should be worried about that

but if you see if you see things you

think didn't seem right and you see some

number of them get reversed you started

to see something that looks like balance

returning to the system it's sort of a

system that will get out of balance

probably on a regular basis but the

public will weigh and balance will be

found there will always be a few people

you think should not have been banned

but that will just always be the case we

live in a world where people don't have

the same opinions so I would say

continue to watch this you should

continue to be very concerned about it

but at the moment it's showing signs

that the slippery slope is not some

direct

March to getting rid of all

conservatives and that doesn't seem to

be the case based on the evidence all

right I almost don't want to talk about

this next topic but I'm forced into it I

really don't want to talk about this I

can't tell you how much I don't want to

talk about the thing I'm gonna talk

about next but I have sort of an

obligation to do it uh it's it's

actually just painful I swear to god it

it it hurts me and I don't mean that as

an exaggeration I feel I feel physical

discomfort on this next topic I have to

defend a OSE it gets worse wait a minute

it gets worse I'm also going to defend

rasheed to lie to lie B I don't know how

to pronounce reveille both of them are

getting the fine people treatment this

week do you know what the fine people is

that's where people took presidents

Trump's quote about the fine people in

Charlottesville they drop out the second

part of his statement where he said I'm

not talking about the the Nazis and the

way supremacist so they cut that part

out and then people think that he's

saying the opposite of what he was

saying now when I point that out to

people who believed that the president

called races fine people what do they do

let me give you some context so you see

the puking already people will be

signing off like crazy here in a minute

when I point out to people that they

just didn't read the transcript totally

and when they do it's obvious that what

they believed about the president was a

hundred percent wrong and is completely

clear because it says so right in the

words what do people say do they ever

say ever even once do they ever say oh

my god I guess I read that wrong the

whole time I've been duped I changed my

mind to the opposite of what I thought

for three years nobody does that or two

years whatever it is nobody does it I'm

watching exactly the same thing happened

with AOC with her the world is going to

end in 12 years because

of climate change when aoc said in

whatever interview that that if we don't

do something about climate change the

the world will end or be destroyed in 12

years I read that and I heard it when I

listened to it and I said to myself oh

she doesn't mean literally the world is

ending in 12 years it's obvious in

context that this is just hyperbole and

that what she really means to me it

seemed obvious in context that what she

meant was if we don't get really really

serious in the next 12 years it'll be

too late

12 was sort of a random even number it

could have been 10 could have been 15 I

don't think that part was important she

was just saying if you don't do

something super super aggressive in the

next decade ish it's gonna be the end of

the world and the world meaning bad

things happening with climate change

doesn't really mean the end of the world

okay so when she says the world is good

man she doesn't mean literally we all

die just bad bad things are gonna happen

when she says 12 years she doesn't mean

12 years it should be obvious to anybody

who heard that that she was using

hyperbole now when I point that out what

do people say to me they say exactly

what they said on the other side when

they heard the fine people's statement

wasn't true did they ever say oh well

now that you explained it to me I get it

he didn't mean fine people were racists

he meant the other people no they never

said it they say I heard it with my own

ears

it was literally what she said Scott

stop trying to Gaslight me she said

clearly and unambiguously

in these words that in 12 years the

world will come to an end because of

climate change how can you say she

didn't say it she said it directly in

exactly those words it's just the fine

people thing in Reverse mister

the other side having the same mental

breakdown as as the Liberals do when

they hear the fine people think so

here's what a overseas had been so that

was that was my original interpretation

I think those of you who've been

watching me on periscope know that I'd

never took the bait on that twelve-year

thing I'm not the one who ever thought

that was ever serious I didn't think she

meant it seriously

I thought she assumed people would you

know understand the context but not so

here's her here's her tweet of it

so AMC says this is a technique of the

GOP to take dry humor plus sarcasm

literally and then quote fact-checking

and that's exactly what people were

doing they were taking her statement

which was not a serious literal

statement and their fact-checking it as

if it could have been meant literally

it's embarrassing

it's really kind of embarrassing because

that's exactly what's happening and

she's so right now let me stop for those

of you who don't know this I'm no fan of

a overseas policies and I think she's a

racist I don't like her at all

but it's also true that she's good at

persuasion so I'm willing to say that

she has some qualities which are

high-end well I can disagree with other

parts because I'm an adult I can do that

so she that she gives her examples she

goes like the quote world ending in 12

years thing then she says you'd have to

have the social intelligence of a sea

sponge to think it's literal kind of

agree that's exactly what I thought when

I saw people taking it literally I

thought to myself subversion of are they

joking are they pretending they're

taking it literally you couldn't really

be taking this literally and then I know

that I observe that people are at least

acting like they're taking it literally

and people are piling onto me on social

media like exactly the same way

the left piled on to me about defiant

people thing and they have the same

attitude and they say it the same way

it's like it's Groundhog Day yeah all we

did is change the topic but the way

people are responding is identical

I heard her say it oh let me get the

quote for you are you confused about the

quote let me show you the exact words

Scott how could you say there's

something so clear these exact words how

could you possibly say she doesn't mean

it

well here's how I can say that I know

how words work if you know how words

work in my case I'm a professional

writer so it's sort of my professional

career responsibility to know how words

work and in particular I'm sort of a

world expert at knowing what a joke is

that's thirty years has been my job I

know what a joke is I know when

somebody's serious I know when they're

exaggerating because I know how words

work apparently and I've told you this

before at least a third of the country

doesn't have a sense of humor and I mean

that in the literal sense the same way

some number of people don't have can't

carry a tune I would be one of them the

same way some people are blind you know

people have all kinds of different

capabilities and about a third of the

public literally can't recognize a joke

unless it's unless it's really you know

obvious and so she calls it dry humor

and sarcasm I don't think those are

exactly the right words she should have

said hyperbole but she doesn't want to

say I probably because she doesn't want

to lose the urgency that she put into

the original statement because people

sort of believed it and then and then

what happens next when people realize

that oh it is kind of obvious that she

didn't mean this literally what do

people do do they say oh oh god I took

that literally you got me I completely

thought she meant that literally but now

that she's explained it was not litter

and now Scott that you've explained that

you took it that way the whole time and

will you see it in context yes yes it's

on me why did I ever take that literally

what was I thinking

did anybody do that no nobody did that

they all mocked me for not understanding

that she must be serious and then they

start asking questions well if if she

didn't mean it

what why did other people repeat it

because I guess Beto and other people

started using that 12 12 year thing well

I don't know why other people repeated

it it's probably a combination some

probably believed it some were probably

using it as for hyperbole some maybe

didn't care they just thought it was a

convenient thing to say and then she

said the GOP is basically this is a

overseas tweet GOP is basically Dwight

from the office so who knows okay that

was pretty good all right because you we

all know Dwight from the office and it's

it's a pretty good tweet so again I

think Ames he is a racist I don't

support her policies but when she said

the world is going to end in 12 years

you should have interpreted that as we'd

better get really really serious in the

next decade or so super serious or else

were in big trouble if you interpreted

it any other way that's sort of on you

but in our political world we'll make

news out of it and turn this nothing

into news all right this gets worse if

you hated that you're gonna really ain't

this yeah I expect to see my numbers

just like drop to zero on this next one

so there's reporting that

what's-her-name representative where did

I put that okay

representative to lie B I don't know how

to pronounce it so it was reported that

there she said that she feels a calming

feeling when she thinks about the

Holocaust

she has a calming feeling when she

thinks about the Holocaust

now given that she's Pro Islam I don't

know if that's what great way to

describe her but she's she has been

accused of being anti-israel that's the

accusation I won't read her mind but

that's the accusation against her now do

you think that she said that she has a

calming feeling about the Holocaust

because it makes her feel good do you

think that's what she was me that she

intended to say it doesn't doesn't

you're the smart part of your brain tell

you maybe this is at a context ah nobody

would say that in public

are you just automatically don't you see

something wrong with us even before I

tell you what's wrong with it don't you

know this can't possibly be true and of

course it's not true because exactly

like the fine people quote where the the

the clarification was left out when he

said I'm not talking about the racist

when this is reported they report the

clarification but they bury it so the

headline will be this you said this

terrible thing which you figured a

little bit out of context you just can't

figure out how in the world this could

mean anything except something terrible

your imagination can't get you there you

hear it and you say okay even if I'm

being charitable I can think of no way

to interpret this other than the worst

possible thing that she somehow felt

good about the Holocaust well here's the

rest of what she said without any

prompting all right so this is her

statement with no prompting the other

thing she said was she talked about it

being the Holocaust being tragedy

horrific persecution of Jews across the

world etc so she says in direct language

that the Holocaust was a tragedy and

horrific persecution so she's not a soft

battling it this is her own statement

with no clear

nobody asks for a clarification she was

just continuing to talk so is there any

doubt about what she thinks about the

Holocaust I think that's very clear it's

a tragedy right and then she gives us

some context and it's clear that what

she meant was that here's my

interpretation that the Holocaust was

this horrible tragedy everybody agrees

she agrees you agree we're all in the

same page nobody's questioning that but

when she remembers it she understands a

time when the Palestinians and it hurt

in her telling of the story I know this

is not my telling to the story but in

her telling of history the Palestinians

and the the Jews essentially worked

together to find some way that the Jews

could be safe with their own their own

land and she said well this was bad for

the Palestinians but she feels some

calmness that some good came out of it

which is that the Jews were safe after

the Holocaust now that's how I interpret

it to me that's what she said

but it's very easy for the news to turn

this into she was she has a good feeling

about the Holocaust she didn't say that

she said the opposite of that she called

it a tragedy etc she just said that it

was a time when the Palestinians of the

Jews had a productive relationship and

that gives her a calming feeling about

the potential for future potential for a

future working together because there

was a time when we worked together

we meaning there was two groups now so

that turned into news this is what I

call the word news where somebody just

says something in a in artful way and

then somebody says well that's sounded

to me a little like you were saying

something terrible so let's pretend we

think that's what you said and act as

though you really meant it when

obviously you didn't mean that obviously

she didn't mean that all right

so I'll put this in the context of if

you watched how people squirmed and

struggled and went into cognitive

dissonance when the fine people hoax was

revealed to them you can see much of the

same thing in Reverse when people find

out the aoc never meant that the world

is going to be destroyed in 12 years the

obvious interpretation is that we have

to get really serious with in 12 years

according to her or or there will be

massive consequences which you could

argue is true or not but at least that's

the correct interpretation all right

here's here's news that makes me laugh

Schumer Chuck Schumer said he was

telling Pompeo who's gonna meet with

Putin I guess he said quote during your

meeting with Vladimir Putin it is

critical that you warn him that any

action to interfere in our elections

will be met with an immediate and robust

response to which I say are we to

believe according to Chuck Schumer that

the government of the United States has

not yet told Putin to stay out of our

elections or else something bad will

happen are we to believe that that

message has not yet ever been delivered

what now I I don't know that it has been

delivered I wasn't in the room I haven't

you know haven't listened to any private

conversations between Russians in the

United States but nothing would surprise

me more than to find out that against

all common sense against all logic

against everything you know to be smart

there's somehow that never came up

nobody mentioned that there's nobody in

the United States who ever said to

Russia if you do this again this is

gonna be really bad for you nobody said

that to them

maybe maybe I mean anything's possible

but it seems to me that that's pretty

much what we would have told them and

and even if we didn't tell them that

second question do we really need to

tell them that is it not obvious

as pun as Putin not paying attention to

the United States for two years he

hasn't noticed that this would be sort

of a sticky point with us I'm sure

shimmer says this to make us think that

the administration never had that idea

it's like Oh Thank You Chuck Wow

we were just gonna go over there and

drink vodka but now that you mention it

maybe we should talk about some

political stuff while we're there what

oh yeah the election stuff let's talk

about that anyway

I found that funny I'm watching the

Trump apparently quoted Tom Fenton and

the quote was that the director of the

FBI is protecting the same gang that

tried to overthrow the presidents do any

illegal coup so I kind of like the fact

that the president and his supporters

are referring to the whole Russia hoax

thing as a coup because it I it feels

fair you know I'm the one who's been

having a great you know a history of

saying that you know words matter and

you have to understand what it's

hyperbole and what it's not

but this you look like a coup we just

don't know who was thinking of it that

way

and who was thinking of it is I just

better do my job and check on this

because there's some question about

Russian connection I think some members

the FBI were just doing their job didn't

think there was anything there but they

figured well we'd better check so I

think some of it was that but clearly

there was something else going on so

there were some people who had different

intentions we know that for sure look at

all the news that we've had lately that

turned on the meaning of words now I've

told you before that one of the ways you

can you can know you're entering the

golden age an age where a lot of our big

problems are solved or on the way to

being solved is that we run out of

problems but the news still has to fill

the news with stuff and if you don't

have problems what are they gonna do

well they're gonna manufacture

so listen to the things that would have

been news and it's all about words was

the Russia collusion thing a coup or an

event or not was as spying or was an

investigation was it a hoax is is the

climate change a hoax a chinese hoax or

is it science was there collusion or was

there conspiracy was there obstruction

or was there just somebody doing his job

I mean almost all of our news is about

somebody interpreting words did the

president say find people did a OSI say

that bla bla so pretty much the news is

people acting as if they don't

understand how words work that's that

that's something like 80% of all the

news is that somebody has to pretend

they don't know how ordinary words work

and so they misinterpret it it's like oh

I get it you only read the first part of

the sentence let's make some news out of

this well if you read the second part of

the sentence you'd know that the first

part wasn't misleading well let's just

ignore the second part somebody says

look at all Taleb comments why would

that matter it wouldn't matter to this

so apparently as the the Democrats

continue to self-destruct Nancy Pelosi

asked she invited an anti-israel mob to

deliver the prayers and in the US House

just think about this Nancy Pelosi I

assume accidentally I think she just

didn't know who she had invited invites

him to mom to give the prayer and he's

got a pretty solid record of being

anti-israel I saw some of the quotes and

it's pretty hard to imagine they were

taken into context and I thought it's

like they stopped trying or something I

mean are they are they trying to lose

this election I'm starting to see people

and speculate that the reason

running Biden is that they know they

won't win and then so Biden is just the

sacrifice sacrifice all politician

everybody's thinking okay Biden is not

going to ever want to run for president

after this election I mean you'll be far

too well then so we can we can burn one

use the old white guy we can say see old

white guys don't work and then we go

back to what we wanted to do if you're a

Democrat and so people are actually

talking like this whole Biden thing it

looks like they're not serious

I mean it's starting to look like they

don't even they're not even playing to

win but here let me give you a

prediction the news business relies on

exciting news so if you're CNN you

you're Fox News what do you think about

having a president Trump well you love

it you love him or you hate him but he's

interesting all the time President Trump

is interesting from the moment he wakes

up to the time he goes to sleep if he

ever sleeps we don't even know if he

sleeps but he's interesting all the time

he is gold for the news business and

everybody would acknowledge that what is

Joe Biden Joe Biden is whatever it kills

the news business Joe Biden is so

freaking boring you know except for his

his gaffes and whatever that I think the

news business looks at him and thinks oh

my god he might actually get the

nomination this election will be

horrible it just won't be fun at all

because most of the things that they

want to say about the president don't

work if he's running against Biden here

are things that don't work hey we

shouldn't have an old white guy as

president well that doesn't work hey we

can't have somebody who long ago said

something that you know 32 years ago

sounds terrible to our ears in 2019 well

that's what they say about Trump right

it's the same thing we can't have a guy

who is always giving shoulder rubs and

trying to kiss women

may or may not like it well that's like

the main thing they say about Trump some

version of that you've grabbed him by

the whatever so Biden is the worst

matchup because all of the fun stuff

that they want to say about him oh and

what about Trump has business dealings

with you know whatever he's in it for

the money and then you've got this

hunter Biden story in the Ukraine

completely ruins all of the attacks

there's nothing that the news can use

that's juicy and fun that you can use if

Biden runs against Trump

there's just he just it's just empty so

here's my prediction the news business

can't let Biden get elected that's my

prediction and I'll go further than this

I'll go way further what and and I want

you to observe how far over my skis I am

I'm Way over my skis now meaning that

I'm making a prediction this should

sound crazy to you and that is that the

the professional news organizations that

are anti Trump are gonna start trying to

suppress Biden's run it may not be

obvious but I think he's gonna be

starved of attention and I think they'll

start promoting whoever they can figure

out might give him a run for his money

maybe not Bernie I think they're gonna

have to look for something to make it a

horse race on the left to make it

interesting at least in the primary

season and also to make it interesting

in the actual election so I would expect

that you're gonna stop hearing about

Biden as much as you think you ought to

for him being such a front-runner let me

ask you this is Biden still campaigning

think about it when was the last time

you saw Biden interviewed on CNN laylee

who is the most important politician in

the world who was not present in trouble

Biden because he's the you know the the

standard-bearer in terms of the polls

anyway he looks like he'll be the

standard-bearer

shouldn't we be seeing non-stop Biden

coverage shouldn't CNN and MSNBC have it

have him on and his surrogates on all

the time

shouldn't we be seeing clips of his

speeches shouldn't he be giving what did

they call them sprays and gaggles and

whatever look like doing what Trump does

all the time which is answering

questions informally with the press

where's all that doesn't it seem to you

that they're already starting to

downplay him and when they talk about

him do they ever talk about him with

interest when he's being reported on

they act like they're going to sleep

just talking about it so my prediction

is this that the news industry will

start to look obviously anti Biden and

it will become more and more obvious but

probably not unless they can they can a

be test some other competitor to to get

their get their visibility up a little

so you may you may see them testing all

the lesser candidates to see if they can

get somebody anybody who would be

interesting that they can sort of

promote next to Biden and maybe take his

place all right that's my prediction I

listen to an expert on Chinese trade

they use actually a China China expert

he said that the real problem with the

China trade deal and the reason that

China backed out or at least a big

reason that may not be the only reason

is the way it was written and that the

trade deal the one we thought China was

almost ready to sign

apparently the language was humiliation

so the deal was and was written in the

form of China if you do this we will

punish you this way China if you do this

we will hurt you this

chyna if you do this we will you know

will treat you like a chill a child will

punish you and and the China expert said

it doesn't matter if it's a smart deal a

good deal it doesn't matter if it makes

sense doesn't matter if the numbers work

none of that matters because it's just a

humiliation and that the the hardliners

in China looked at it and said ah I

don't care about what's fair or anything

else why we can't sign this this is

completely disrespectful it'll makes us

look like children who needed to be

scolded and I don't know I'm not a China

expert so I'm not going to put my own

opinion on that but if that's what's

happening then the only way we're gonna

get past it is some kind of a deal that

makes it look like they won well at the

same time it looks like we won so

somehow this has to be recast maybe they

need to add variables for example there

may be something else outside of trade

that China wants something that you know

we wouldn't have as big a problem giving

them so there might be something might

be something that we could widen this

negotiation so that would be something

in the deal where the Chinese could say

oh yeah we got that now there may also

be a way to word the deal so it's not

humiliating in other words it could be

just the way it's presented so you could

say for example if either side does acts

the penalty will be why knowing in

advance that only one side is likely to

do that thing so for example if we said

if either the United States or China

steals the intellectual property of the

other the penalty will be X even if you

think that that will never happen that

the United States will never to steal

their IP in any important way and that

really the only problem is that they're

stealing arms even if you believe that's

true you could certainly write the deal

so that you disguise that so that that

China will sign the deal that says yeah

finally we Chinese got a deal this says

China will that says

the United States will stop stealing our

intellectual property maybe they just

need to be able to say that so I

certainly hope that our negotiators are

smart enough to frame a deal so at least

on paper doesn't look like a humiliation

I hope we're smart enough to do that but

at least one person who knows more than

I do thinks we're not smart enough to do

that so we'll find them I saw a news

article that I like to point out

positive scientific news just so you

know what's coming

apparently some researchers I think it

was that Lawrence Lawrence Berkeley labs

figured out how to make a type of

plastic that is easy to recycle now that

might not sound like a big deal but

apparently current plastics or have lots

of different forms and they've got you

know they've got a coloring dyes in them

and and other chemicals in them and if

you try to recycle them it's sort of a

mess it's hard it's hard to sort out and

repurpose plastic the way it's currently

made but in this lab they came up with a

form of plastic which apparently used as

good as any other plastic but it has the

unique quality that you can break it

down to it's what do they call it - its

smallest level and then reconstituted

and it becomes a perfectly new good new

product so there's a new kind of plastic

that could change forever the you know

the plastic that's floating in the ocean

it could change forever how much oil we

need to use to turn into plastic it

could be yeah at the molecular level yes

so it's something you can reconstitute

at the molecular level thank you for

those that work anyway who knows if that

will be a big deal or not but when you

see that kind of development you have to

say to yourself mmm

there we have a very resourceful world

and and maybe plastic is another one of

those things we just solved or is on its

way to being solved all right let's see

we have to talk about Alyssa Milano's

sex Reich I told you that I gave Alyssa

Milano and a +4 persuasion and getting

our attention with a the so-called sex

Frank the idea is that she was

suggesting that women stop having sex

with their boyfriends and husbands until

women have control of their bodies

meaning the abortion debate and of

course she's getting pushback even from

our own side so this is another example

of how the Democrats are eating

themselves so even even feminists are

saying Alyssa Milano the way you frame

this it's as if you're saying that sex

is something that women give to men like

a gift instead of saying instead of

saying we both like sex which would be

the more modern interpretation and I

don't really have much opinion about the

pushback of this I you know I I think

that I would say that Alyssa Milano is

probably more woke than the people who

were criticizing her for being under

woke and I think that you can't tell

when I say that she's more were more

woke I think that she's beyond beyond

the old stereotype of sex is something

that women give to man I think she's

beyond that to the scientific level and

at the scientific level men really like

sex they'll do a lot to get it all right

so people are trying to treat Alyssa

Milano as though she's somehow taking

this backwards it's like oh it's like

the old days when it was like you know

the the thing that women have to offer

is just making babies and giving you sex

you're taking this back to the past

Alyssa Milano

now I'm no fan of first by the way not

her political politics but I am a fan of

her political activism because I think

she's sincere she is putting the work in

I always respect it when people work

hard no matter what it is and she's

getting attention for a cause those are

all very effective things so you can

disagree

with her all you want but it's hard to

disagree with the effectiveness of it

she got her attention anyway so my point

is that I think Alyssa Milano was taking

a scientific point of view in a more

modern view than her critics and the

more modern view is yes obviously women

have more to offer than just sex we

should already be past that question but

it's also true men really like sex and

they'll do a lot to get it so this might

work from a political standpoint it's

not it's not crazy

it's funny it's funny but it's not crazy

somebody says LMFAO you tried to say

she's smart now that's funny well I have

not offered an opinion on her

intelligence I have said that she is

working hard I've said that she's

sincere neither of those have anything

to do with intelligence and that the

effect of what she's done is that we're

talking about it that's just the fact

we're talking about her she's in the

news she's a headline she got attention

none of those have anything to do with

intelligence I'm just saying that what

she did was all what she wanted to do if

somebody says I'm going to do X and then

right in front of you they work hard and

they accomplish acts why can't we just

say so she's trying to do X it looks

like she's succeeding at that that's

that's the beginning in the end of the

story I just don't think it's helpful to

just automatically hate everything about

the people that are on the other side

yeah you can say they're doing some good

stuff you just don't like the other

stuff it's okay you can do that the book

there was a book I was recommending

yesterday called invisible influences

it's about how easily people are are

brainwashed and persuaded and one of the

tests that they do is one you've seen

before in these Street interviews how

many times have you seen somebody do

these one of these gotcha

Street interviews where they will

pretend

that a Democrat policy is a Republican

policy and vice versa and they'll try to

get people who say they're in one side

to back the policy of the other side

just by not telling them it's the other

side's policy and how often does that

succeed almost every time almost every

time you can get a Democrat to strongly

back a Republican policy if you fool

them and told them it was a Democrat

policy and vice versa it works both ways

now that has been demonstrated

scientifically in other words they've

done tests where they'll present

information without context and see what

people think and then they'll present it

with the context of a different group

and they'll say this is the Democrat

view what do you think or this is the

Republican view what do you think and

what you find is that it doesn't matter

what the facts of the case are it

doesn't matter what the situation is

doesn't matter what the argument is

completely doesn't matter it only

mattered to people which team it came

from the moment they heard that it came

from their own team or the other team

they took aside and then they argued why

it made sense but that argument why it

made sense was an afterthought because

they didn't make a decision based on it

making sense

they simply heard which team it was and

then they joined the team and by the way

many of these studies they're looking

for a statistically significant effect

right it's like a lot of studies would

be like well yes we move people by five

percent so we think this is pretty valid

this isn't a five percent effect this is

closer to a hundred percent you can move

almost a hundred percent of Republicans

and Democrats to a view that's the

opposite of their own view simply by

telling them that that their team agrees

with it that's it

almost a hundred percent think about

that do you believe that you have free

will it's been disproven your free will

in terms of political opinion has been

scientifically conclusively disproved

you can repeat repeat the experiment in

a hundred different ways and 100

different varieties and do you know what

happens it's always the same people

don't use any kind of common sense or

facts to make political decisions now I

think it might be different for the

professionals because they've got a lot

going on but for the voters

we're simply watching the news and then

forming opinions none of it has to do

with the reason none of it has to do

with the fact people simply take sides

and then argue why it made sense for

them to take that side anyway that

explains all the the word news that you

see the reason that each team is making

news and of the way somebody worded

something this is because they can and

because they actually talked themselves

into believing everything the other side

says is crazy and stupid all right

ah free will does not exist that is

correct it is an illusion how do we get

our team on our teams in the first place

that's a good question

so there's also research that shows that

there's a genetic component to whether

you're conservative or liberal and that

has been pretty well established so so

there's a big part that you're just born

with born with some kind of impulse one

way or the other beyond that you're

probably born into a family that shares

those same impulses because DNA so

you're probably born into it with a

natural inclination to lean one way it's

reinforced by the fact that your family

leans that way they have a similar DNA

so it's a combination of genetic and

social forces now there are people who

change sides but I'll bet they don't

change sides often unless at the same

time there's something else changing in

their life in other words they may be

less close to the people who they used

to agree with and they may have met a

few people that are influential on the

other side and so it's it's because the

people change them not because the

argument change them might be because

they get older my

they have discovered something but for

the most part people just join the team

and then argue why they white made sense

to be there now I've told you for a

couple years that one of the tricks I

used to remain independent and thought

as much as a human can is that I don't

vote and I don't identify with either

party and part of the way I do that

which is hard it's hard to not identify

with the left of the right is I spend

most of my time saying good things about

Trump's skills as a persuader but I also

identify myself as left to Bernie which

is sort of a category that I'm not even

sure exists but because I brand myself

as ambiguous in theory according to

everything we know about science and

persuasion you should give me a more

clear opinion of both teams because I

don't say I'm not on the team and I

don't say I am on the team I observe

very few people in the United States are

actually observers somebody says now

you're lying I'm not sure which part you

think I'm lying about but you can put it

in a comment if you want I'll be happy

to comment on it so the the part that I

would say for sure and those of you been

watching me can say this with you can

confirm this

I do take opinions on both sides so you

have seen me spread my opinion across

various political ideologies so when I

see President Trump say the fine fine

people think I'm not predisposed to

think he's a monster so I can see it

more clearly when aoc were to lobby

Slaby

I wish I knew how to pronounce her name

I feel bad about that but when they say

things that I may not agree with but I

can at least understand what they intend

to say because I'm not on a team and I

do believe it gives you some ability to

to see the world more clearly by not

being associated with the team it's like

a superpower

- liebe I see lots of different people

helping me pronounce that but none of

it's helping could you change the impact

of a speech with a laugh track yes you

could yeah you can change how any

communication is how it is received by

changing the context and a laugh track

is would be part of the context so yes

you can absolutely change communication

by changing the context these are the

disingenuous arguments that cost you

credibility do you notice there's no

reason there so if whoever just said

your argument is disingenuous and it's

costing you credibility that is a sign

of cognitive dissonance it means that

I've said something that's triggered you

and you have no unit you don't know and

your response is to imagine that you can

read my mind

so somebody here believes they've read

my mind and that's something I said is

disingenuous in other words that I'm

intentionally misleading or lying why

would I do that it's exactly the

opposite of all of my ambitions my

entire ambition is that I can disagree

with you and and do it honestly

let's look this is my entire brand my

brand is not to convince you of

something that isn't true or useful I

don't have what what possible incentive

would I have for that I don't get paid

by anybody to do that

I have no financial interest it doesn't

help my reputation it doesn't make me

feel good I have no interest in being

disingenuous about any of these topics I

don't have a personal stake I'm not

running for office I just don't have an

interest if I had an interest then you

would be I think you would be it would

be reasonable for you to say I think

he's he's got a self interest here he

might not be saying the truth because

people who have self interest do not

tell the truth

my entire

ambition is for people to think that I

am willing to to tell the truth on both

sides that's all I want to accomplish

because that's what gives me that's what

that's what would give me value all

right to have value I have to be

legitimate on both sides and if I if I

were to say something that you could sit

there and say oh that's obviously a lie

he's not saying what he means if I did

that even for a second it would

completely ruin everything that I'm

trying to do all right there's a Forbes

article about me that says I have an

agenda yeah whenever you see anybody

writing about anybody whether it's me or

anybody else and they purport to know

what you're thinking or your your real

intentions sometimes they're right but

you should assume that by by a large

margin they're usually not maybe 60% of

the time somebody says you want to be

recognized as the smartest person in the

room not smartest that that would be a

that bar would be too high because you

know the smartest people in the world

are so smart that they're almost alien

creatures and I'm not going to make a

play for being the smartest person in

the world that's a completely enter and

a reach I would like to make a play for

developing some systems and techniques

to keep one relatively open-minded and

and free from the bubbles that we get

into so I would like to stake out that I

have some technique and it's just

technique something anybody can do that

keep me relatively free from bias not

free from bias because people can't do

that nobody can be free from bias but

you can use some tools to put a control

on it and

and I tried to demonstrate that through

prediction so if you've been watching

you know that my claim is not that I

have been right about something but

rather than I'm predicting something and

you can see that if this filter on the

world that I present the persuasion

filter as I like to call it then if it's

accurate you'll see that the predictions

are accurate so that's that's the only

standard that I'd like to be judged on

all right I got other things to do I'm

gonna go do them right now

and I hope that you have an amazing day

talk to you later