Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive July 1, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas

Context —

es, he calls it the Brandon administration, as I borrowed his joke just a moment ago. The Brandon administration always gets a big laugh from the partisans. Let's talk about the things that are happening. Things are happening. Let's see. Vaccination mandates going into effect January 4th for big employers over 100 people. What is there to say about that? You know, I could say I don't like them. Y…

← Previous segment →

e three different parties.

And let me make a suggestion. This has opened up the door very much for a new party, maybe for the first time. I don't think that a third party really had a chance, and maybe they still don't. But it's the biggest opening I've seen.

Here's how I would do it. This is me running for president as an independent, starting my own third party or fourth party depending on how you count them. I would call it the Middle Party. I would call it the Middle Party, and I would say I oppose the extreme right and the extreme left. And most people do. Unless you're wed to the name on your registration, consider the Middle Party, because I'm going to give you stuff that makes sense.

I might raise your taxes a little but not a lot, and I would do it with the support of economists and lots of support that it makes sense economically. I might do something that would benefit the black population of this country, but it will make sense. It won't be stupid, right?

So don't you think that the right candidate, you'd have to be the right person, but don't you think that the Middle Party, and the name of it is very important? If you say you're some other party, then people say, "Oh, why do I want to be that?" But if you say you're the Middle Party, guess what? You can stay Republican. You can stay Democrat. You're just voting for the middle. A lot of people like the middle, but they prefer to be a Republican. They prefer to be a Democrat. But they might vote for the middle. So give them something to vote for.

And then every time somebody says, "What side are you on?" you just stake out the middle, the sensible middle, and say, "Look, this is where the people are. The people are in the sensible middle."

Take any topic. Take any topic. The school system. You could say, "Yeah, we're going to keep our public schools, but we're going to keep the option open for competition." Totally in the middle. Totally supported. And you know, you could just go right down the line on different topics.

How about abortion? If you're running for president, you have to talk about it. But here's how I'd handle it if I were the head of the Middle Party. I'd say it's not a federal government decision, and I'm not going to make it one, because I think the authority for that should be pushed down to the lowest level you can get it, state level ideally. And I just say I'm out. I'm the middle. Whatever the country wants, state by state, it's fine with me. I think that could win. You'd have to have exactly the right candidate though.

Everybody's talking about why did Youngkin win. Have you noticed that whenever anything happens there are lots of explanations? When Trump unexpectedly won in 2016, what was the news all about the next day? It was all about why he won, and all the reasons were different. It was all over the place. I think CNN had 14 different reasons he won.

But here's the thing. With a big complicated thing lik

Context —

e an election, it's never one thing. It's all of the things. Every one of the things had to be the way they were for him to get the result he did. If any of those things had been different, you would have lost. So is it sensible to say there's one thing? Not really, because it's sort of the haystack thing. It might be the last straw, but it's just one of the straws, right? Is the last straw the sp…

Next segment → →