Episode 2315 CWSA 12/07/23 GOP Debate, Trump's Narrow Ravine Strategy, McLeavin' And Lots More

good morning everybody and welcome it's the highlight of human civilization it's called coffee with Scott Adams or in the elbonian language as far as you know there's an elbonian language and if you'd like to take your experience up to levels which nobody can even understand all you need is a cup or mug or glass a tanker cheler a canteen Jugger flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparallel pleasure of the dop media of the day the thing that makes everything better it's called the simultaneous Sip and the house now go ah just right Sublime all right now for those of you who are new there might be some new people who have never seen the show before um give me the answer to the question before I ask it go answer to the question before I ask that is the correct answer yes now here's the question in AR Rasmus and poll uh what percentage of people uh are in favor of removing statues of Washington George Washington you said 25% gosh you're good 27 27 but around you know within the margin of error I think I think your ability to know the answers before the questions are asked is unparalleled purely unparalleled and if you think there's any audience in the world that is smarter than this one you let's see if they can answer the question before you ask it just give them that test they won't be able to do it well I am loving the uh I don't know what you'd call it uh but the the Ascension maybe of Bill lman famous hedge fund investor guy so he's been going really hard at uh Harvard especially and wokeness now more generally he's he's become kind of the Rosa Parks of uh of of the Dei uh debacle um and he says among other things in a long post today and he's becoming a national treasur in my view he says I don't think it will be long before we look back on the last few years of free speech suppression and the repeated career-ending accusations of racist for those who question the Dei movement do you think that will happen do you think we will someday look back at this period and it will look like Mc.

Carthyism and that the Dei thing will look like it was a gigantic mistake and it will be largely dismantled yes yes he's absolutely right there's no way around it it's definitely going to happen uh and he said we're all shortly going to realize that the Dei era is the Mc.

Carthy era part two he said he learned from someone who had firsters knowledge of the uh situation that when Harvard was searching for a president um the committee would not consider a candidate who did not meet the Dei offices criteria in other words no white men so that that it was exactly what it looked like if you're wondering to yourself huh I wonder if they excluded white men in their search yes they did yes they did uh and Bill Amman points out the same is likely true for other Elite universities uh um so the would you say that the competence crisis is real I saw three uh College presidents that in my opinion were incompetent now as uh other people have pointed out other people who identify as female so I'll quote them instead of taking the heed on myself those three College presidents uh set back women's right by about 50 years am I the only one that had that impression and by the way this wasn't my original it's not my original observation it's something I was thinking when I watched it uh I think it was Greta Greta Van sest who was was saying it was setting back the the women's move the women's movement I think she said set back the women's movement you're really did it was it was a terrible terrible day for women well uh Mc.

Carthy's leaving leaving the job he's leaving government I guess he had hinted that he might do it if he got push out at the the leadership job and I guess he is but the funniest part about that story is Matt Gates who is obviously the agent of that change he's the one who pushed for it uh he had a post today with just one word mle now some people interpreted it that Matt gase was leaving but that's not what he meant he was talking about Mc.

Carthy he was making a joke about the mcloven character there's a movie with teenage character who calls himself mcloven she calls him meven that was super bad was the name of the movie yeah and I just love the fact that he's dancing on his grave mle that they had me laughing today all right uh China is allegedly uh going to revamp its space program and the reason that China is so worried about getting behind on space is not because the United States is doing such good work but because Elon muskus so who beat China space was it the United States uh not exactly was it India no no it was just Elon Musk just one one person just that one person destroyed on the most probably probably the most important um stage of human development you know if someday if humans live another Thousand Years we're going to look back and see that the leaving of the planet to become Interstellar was more fundamental than even you know Finding discovering America so-called discovering and uh it was one person basically one person did that and beat China so it's one person who beat uh over a billion people how many people are in China 2 billion 2 billion right what's the population in China 1.3 1.7 1.2 we got lots of estimates over a billion all right um so South Carolina uh the state they have announced that they're not going to invest any money in Walt Disney Company so it's no longer An approved State investment so now the Disney Company is uh not only fun for the whole family but considered by one State uh so evil that you can't even invest in them but also fun for the whole family but a state government has decided they're too evil for you invest in them so you can take the family but my God don't put your money there says the state of South Carolina I don't know if that will form any kind of a trend we'll see I saw a post by Rohan Pandy who is a my kind of poster you ever see you ever see a on social media where you say my God that could have been me posting that because it looks like I did it or here's one that just looks like something I would have done except I'm not this smart so if I were smarter I would have posted what Rohan Pandy posted he noted uh he says a quick skitso Theory uh top and bottom quarks so those are the the names for two different flavors of Quark the top and the bottom they originally called Truth and Beauty so there's a truth quark and a beauty Quark now here's the interesting part uh SAA first name of the leader of Microsoft in Sans cript his name his name means truth but Sundar first name of the leader of Google in Sanskrit his name means Beauty so as Rohan points out the two the two mfers he says competing in the race to AGI are named after opposing fundamental particles and then he says the simulation is effing with us that's pretty good that the two people are truth and beauty and that used to be two fundamental particles now it's all just coincidences but it's fun of course he may have made up all of this but still fun how many of you saw a a very viral video of a new form of AI called gini I think it's Google's um that was doing some amazing things but by looking at images and you could draw a picture and it knew what you were drawing and it could it could compare two things and all that well it took all of today to find out that was a fake video that was fake that totally totally fooled me but here's what was fake about it the fake part was uh you believe that it was a human talking to the computer because what you heard it was a conversation between a human and a computer in truth they were giving it super prompts and text but the human was not repeating what the super prompt said the super prompt was giving it more information than the human was so the trick was you thought that the computer only knew what it saw plus whatever the human was saying verbally but what the computer actually knew was what they typed into the prompt which had formatted the question in a way that narrowed the responses so the amazingness of the responses wasn't nearly as amazing as it would have been if you'd known how they asked the question but still amazing yeah still amazing it's it just wasn't as amazing as the video uh that's a anyway I don't know if it's true but there's a claim that somebody's seen the super prompts and they're different all right axios is talking about Elon mus strategy with his AI called Gro and apparently it's unclear whether the AI that Elon Musk is building would be part of the xplatform or part of a separate company that the xplatform accesses and works with so we don't know that yet but if the um but if it's true that uh the gro or you know that's the name of the AI that'll be operative on a if it's true that it gets valued the same as chat GPT then Trump then musk will have doubled his investment so if he paid 44 billion and chat GPT is already uh valued on paper more than that twice that it's like 90 billion or something so he could actually double his investment the day that uh grock goes live potentially because that would that would depend on you know people's um psychology saying oh no that's that's as good as chat gbt so we'll give it the same value Could Happen here's what axios speculates as at least a possibility and I agree but only after reading you know axios so I I did not come to this decision on my own axios guided me there it goes like this when musk said about advertisers uh don't advertise Fu in other words don't advertise if if you have a problem or you're trying to manipulate me you're blackmail me don't advertise F you now do you think that musk anticipated how much trouble that would cause or or at least knew there was a risk of how much trouble that would cause cuz it seems it seems unlikely that he would be unaware that would be a problem so one one has to wonder what if he knew how much of a risk it was and he did it anyway is it just because he's Bas based and awesome and he just didn't care about $44 billion maybe that's actually entirely possible but I would like to suggest there's one other possibility and it goes like this Elon Musk is the only person who's figured out that the advertising model is going to be gone in 3 years because AI will completely replace it he might be the one who figured out that he has to get out of he probably wants to get out of advertising as fast as possible and go to subscription or a model that looks like this wouldn't you like to never see an advertisement again unless your personal version of AI decided from based on what you told it directly or what it knew about you that it would always be scanning for new products and if it found anything that was right on point for you it would show it to you but it wouldn't show it to you while you're on task in other words it wouldn't interrupt you while you're reading something it would simply know that a good time to talk to you or even maybe just make a little shopping list for you that you don't even see unless you tap on it I don't see any way that advertising uh works as a as a revenue model and as a business model in 10 years how many would agree with the following statement in 10 years the advertising model will be completely dead in 10 years all right I I I think I can convince you in 10 years it'll be Deb how about five will will anybody go with me to five because the thing that'll kill it is likely to be some AI related architecture I think five yep now in five I don't mean every single ad model would be Deb I mean in five you could maybe imagine the X would be uh add model free while still giving you all the advertisements the you you might actually say uh let me ask you this how much would you pay to never see another advertisement again unless you wanted it and you only see it when you want to how much would you pay to remove just advertising from social media because we're getting pretty close to that and here's how if if if musk succeeds and making X the place you go and just live because you can make payments there you can see the news there you can comment there basically you could just live there see all your videos and everything then suppose he makes it ad free imagine going to an environment that's ad free and you know playing in your playground all day how would you feel the first time you turn on cable news and it goes to a commercial in 12 minutes and it stays there for another 12 minutes seems like like you will you will be so done with the ad model once you buy out and I'll tell and I'll tell you I have some experience with this because um I've bought myself out at the You.

Tube advertisements meaning that if you pay extra I forget what they call it but whatever the the business model is on uh You.

Tube you pay extra to see no advertisements the the nature it's premium somebody says um the nature of your experience without advertisement is so transformative that it makes You.

Tube in my opinion the premier adverti the Premier Entertainment vehicle in the world by 10 is probably 10 times more entertaining than the next most entertaining thing this long form just talking about long form so anyway I think musk might have more of a Instinct about uh advertising being dead than you do and just speculating that I think he's probably thinking ahead to the death of advertising and that he probably didn't feel that it was an existential threat to X if he just killed it early in fact it might accelerate the urgency to get past the model which is going to happen anyway so he might actually come out ahead because you could imagine what would happen to the team at X imagine you're working at X you've got some people are trying to work on the non-advertising model and some are working on the advertising model do you think when he blew up the advertising model that that changed the energy probably probably the people figuring out how to make AI work and and all the Alternatives probably got real busy probably also the advertising team got real focused on smaller businesses the ones that are you more likely to be advertising so I'm not sure that that was the bad thing that you think it was you know maybe it was there's no way to read his mind to know what he was thinking but I'm going to I'm going to go on record as saying I think that musk will probably say something that suggests the advertising model is not forever expect to see that all right um climate activists are concerned that AI would be another risk to climb in two different ways AI might be used to spread climate disinformation well my God uh my God yeah I'd hate for there to be any climate disinformation out there because you know what the climate information that we have now is so good that we all have the same opinion about the risk am I right yeah cuz it would be a real problem if if suddenly our good climate information turned into unreliable stuff because of AI I mean that's reason enough to stop AI let's slow that down we don't want any unreliable information about the climate out there um but also the AI models are huge data center users and so they they use a ton of electricity so that's a good point or or is it um here are a few things that AI might tell you about climate models do you know how I know that it might tell you this I asked it so I asked AI hey I got a few specific questions about climate models because I would like to know how reliable they are so here are some things that there's no opinion in what I give you now so so these are just facts I asked how many climate models are there do you know how many climate models are there thousands dozens hundreds 25 60 13 now don't you think that if the entire strategy of climate change based is based on the models and it is don't you think you should know how many models there are would would it affect your opinion of the reliability of models if you knew how many there were let take two extremes let's say there were there had never been more than five models and one of them got thrown away over the years because it just didn't work but imagine if the other four had been doing a pretty good job for like 30 years that would tell you something important wouldn't it if you had three different models and they actually predicted pretty well the actual temperature for 30 years my God that would be that would be amazing and I would be quite inclined to believe a model like that do we have that no nothing like that that would be that would be very very believable all right here's another question oh so the answer is that the IPC averages 29 models is that the answer to how many models there are if the the most official body uh takes the average of 29 models so would it be fair to say there are about 29 models does it follow does it follow that if they only use 29 well they can't be that much more than 29 because the whole the whole reason that you take an average is because you're not sure which ones are right so if you had hundreds of them and you're not sure they're right you would take the average of all the hundreds so therefore if they're only taking an average of 29 doesn't that suggest since they're not being super picky about which you know because they don't know which ones are right that's why they take an average doesn't it suggest that the total number might be close to 29 because why would they throw out any models what what what would be the reasoning for discarding any models at all if they don't know which ones are right and they don't know which ones are right that's why you average because you don't know which one's right well the answer is it's probably hundreds of models but they average 29 huh huh now here's another question for you how many models are retired every year do you know what that means it means there used to be a model that they were tracking but it became so bad at tracking over time that they said you know we can't even tweak it we're we're just going to throw this in the way how many so out of the out of the number of models that you don't even know how many there are maybe hundreds maybe 29 good ones according to the IPC how many of them change out every year so that the 29 you're looking at are not exactly the same 29 as 5 years ago is it do half of them change out because if half of them changed out wouldn't you say to yourself well that doesn't sound very good at all that sounds like guessing if half of them are replaced every year or is it one one out of 29 wouldn't be bad but but how about the fact that you don't know the answer to that question because if you don't know how many get changed now every year you don't know anything do you understand that if they're tracking 29ish models but you don't know if they're replacing models as they go you literally don't know anything nothing can be deduced from tracking a changing basket of anything imagine if this had been the stock market they say we're going to we're going to track the uh S&P 500 oh but wait the S&P 500 the the biggest 500 companies it changes all the time things are coming in and coming out so at the end what did you really check it wasn't 500 companies cuz at the end it might be you know 350 that are left depending on how long you're tracking so if you're not tracking the same thing you're not tracking anything all right here's another question how many variables are in a model how many variables are in a typical model if there were three variables I would say to myself hm three variables there's at least used to fighing chance that you could wrestle three variables into a useful model cuz three is not too many but suppose suppose you had five you know five is not just two more variables when you go from three variables to five your your possibilities explode so how how many variables do you think are the the essential variables they even have a name for the essential variables CU there's they're infinite variables but they're not all meaningful how many are the essential ones well if you check online you'll find out four the four variables so I said oh that's not bad really there just four variables and then I looked a little deeper no there are four categories of variables there are four categories the total number of variables is closer to 54 essential variables 54 variables now let me ask you this what if there were one more variable that they found tomorrow because I I see stories about this all the time oh we found another variable we didn't know about if you were to find the 55th variable and you added it to the 54 what does your intuition tell you does your intuition tell you well it's only one more variable you've already got 54 variables so if you're only going to add one more how much difference could it make am I right it's only one more variable you've already got 54 couldn't make that much difference right no one variable can completely change the outcome from up to down if you've never done modeling you wouldn't know that how many of the 54 variables if you got any one of them wrong just one of them how many of the 54 could completely reverse the direction from the temperature going up to the temperature going down in the future how many of the 54 if you just had one of them a just one of them a little bit wrong how how could it change a lot of them probably probably a number of the 54 if you got them a little bit wrong and you iterate that over time cuz small errors exaggerate over time with models probably there are 54 ways that that could go wrong in other words you'd have you'd have to really have a a solid lock handle on all 54 variables or else it wouldn't necessarily be anything it would just be I don't know could be anything that would be the only way to analyze 54 variables now let me ask you this how many models that purport to forecast the future and of course there are Financial models economic models so a lot of people have models that try to forecast the future how many of them have something in the order of 54 variables and a track record of being correct now I'm laughing because everybody who's been involved in any kind of forecasting or modeling knows and I'm going to say as clearly as POS as possible they know that this isn't a real this is not real there's nobody tracking 54 variables and uh maybe hundreds of models but some humans are picking the best 29 out of the hundreds because what do you know how they pick the 29 models out of the hundreds of models is it because they're the most accurate I doubt it or is it the ones that support the uh the narrative the best what do you think what do you think yeah use your understanding of everything you've ever seen in the real world and you tell me that there are hundreds of models to choose from there only going to choose 29 do you think they're going to choose 29 models that when you put them together they don't support the narrative there isn't there isn't the slightest chance of that not even the slightest chance now how about waiting do you think they take those 29 models and they give them all equal weight because normally when you do a survey you would weight it uh by the number of people you talk to right if you're going to take a an average of a bunch of surveys about let's say vaccine uh Effectiveness or something like that the thing that would make it logical to average them is that they're individually smallish studies so if you add them together you've got enough at least people involved to say something but what is it you're averaging if you're averaging climate models what what is the uh metaanalysis logic that adding them together and taking the average is anything like how what how does it even make sense yeah the the metaanalysis at least makes sense even though it's in it's horoscopes but at least there's a little bit of logic to it if the only wrong with the studies was some some of them were underpowered then adding adding them together would be exactly the right solution but if you have completely you know just people looking at variables on their own and databases on their own what is it you're averaging just the outcomes and I'm not sure there's I'm not sure there's any logic to that or why would you even assume that the average is useful right there's no logic to say that the average would be useful in this specific case there are lots of cases where the average is exactly what you want want but I don't see any internal logic to this all right how many so you don't know how many models are added to the total new models you don't know how many are retired you don't know how they picked the 29 models and you don't know if they added one more variable someday to the 54 they have if it would reverse the entire direction of the curve let me say the the faster version of all this nobody can predict the future F nobody can predict the future that's never been a thing ever ever right you you can say maybe that human nature stays consistent over time and that that gives you a little bit of that history repeats feel but even that's fake right but you could definitely say all right next year humans will be selfish and you know susceptible to cognitive dissonance yeah that's fair but you don't know anything about the variables in nature all right um let's talk about that goop debate I saw a little of it and I watched a bunch of clips and um there's the if you didn't watch it the four participants that are not Trump are V ramaswami and Chris Christie and Nikki hilly and uh that other guy who's the other guy who's the fourth person in the stage Des sanctimonious something yeah somebody named Ron was also there uh but he did not make any highlight Ron didn't make any highlight films the highlight films left him out now uh here's what I take away from the whole thing um it was easy to observe that people just thought their favorite person won uh I was watching David Pacman uh when he was observing it as an observer so I was watching him observe in real time and his take was that Chris Christie won easily it was like Chris Christie's night now Pacman's a Democrat you know famous Democrat and do you think that what he was responding to was the quality of Christie's arguments or was it that Christie hates Trump the most obviously it's because TR Christie is the one who says Trump's the problem obviously right now did he really believe that Chris Christie did the best job I think so yeah I don't think he was lying I think that we all had our subjective reality reinforced right if you were Nikki H's Camp you thought she won if you were in D santis Camp you thought he won by not making news you know not being crazy if you were in v v Camp as I am you think he won and I do right so everybody agreed with what they thought was going to happen before it happened so so you could ignore everybody's opinion who of who won right that's useless but there were some highlights uh van Jones said he was literally shaking after listening to V uh and what he called his smooth and condescending way and he's more dangerous than Trump because he could out outlive Trump by 50 years and you might be seeing a tyrant in the making those are my words but um he says that the's embracement of the quote replacement theory that we'll talk about is one step from Nazi propaganda what do you take from Van Jones reaction to V do you say to yourself my God I had not thought of it that way but van Jones might have a good point about this this uh Brown fellow becoming the next Hiller or do you say that's the only only one he's worried about to me it looks like van Jones is only worried about one candidate who isn't Trump so does that make you like V less knowing he's the one that scares van Jones the most well if you believe that the reason he's scared is the risk of totalitarian racism then I guess I guess you haven't listened to anything V said that I I feel as if if this analysis of aake has to ignore everything he stands for the books he's written every TV appearance and everything he's ever posted which is 100% uh Merit and not race he's the most anti-racist candidate of all time by far he is the furthest from a racist Nazi of any major candidate in the history of the United States that's true he he says that the loudest and he's the one that says you got to include white people and white men if you're being serious about Merit if you're being serious about not being a racist who's the who's the other Brown leader who says how about white people are not discriminated against either yes definitely don't discriminate against anybody else but why are you discriminating against white people he's the only one yeah the comment says Scott is a V's propaganda Minister how about he's how about I'm just endorsing him for president looks the same I guess all right some more uh things happen um so uh Megan Kelly asked Nikki hilly aren't you too tight with the banks and the billionaires to win over the gop's working class base good question and she said uh we will take support from anybody I don't I don't ask them what their policies are they ask me what my policies are nicely done nicely done uh I don't I don't think Nikki H is my first choice or even third or fourth choice for president but that that's a good answer that's the Willie Brown answer I always talk about where you should you should just go right at it so denying that you're taking money from somebody is weak and denying you know sort of just restating your policies kind of weak but she says it directly we'll take money from anybody they ask me what my policies are that's the way it works it's not the other way around that is a cool strong answer I liked it all right uh went super hard at them and he had quite a few moments one of his moments was he challenged his competitors to name the three provinces in Ukraine that they're trying they're trying to protect now number one it's a messed up question meaning that I don't think you need to know the names of the provinces the same as I didn't believe that U George Bush Senior really needed to know the cost of a price of bread do you remember that gotcha when somebody asked George Bush Senior if he knew the price of a loaf of bread and he didn't that really was unimportant because if he understands you know the inflation rate he kind of gets it you know you don't need to be shopping for a loaf of bread yourself that was always dumb so when uh V used the loaf of bread trick I'll call it to challenge them to name the three provinces uh Nikki hilly got a look on her face that V called out as a blank expression now this was the brilliant part this was brilliant so much like the uh you you've heard the auditory illusion of uh uh what is it green needle and the other uh Yan and Laurel Laurel and Yanni and all that stuff so when uh Nikki hilly made a let's say an exaggerated expression on her face to that comment you in her like her mouth especially when and sort of a smirk I looked at the smirk and I said is that a blank expression or is that a smirk because a smirk says I'm going to kill you and you I have the goods but if the smirk was a uh-oh I'm in trouble well then it's say exact opposite so when V looked called her out and pointed to her and said look at the blank Expressions he primed you to see it as a blank expression and it was brilliant that that was that was probably the smartest uh in the moment play you'll ever see in your life because when he called it down as a blank expression you saw it that way if he had not called it out do you know how you might have seen it how many of you watched the debate and noticed that eventually Nikki hilly did say the names of the three provinces without prompting did anybody see her do it nope you didn't even see it I did I I saw it because she did it when somebody was talking over her so one of the others or more of them were talking over her and after the conversation had gone for a while she sort of leaned into the mic and just said the names of the provinces so if you're wondering what the smirk was for she showed you that she actually knew the names of the provinces but she did a bad job of clearing out the space so that when she delivered her killshot that she knew the names of the provinces you could hear it and it would be her moment so I think you know you can't read mines I can't read her mind but I did observe personally her saying the names of the provinces now did did she have to think about it probably I would I'd have to like think about it for a moment it's like could I come up with the three and then I think V said something about you know acting like she got one of them wrong or something Crimea or something and um cuz there can you give me a fact check there are three provinces but that doesn't include Crimea right crimea's would it's its own thing so so she got you know she may have known she may have gotten close or she may have had an answer that the audience would recognize or would think was the right answer but um so I'm going to give vake an A+ for creating that situation it was a good one for priming us to see her as a blank blank face and also the other people and then also talking over her when she had a chance and the talking over her when she had a chance to redeem herself that also worked right so you might say to yourself that was really kind of sneaky you know weasy debate technique to which I say that's all these debates are the all the debates are are people looking for their little weasly tricky moments it's not about the cleverness of their argument if it were about the solidness of the argument disantis would look like a winner you know at least half of the debates was never about that it's about creating the energy in the moment and the you know can you do it again kind of vibe so if you didn't like V you liked him even less CU he was so strong in the debate if you liked him you said oh he scored all the Good Hits and Etc uh another we'll give give some more moments here uh so V said that he believe he said why am I the only person on the stage uh at least who you can say that and they listed several things that are really controversial that he says he believes now that other people are afraid to say they believe so the first one is that January 6 now looks like it was an inside job now he says looks like it was which is the fairest way to say it if he said it was I think that'd be going too far but he's really smart about knowing where that line is so he says it looks like it it it was an inside job and it does it looks like it I I also do not declare that it was but based on what we've seen I'd say the hypothesis that it was an inside job is dominant you're more likely than than the opposite but I don't know for sure then he also said uh the government lied about 91 and Saudi Arabian involvement lied for 20 years I I'm not totally up on that topic but sounds like that's about right uh that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump now when he says stolen he doesn't mean that the vote was miscounted you know he's talking about more uh you platform manipulation and uh the suppression of free speech and all that which is valid and then here's where the Trouble Comes or does it you've heard of this thing called the the Great replacement I know you've heard of it it's the idea that uh generally comes from a very right-wing uh conservative types and they say that uh you remember the um Charlottesville March and the Marchers were saying they will not replace us talking about uh Jews and that that's just like a sliver of the the larger concept but then if you look at the border it looks like there's some kind of well some would say I'll say some would say that it looks like the open border is an obvious attempt to replace the current majorities with Browner majorities that are more likely to vote Democrat now vake is taking I think the uh the border is open and they're bringing in lots of future Democrat voters to replace us meaning you know us in this case would be conservatives not white people so when V says replacement he's not talking about brown people because he's brown right he he's not talking about I think they want brown people to replace vake that's not what he's saying uh but he's he's he's he's definitely dancing close to the Sun here because people like van Jones are going to hear it as the racist version but if you hear it as the why is the Border open and non citizens are pouring in and changing the nature of of our country in ways that maybe he doesn't like or you don't like so this is really dangerous and provocative but I think what he's trying to do is revive um free speech that that's what I see in this comment I don't see in this comment any kind of you know uh dog whistle I I don't think he's about the dog whistle I think this is more about the beginning of reclaiming the great replacement from it's only what racist talk about to uh I'm just looking at the math you just brought in 8 million people that weren't here before are are are they having an an impact on our uh let's say ability to um manage the country The Way We Were of course they do of course might it might be a good impact or it might be a bad impact but it's certainly a a replacing what was here in a general sense impact but I don't think it's a ra a racial comment I think has more to do with um how how people think actually all right so we'll see if he can get away from that little hole he dug himself a little hole because should he become president or presidential candidate he's going to have to explain this for the rest of his career like they'll they'll never drop this but he is good enough that he could take the gun from their hand and flip it around so if you imagine vake answering the question hey is this great replacement thing sort of a Nazi thing he would obliterate whoever asked him that question like that would be another moment that he would Sparkle because you should be able to obliterate that dumbass question he could do it all right um and then he went after Nikki hilly for saying that uh when he had criticized her in Prior debate uh Nikki Hil said suggested that maybe he had a quote woman problem maybe he had a woman problem well that's not quite a nice thing to say for one Republican to another because aren't the Republicans the ones who are supposed to sort of not talk like that and not act like it's some kind of weird woke Dei thing that's kind of opposite of being a democr or of a republican at the moment so V Answers by saying I don't have a woman problem uh Nikki has a corruption problem and then he held up his notes and on one page he had written uh Nikki equals corrupt did you see that moment when he when he held it up and showed that was all that was on his page it was visual it made the news and you'll remember it forever perfect perfect um then he said uh that Nikki hilly this is a woman who will send your kids to die so she can buy a bigger house talking about her preferences for more warlike policies this is a woman who will send your kids to die so she can buy a bigger house you could you could write a doctoral thesis on that one sentence it's so perfect persuasion Perfection because you know I always tell you that uh fear is the best persuasion right fear is the best persuasion what is more scary than sending your kid to die that's pretty scary and what is more visual than send to die so you can buy a bigger house so you got the bigger house you got your visual you got your son dying that's also visual but it's also fear one sentence do you do you understand how good he is at this yeah this is a skill level that we've I don't think we've ever seen it before honestly I'm I'm not aware of ever seeing anybody who operated at this level including Trump yeah Trump is a singular character I always resist comparing him to anything because his own method just can't be duplicated you you can't take his method so he just sort of operates in his own you know zip code and he is just Trump As Trump in fact that's all I say about him now Trump is Trump that that's the good news and the bad news Trump is Trump you know why why is he leading right now in the polls because Trump is Trump it explains a lot you no nobody else is him if anybody else could be him they might be leading in the polls too but Trump is Trump there's only one there will never be another one if you like that there's nobody else to vote for all right um so that was pretty artistic fromes um she called her uh she says she's the donor's she has donor Puppet Masters I like Puppet Master too because you can see the puppet strings visual visual visual just so good on the visual stuff and then he says directly that he rejects identity politics he says two chromosome two X chromosomes uh does not IM you from criticism oh thank you yeah vake slamming Nicky Hy for being uh too woke that is the show I wanted to watch that one speaks to every part of my body I can feel that right there are a lot of things that you say oh that's a good intellectual poter I like that policy that's a good policy when he said two exm zones do not imun it doesn't immunize you from criticism and he rejects identity politics I could feel it like in my body I can feel that that's a whole different level yeah so there's some uh controversy about I guess the rumble feed that was covering the uh the debate I guess it glitched out when um somebody maybe Megan Kelly asked about the warp speed you know the getting the vaccin Nations fast with Trump and so people are saying oh that's a coincidence that it cut out just on that question but it wasn't coincidence it was just technical problem there it is very unlikely that Rumble would cut out on a republican debate let me say that again there's not really any chance that Rumble intentionally cut a feed at any point during a republican debate that is not a possibility there's no real world possibility that that happen at all all right um what else so the rock notice I didn't mention De.

Santis I feel like De.

Santis is just a running out the clock you know sort of waiting around to see if anything happens with Trump but not really trying too hard to win at this point I I think he's just trying to do an honest attempt because he has backers and they want him to do it just looks like I mean he did not seem engaged at he he just did his good De.

Santis job and by the way the I I have the funniest or unusual take on De.

Santis De.

Santis is the best politician that doesn't interest me so so it's like a compliment actually that's just a complete compliment do you know why he doesn't interest me because he doesn't do crazy every day there's no crazy he just like sort of does good things that his base wants them to do he's a great politician in terms of execution um but for for the presidency if you're running against the Trump you're running against a superstar he doesn't have Superstar energy to to level up to you know the Taylor Swift of of politicians so it's it's terribly unfair and if Des santis comes back around in some subsequent year and runs for president I I can see supporting him yeah he he's a solid solid um patriotic good servant to the people I think so The Rock Dwayne The Rock Johnson uh did some mysterious meeting with the military Folks at the Pentagon um after you know long ago saying that uh the parties wanted him to run for president the parties I love the way he says it making it seem like he you know even the Democrats and even the Republicans both sides yes it's the parties oh don't don't ask me which side I mean they all want me so he's very smart to not kill the rumor because the longer the rumor goes the more fun it is for him and more free attention he gets so he's smart to keep it going but I would say it's unlikely that he was talking to the Pentagon to line up his support for running for president or to do his research before he ran for president or any of that the most likely scenario is he has some business with the Pentagon could be he's doing a movie might want some support from the military could be the military wants him to be sort of an ambassador to uh improve recruitment he' got to be perfect for that so I doubt that it's because he's running for president but it's fun it's fun to think about it speaking of fun axios is reporting that Melania uh thinks Tucker Carlson would be a great VP for uh Trump uh because he's he's sort of he's sort of the more articulate version of trump with very similar attitudes about things now I don't think it's going to be Tucker because I don't think Tucker would um be Reckless enough to take the job it it seems like Tucker is in sort of an ideal place for his media life and unless he's looking for a radical change to that which would surprise me I don't think he's going to even consider it but it's a lot of fun isn't it it's a lot of fun I I tell myself okay like just game that out in your mind question number one would Trump do better in the election if Tucker is his vice president go would would he would Trump do better in the election almost all knows wow about 80% knows on locals what do you think You.

Tube oh You.

Tube is more yeses well also lot of NOS I should have waited all right more NOS than yeses so so a lot of you don't think he would change the outcome here here's why Tucker would be a positive Tucker is one of the I'd say top five best communicators in all of politics would you agree with that he's a top five best Communicator in all of politics so therefore he some would say and therefore he would be a good vice presidential uh run mate here's what I say you get all that for free Tucker is still going to be talking you still going to have a huge platform no matter what and you know he's going to be supportive of trump because he said so directly so Trump can get all the benefit of Tucker's communication Excellence without any of the reputational harm of saying oh 10 years ago Tucker did a thing oh 5 years ago Tucker said this thing that could be interpreted two ways he he could just take all the good for free with none of the pain because if he could find a VP who didn't have any of the controversy that Tucker brings naturally then he can get all of Tucker's goodness plus a solid you know backup candidate that helps him for his age especially I think I think Trump has to go young because the age question will be Salient if he gets elected and um I think VI is more obvious choice but we'll see um the competence crisis is real apparently there's this case going on to see if Trump should be denied being on the ballot in some states so Colorado is looking at that and the Colorado Supreme Court Judge uh William Hood III said in the process of uh discussing it and uh judging it he said quote in some ways January 6 uh seems like a poster child for Insurrection in other words indicating that the judge uh believes that Insurrection is largely obviously proven now is that bad news if he thinks that the Insurrection is sort of obvious well it's bad news for this judge because it makes him look like an idiot how how exactly is it obvious that an unarmed trespass is anything more than at best delaying a process for a few hours or a few days you know may maybe the Supreme Court has to look at it that's it that that was the highest level of risk a short delay Supreme Court looks at it rules how does a judge not understand that that this is an incompetence problem isn't it am I wrong to me this looks like basic competence is just missing yeah we'll see um now here's what I think about Trump's uh language lately so I think axios was pointing this out as well so he's he's used language that his critics are saying hey that's very well it's not Hitler like but it's Hitler adjacent well that's not quite dictator talk but you're getting real close well that's not exactly what the Nazis say but it reminds me of them so is he doing the dumbest thing in the world by allowing people to frame him as a dictator it it almost looks like he's doing it intentionally especially when he said um that he would would only be a dictator for one day he said quote uh we're closing the border and we're drilling drilling drilling after that uh I'm not a dictator so just one day I'll just be a dictator for one day after that not a dictator now when I first heard it my first reaction was oh why are you doing this like this is just the worst idea his biggest problem is that they're going to call him a dictator he knows that so why would he use language that most of us would recognize would make you be label a dictator why would you do that well I have a hypothesis I don't know that it's true but it goes like this he might be playing what I call the narrow Ravine strategy now this is one I have used myself in the past and you might recognize it from some of my past the narrow Ravine means you allow your enemies to Bunch up in in a place where it's really easy to you know shoot down and kill them so you're basically you're Hing them into the most vulnerable place for them while they believe they're winning so the thing that gets them into the narrow Ravine in the first place is they say ahha we've got you trapped you're going to be trapped in the narrow Ravine and then they chase you down the narrow Ravine but you've got all your people on the top and they shoot down into the narrow Ravine and kill him so it's basically a trap the narrow Ravine trap so we see him saying things which are making his critics say oh salivate salivate he keeps saying things that's going to make it easy for us easy for us to uh to take him out by labeling him a dictator and so they're like all right we got our plan everybody everybody here's our plan we're going to go full dictator on Trump he's making it easy he keeps saying all these dictator things and he is what's another what what's another reason he might be doing it well I think he may have given you a little wink in a nod when he said he would be a dictator for one day just to get a couple of things done and here's what I think he's telling you he's going to milk it because there's nothing easier in theory this doesn't mean he'll do it but in theory there would be nothing easier to persuade than to persuade people that he wasn't a dictator it could be the easiest thing and the way you would do it is by mocking it you just make a joke out of it did he make a joke out of it when he said oh I might be a dictator for one day just one day yes yes he did that was literally making light of it he never gave it wait if he had said dictator why I'm in favor of free speech and you guys are against free speech and here are my three other reasons why I'm not a dictator and what would the audience hear dictator dictator dictator well you're very defensive aren't you you you you seem very defensive about this dictator thing why are you so defensive you know why why does this attack really get under your skin you know why why are you melting down over this must be true because the way you're reacting to it right that would be the mistake it's also the way a classic politician would respond I'm no dictator the other side might be acting more like dictators than me let me give you these laundry list of reasons doesn't work at all but what are they reporting about it they're they actually axios literally reported it was a wink and a nod the the news actually picked up that that it was a wink in a nod now a wink in a nod is not mockery but it's a signal that it's coming oh it's coming I think that he's playing the narrow Ravine followed by the mockery cannons I think the mockery cannons are are uh just on hold and once he gets the Democrats do fully commit and it might even be months from now I mean it could be next summer just let them just call him a dictator while he's leading in the polls because as long as he's leading the polls everything's good gets his nomination over the summer and then goes full mockery cannons on the only thing that they've accused him for for a year and they're going to say it's not working and they're going to have to come up with something new at the last minute which is always a tough tough thing so I think he's leading them into the narrow Ravine on this dictator thing because objectively speaking If he if he eventually mocks it and then people start looking at you know the opposite evidence that maybe it's the Democrats were the the power hungry people to me it's looking like it might be a really strong play but there's a lot of assumptions I'm making my first assumption is that he's fully aware of what he's doing and that it's a narrow Ravine play I think the the wink and the nod about dictator for a day does tell you that he's not going to take it seriously and that he's going to keep it in that frame and if he keeps pushing that frame it's going to be glorious it's going to be glorious all right meanwhile uh I guess there are more voting machine company lawsuits against uh I guess smart mtic is going after Mike Lindell for his claims about uh their machines they're going after Newsmax and then Dominion is also going after Newsmax so all that action might happen over the summer which would um potentially being embarrassing I guess but the other thing is em embarrassing for Trump I suppose but the other possibility is that there will be a lot of Discovery why is it that nobody's required the voting machine companies to show us their um code I see this is the part I don't understand may maybe somebody can explain this if somebody's a lawyer if I'm a lawyer and I say if I've made an accusation that that your voting machines um cheated and then they sue me because there's no evidence that they cheated which is the case you no no convincing evidence that I'm aware of doesn't Mike Lindell have every right to make them show all of their proprietary software and if they don't show their proprietary software doesn't he win because he makes a claim that they can't disprove without showing their software and they can't do that because it's proprietary the the worst that they could prove is that he hasn't proven his claim but I think in order for him to be guilty they have to sort of prove that it's not true do I have that right that in order to Prevail they have to prove that his claim is false how do they do that unless they show their unless they uh open themselves up for a full audit and that's never going to happen how how did they prove that they couldn't have changed it without being detected unless they show every part of their system there is a possibility that these voting machine companies are being encouraged by the Democrats to do what they're doing because it looks bad for Trump it's a possibility that the people who least want this law these lawsuits are dominion and smartmatic they might not want to do this but they might have a lot of pressure from people who make decisions about what voting machines get put into what areas so in other words their customers might be pushing them their customers meaning Democrats so here's what I would look for I would look for the answer to this question does this open up the uh the machine companies to Greater scrutiny than they would ever agree to it's a big question isn't it I don't know the answer to it so I'm looking for actually maybe some wisdom here all right um now here's interesting news apparently the Saudis and France are talking sort of privately about how to figure out what to do with Gaza after the the fighting stops now do any of you remember I said the best solution might be to get a Saudi Arabia involved in the the endstate solution because and and that maybe it's part of a larger deal to normalize relations did I say that in public or am I imagining it I need a fact check I did say that in public right and it looks like it's happening to me this was the most productive possibility doesn't mean it'll work but the most productive possibility is that Saudi wants to do a deal presumably in which you know they normalize relationships with Israel for for purely Financial basic obvious reasons right it's just in saudi's best interest and I think they have a leader that could get it done so if they're looking to make a breakthrough in the larger piece for the area which the Saudis would like wouldn't don't you think the Crown Prince would like to elevate his status in the region by being a peacemaker can you imagine anything that would be better for Saudi Arabia and better for the Crown Prince than to be seen as the the person who finally pulled something together that worked there's nothing there's nothing that would be better for Saudi Arabia nothing in my opinion but I'm not very good as an expert at the Middle East but to me it looks like it'd be the best thing so that might be productive we'll see but the uh initial offer looks like a loser uh the rumor is that what the reported plan would be or at least this is you know maybe the working conversation about what it might be is they would strip Gaza of arms um which I don't know if that's even possible do you think you could keep heavy weapons out of Gaza even no matter how hard you tried I don't know maybe set up local governance well what is local governance what is local governance because there's no way that Israel is going to you know abdicate control so does that mean that they have a local government but the security is still handled by others cuz it's who handles the security who who is in charge so that part is unstated uh and to unlock Israeli prison doors and let 5,000 prisoners out and that maybe this has to do more with normalizing relationships with Israel that might be the big play here anyway I don't know if any of this will be useful but it's exactly the right conversation um and uh to me it looks like the most fruitful path there are 50 interns were now put together a letter uh interns in the White House against Joe Biden's uh handling of Israel and Hamas and uh says that they're ignoring the pleas of the American people blah blah blah how how many inter are there 40 interns not 50 how many interns are there uh in the White House are there more than 40 interns that that sounds like a lot of interns that sounds like too many doesn't it all right um so I love this because it's another example of uh I'm guessing that these interns are very diverse you want to make a guess do you think the the interns are a little extra diverse so they probably have some Dei um some Dei uh let's say objectives when they got their interns and now they have 40 of them that object to the administration that hired them in a pretty significant way so it makes me wonder if they think that worked out for them so we'll see how that goes um the Texan which is a publication reports that uh I guess Texas the Attorney General uh Texas Attorney General is ass suing the government for weaponizing censorship against the daily wire and the Federalist so the daily wire and the Federalist I guess are the would they be the plaintiffs do I have that right in other words in order for the suit to have meaning there has to be victims so I think they would represent the victims I think that's how it works and the idea would be that uh the uh the Democrats um put together a censorship architecture of these fake cutouts Etc and influenced uh social media companies for the purpose of censorship what do you think about this I think this has a good chance because as far as I know the the factual basis for this lawsuit is well demonstr ated and now public meaning that you know from the Twitter files and basically everything that Michael shellenberger is doing and Matt taibe as and uh yeah and Congress I think they have enough evidence to make this case I think they do so this will be interesting Texas to the rescue again huh so we'll see we shall see I think that's important all right uh yeah Mike Ben is the the best voice on the uh what do they call it the censor censorship industrial complex I call it the brainwashing industrial complex I think censorship well that gets to the Constitutional question the best you know cuz the government can't do censorship I think that if you want to understand it on the sort of common sensical level it's not censorship on the on the Practical level it's brainwashing they don't just want some people not to talk they want to change what you think and so brainwashing is the scarier crime that the censorship is sort of how you get to the crime but the crime is the brainwashing it's just that the constitutional part is the censorship all right um censorship or deprogramming uh let's see I'm being prompted to talk about Congressman Thomas Massie all right let me tell you what I've learned so Breitbart and uh Joel Pollock in particular uh was giving Thomas Massie some heat for a meme that used Z Zion was part of the mean and I said to well I said here um I don't really see where that was anti-semitic so here's the counterargument so if you want to understand how anybody would see that as anti-semitic here's the counter argument that that language is more commonly used by uh uh let's say the worst racists on the right who believe that uh the word Zion is closer to a global Jewish conspiracy idea and not what the dictionary tells you because the dictionary just says it's about uh Israel's statehood and supporting it right so I looked at all the definitions and the definitions were all the same it's just about Israel being a state and sporting it so I thought well what's wrong with using that word if every definition is a perfectly innocent definition what's wrong but all words mean something in context only would you agree words don't have just a meaning and a context every word in fact that was a big point in my book reframe your brain one of one of the chapters makes a big point of this words take on um meaning beyond the word so you can look at the dictionary and there will be the base meaning but that's not everything the word means right we we put Power into words and because a certain group of people have used that Zion word as part of their Ultra anti-semitic uh narrative that anybody else who uses it is whether they like it or not is taking be on all that weight so we could argue all day about the specific definition of the word but it does have the effect of giving some um let's say giving some oxygen to the worst anti-semitic parts of the country so if you want to stop somebody from giving oxygen to the worst people in the world you call it out when they use the word just so people know there there's sort of a line here gurgle I'm just telling you both sides right if you want to know what side I take I take the I take the side of Thomas Massie because he used the words the way the dictionary uses them he's a nerd and nerds use words the way the dictionary uses them and and I think that's the whole story now but is it also fair for somebody to point out that you're getting real close to that line that you don't want to give any Oxygen to yes it is absolutely fair to point out that those words carry more meaning than the speaker may have intended that is fair right but I but I but I'm always going to side with the Free Speech if you're using an English word in an English word way to make a point that's not racist I'm okay with that but I'm also I'm also okay with warning somebody that they're getting close to a line that's okay too can I agree with both of them I'm going to agree with both of them today all right but largely because I like both of them personally have you ever notice how hard it is to disagree with somebody you like right so I love Joel Pollock and I love Thomas Massie so I'm just going to agree with both of them and move on all right um did you watch the squid games no I've never seen the squid games it doesn't look like something I'd like I don't know um yeah all right I'm seeing lots of reactions here but I think we've done the job that we wanted to do today oh my God more than more than enough uh You.

Tube thanks for joining I enjoyed I enjoyed you and we'll see you tomorrow bye for now

good morning everybody and welcome it's

the highlight of human civilization it's

called coffee with Scott Adams or in the

elbonian

language as far as you know there's an

elbonian language and if you'd like to

take your experience up to levels which

nobody can even understand all you need

is a cup or mug or glass a tanker cheler

a canteen Jugger flask a vessel of any

kind fill it with your favorite liquid I

like coffee and join me now for the

unparallel pleasure of the dop media of

the day the thing that makes everything

better it's called the simultaneous Sip

and the house now

go ah just

right

Sublime all

right now for those of you who are new

there might be some new people who have

never seen the show before

um give me the answer to the question

before I ask it go answer to the

question before I ask that is the

correct

answer

yes now here's the

question in AR Rasmus and poll uh what

percentage of people uh are in favor of

removing statues of Washington George

Washington you said

25% gosh you're good 27 27 but around

you know within the margin of error I

think I think your ability to know the

answers before the questions are asked

is unparalleled purely

unparalleled and if you think there's

any audience in the world that is

smarter than this one you let's see if

they can answer the question before you

ask it just give them that test they

won't be able to do

it well I am loving the uh I don't know

what you'd call it uh but the the

Ascension maybe of Bill lman famous

hedge fund investor guy so he's been

going really hard at uh Harvard

especially and wokeness now more

generally he's he's become kind of the

Rosa Parks of uh

of of the

Dei uh

debacle um and he says among other

things in a long post today and he's

becoming a national treasur in my view

he says I don't think it will be long

before we look back on the last few

years of free speech suppression and the

repeated career-ending accusations of

racist for those who question the Dei

movement do you think that will happen

do you think we will someday look back

at this period and it will look like

McCarthyism and that the Dei thing will

look like it was a gigantic mistake and

it will be largely

dismantled

yes yes he's absolutely right there's no

way around it it's definitely going to

happen uh and he said we're all shortly

going to realize that the Dei era is the

McCarthy era part

two he said he learned from someone who

had firsters knowledge of the uh

situation that when Harvard was

searching for a

president um the committee would not

consider a candidate who did not meet

the Dei offices criteria in other

words no white

men so that that it was exactly what it

looked like if you're wondering to

yourself huh I wonder if they excluded

white men in their search yes they did

yes they

did uh and Bill Amman points out the

same is likely true for other Elite

universities uh um so the would you say

that the competence crisis is

real I saw three uh College presidents

that in my opinion were

incompetent now as uh other people have

pointed out other people who identify as

female so I'll quote them instead of

taking the heed on myself those three

College presidents uh set back women's

right

by about 50

[Laughter]

years am I the only one that had that

impression and by the way this wasn't my

original it's not my original

observation it's something I was

thinking when I watched it uh I think it

was Greta Greta Van sest who was was

saying it was setting back the the

women's move the women's movement I

think she said set back the women's

movement you're really

did it was it was a terrible terrible

day for

women well uh McCarthy's leaving leaving

the job he's leaving government I guess

he had hinted that he might do it if he

got push out at the the leadership job

and I guess he is but the funniest part

about that story is Matt Gates who is

obviously the agent of that change he's

the one who pushed for it uh he had a

post today with just one word

mle now some people interpreted it that

Matt gase was leaving but that's not

what he meant he was talking about

McCarthy he was making a joke about the

mcloven character there's a movie with

teenage character who calls himself

mcloven she calls him

meven that was super bad was the name of

the movie yeah and

I just love the fact that he's dancing

on his

grave mle that they had me laughing

today all right uh China is allegedly uh

going to revamp its space program and

the reason that China is so worried

about getting behind on space is not

because the United States is doing such

good work but because Elon

muskus so who beat China space was it

the United

States uh not exactly was it

India no no it was just Elon Musk just

one one person just that one person

destroyed on the most probably probably

the most important um stage of human

development you know if someday if

humans live another Thousand Years we're

going to look back and see that the

leaving of the planet to become

Interstellar was more fundamental than

even you know Finding discovering

America so-called discovering

and uh it was one person basically one

person did that and beat China so it's

one person who beat uh over a billion

people how many people are in China 2

billion 2 billion right what's the

population in China

1.3 1.7 1.2 we got lots of estimates

over a

billion all right

um so South Carolina uh the state they

have announced that they're not going to

invest any money in Walt Disney Company

so it's no longer An approved State

investment so now the Disney Company

is uh not only fun for the whole family

but considered by one State uh so evil

that you can't even invest in them but

also fun for the whole

family but a state government has

decided they're too evil for you invest

in them so you can take the family but

my God don't put your money there says

the state of South Carolina I don't know

if that will form any kind of a trend

we'll

see

I saw a post by Rohan

Pandy who is a my kind of poster you

ever see you ever see a on social media

where you say my God that could have

been me posting that because it looks

like I did it or here's one that just

looks like something I would have done

except I'm not this smart so if I were

smarter I would have posted what Rohan

Pandy posted he noted uh he says a quick

skitso Theory uh top and bottom quarks

so those are the the names for two

different flavors of Quark the top and

the bottom they originally called Truth

and Beauty so there's a truth quark and

a beauty Quark now here's the

interesting part uh SAA first name of

the leader of Microsoft in Sans cript

his name his name means truth but Sundar

first name of the leader of Google in

Sanskrit his name means Beauty

so as Rohan points out the two the two

mfers he says competing in the race to

AGI are named after opposing fundamental

particles and then he says the

simulation is effing with

us that's pretty

good that the two people are truth and

beauty and that used to be two

fundamental particles now it's all just

coincidences but it's fun of course he

may have made up all of this but still

fun how many of you saw a a very viral

video of a new form of AI called

gini I think it's

Google's um that was doing some amazing

things but by looking at images and you

could draw a picture and it knew what

you were drawing and it could it could

compare two things and all that well it

took all of today to find out that was a

fake

video that was fake that totally totally

fooled me but here's what was fake about

it the fake part was uh you believe that

it was a human talking to the computer

because what you heard it was a

conversation between a human and a

computer in truth they were giving it

super prompts and text but the human was

not repeating what the super prompt said

the super prompt was giving it more

information than the human was so the

trick was you thought that the computer

only knew what it saw plus whatever the

human was saying verbally but what the

computer actually knew was what they

typed into the prompt which had

formatted the question in a way that

narrowed the responses so the

amazingness of the responses wasn't

nearly as amazing as it would have been

if you'd known how they asked the

question but still amazing yeah still

amazing it's it just wasn't as amazing

as the

video uh that's a anyway I don't know if

it's true but there's a claim that

somebody's seen the super prompts and

they're

different all right axios is talking

about Elon mus strategy with his AI

called Gro and apparently it's

unclear whether the AI that Elon Musk is

building would be part of the xplatform

or part of a separate company that the

xplatform accesses and works with so we

don't know that yet but if the um but if

it's

true that uh the gro or you know that's

the name of the AI that'll be operative

on a if it's true that it gets valued

the same as chat

GPT then Trump then musk will have

doubled his

investment so if he paid 44

billion and chat GPT is already uh

valued on paper more than that twice

that it's like 90 billion or something

so he could actually double his

investment the day that uh grock goes

live potentially because that would that

would depend on you know people's um

psychology saying oh no that's that's as

good as chat gbt so we'll give it the

same value Could Happen here's what

axios speculates as at least a

possibility and I agree but only after

reading you know axios so I I did not

come to this decision on my own axios

guided me

there it goes like this when musk said

about

advertisers uh don't advertise

Fu in other words don't advertise if if

you have a problem or you're trying to

manipulate me you're blackmail me don't

advertise F you now do you

think that musk anticipated how much

trouble that would cause or or at least

knew there was a risk of how much

trouble that would cause cuz it seems it

seems unlikely that he would be unaware

that would be a

problem so one one has to wonder what if

he knew how much of a risk it was and he

did it anyway is it just because he's

Bas based and awesome and he just didn't

care about $44

billion maybe that's actually entirely

possible but I would like to suggest

there's one other

possibility and it goes like

this Elon Musk is the only person who's

figured out that the advertising model

is going to be gone in 3

years because AI will completely replace

it he might be the one who figured out

that he has to get out of he probably

wants to get out of advertising as fast

as possible and go to

subscription or a model that looks like

this wouldn't you like to never see an

advertisement again unless your personal

version of AI decided from based on what

you told it directly or what it knew

about you that it would always be

scanning for new products and if it

found anything that was right on point

for you it would show it to

you but it wouldn't show it to you while

you're on task in other words it

wouldn't interrupt you while you're

reading something

it would simply know that a good time to

talk to you or even maybe just make a

little shopping list for you that you

don't even see unless you tap on

it I don't see any way that

advertising uh works as a as a revenue

model and as a business model in 10

years how many would agree with the

following statement in 10 years the

advertising model will be completely

dead in 10 years

all right I I I think I can convince you

in 10 years it'll be

Deb how about

five will will anybody go with me to

five because the thing that'll kill it

is likely to be some AI related

architecture I think

five yep now in five I don't mean every

single ad model would be Deb I mean in

five you could maybe imagine the X would

be uh add model free while still giving

you all the

advertisements the you you might

actually say uh let me ask you this how

much would you pay to never see another

advertisement again unless you wanted

it and you only see it when you want to

how much would you pay to remove just

advertising from social

media because we're getting pretty close

to that and here's how if if if musk

succeeds and making X the place you go

and just live because you can make

payments there you can see the news

there you can comment there basically

you could just live there see all your

videos and everything then suppose he

makes it ad

free imagine going to an environment

that's ad free and you know playing in

your playground all day how would you

feel the first time you turn on cable

news and it goes to a commercial in 12

minutes and it stays there for another

12 minutes seems like like you will you

will be so done with the ad model once

you buy out and I'll tell and I'll tell

you I have some experience with this

because um I've bought myself out at the

YouTube advertisements meaning that if

you pay extra I forget what they call it

but whatever the the business model is

on uh YouTube you pay extra to see no

advertisements the the nature it's

premium somebody says um the nature of

your experience without

advertisement is so

transformative that it makes YouTube in

my opinion the premier adverti the

Premier

Entertainment vehicle in the world by 10

is probably 10 times more entertaining

than the next most entertaining thing

this long form just talking about long

form so anyway I think musk might have

more of a Instinct about uh advertising

being dead than you do and just

speculating that I think he's probably

thinking ahead to the death of

advertising and that he probably didn't

feel that it was an existential threat

to X if he just killed it early in fact

it might accelerate the urgency to get

past the model which is going to happen

anyway so he might actually come out

ahead because you could imagine what

would happen to the team at X imagine

you're working at X

you've got some people are trying to

work on the non-advertising model and

some are working on the advertising

model do you think when he blew up the

advertising model that that changed the

energy probably probably the people

figuring out how to make AI work and and

all the Alternatives probably got real

busy probably also the advertising team

got real focused on smaller businesses

the ones that are you more likely to be

advertising so I'm not sure that that

was the bad thing that you think it

was you know maybe it was there's no way

to read his mind to know what he was

thinking but I'm going to I'm going to

go on record as saying I think that musk

will probably say something that

suggests the advertising model is not

forever expect to see

that all right um climate activists are

concerned that AI would be another risk

to climb

in two different ways AI might be used

to spread climate

disinformation well my God uh my God

yeah I'd hate for there to be any

climate disinformation out there because

you know what the climate information

that we have now is so good that we all

have the same opinion about the risk am

I

right yeah cuz it would be a real

problem if if suddenly our good climate

information turned into unreliable stuff

because of AI I mean that's reason

enough to stop AI let's slow that down

we don't want any unreliable information

about the climate out

there um but also the AI models are huge

data center users and so they they use a

ton of

electricity so that's a good

point or or is

it um here are a few things that AI

might tell you about climate models do

you know how I know that it might tell

you

this I asked it so I asked AI hey I got

a few specific questions about climate

models because I would like to know how

reliable they are so here are some

things that there's no opinion in what I

give you now so so these are just

facts I asked how many climate models

are

there do you know how many climate

models are

there

thousands dozens hundreds

25 60 13 now don't you think that if the

entire strategy of climate change based

is based on the models and it is don't

you think you should know how many

models there are would would it affect

your opinion of the reliability of

models if you knew how many there

were let take two extremes let's say

there were there had never been more

than five

models and one of them got thrown away

over the years because it just didn't

work but imagine if the other four had

been doing a pretty good job for like 30

years that would tell you something

important wouldn't it if you had three

different models and they actually

predicted pretty well the actual

temperature for 30 years my God that

would be that would be amazing and I

would be quite inclined to believe a

model like that do we have that no

nothing like that that would be that

would be very very

believable all right here's another

question oh so the answer is that the

IPC averages 29

models is that the answer to how many

models there are if the the most

official body uh takes the average of 29

models so would it be fair to say there

are about 29

models does it follow does it follow

that if they only use 29 well they can't

be that much more than

29 because the whole the whole reason

that you take an average is because

you're not sure which ones are right so

if you had hundreds of them and you're

not sure they're right you would take

the average of all the

hundreds so therefore if they're only

taking an average of 29 doesn't that

suggest since they're not being super

picky about which you know because they

don't know which ones are right that's

why they take an average doesn't it

suggest that the total number might be

close to 29 because why would they throw

out any models what what what would be

the reasoning for discarding any models

at all if they don't know which ones are

right and they don't know which ones are

right that's why you average because you

don't know which one's

right well the answer is it's probably

hundreds of models but they average 29

huh huh now here's another question for

you how many models are retired every

year do you know what that

means it means there used to be a model

that they were tracking but it became so

bad at tracking over time that they said

you know we can't even tweak it we're

we're just going to throw this in the

way how many so out of the out of the

number of models that you don't even

know how many there are maybe hundreds

maybe 29 good ones according to the IPC

how many of them change out every year

so that the 29 you're looking at are not

exactly the same 29 as 5 years ago is it

do half of them change out because if

half of them changed out wouldn't you

say to yourself well that doesn't sound

very good at all that sounds like

guessing if half of them are replaced

every year or is it

one one out of 29 wouldn't be bad but

but how about the fact that you don't

know the answer to that question because

if you don't know how many get changed

now every year you don't know

anything do you understand that if

they're tracking 29ish models but you

don't know if they're replacing models

as they go you literally don't know

anything nothing can be deduced from

tracking a changing basket of

anything imagine if this had been the

stock market they say we're going to

we're going to track the uh S&P

500 oh but wait the S&P 500 the the

biggest 500 companies it changes all the

time things are coming in and coming out

so at the end what did you really check

it wasn't 500 companies cuz at the end

it might be you know 350 that are left

depending on how long you're tracking so

if you're not tracking the same thing

you're not tracking

anything all right here's another

question how many

variables are in a

model how many variables are in a

typical model if there were three

variables I would say to myself hm three

variables there's at least used to

fighing chance that you could wrestle

three variables into a useful

model cuz three is not too many but

suppose suppose you had

five you know five is not just two more

variables when you go from three

variables to five your your

possibilities

explode so how how many variables do you

think are the the essential variables

they even have a name for the essential

variables CU there's they're infinite

variables but they're not all meaningful

how many are the essential ones well if

you check online you'll find out

four the four variables so I said oh

that's not bad really there just four

variables and then I looked a little

deeper no there are

four categories of variables there are

four

categories the total number of variables

is closer to 54 essential

variables 54

variables now let me ask you

this what if there were one more

variable that they found

tomorrow because I I see stories about

this all the time oh we found another

variable we didn't know about if you

were to find the 55th variable and you

added it to the 54 what does your

intuition tell you does your intuition

tell you well it's only one more

variable you've already got 54 variables

so if you're only going to add one more

how much difference could it make am I

right it's only one more variable you've

already got 54 couldn't make that much

difference right no one variable can

completely change the outcome from up to

down if you've never done

modeling you wouldn't know

that how many of the 54 variables if you

got any one of them wrong just one of

them how many of the 54 could completely

reverse the direction from the

temperature going up to the temperature

going down in the future how many of the

54 if you just had one of them a just

one of them a little bit wrong how how

could it change a lot of them probably

probably a number of the 54 if you got

them a little bit wrong and you iterate

that over time cuz small errors

exaggerate over time with models

probably there are 54 ways that that

could go wrong in other words you'd have

you'd have to really have a a solid lock

handle on all 54 variables or else it

wouldn't necessarily be anything it

would just be I don't know could be

anything that would be the only way to

analyze 54 variables now let me ask you

this how many models that purport to

forecast the future

and of course there are Financial models

economic models so a lot of people have

models that try to forecast the future

how many of them have something in the

order of 54 variables and a track record

of being

correct now I'm laughing because

everybody who's been involved in any

kind of forecasting or modeling knows

and I'm going to say as clearly as POS

as possible they know that this isn't a

real

this is not real there's nobody tracking

54 variables and uh maybe hundreds of

models but some humans are picking the

best 29 out of the hundreds because what

do you know how they pick the 29 models

out of the hundreds of models is it

because they're the most

accurate I doubt it or is it the ones

that support the uh the narrative the

best what do you

think what do you think yeah use your

understanding of everything you've ever

seen in the real world and you tell me

that there are hundreds of models to

choose from there only going to choose

29 do you think they're going to choose

29 models that when you put them

together they don't support the

narrative there isn't there isn't the

slightest chance of that not even the

slightest chance now how about waiting

do you think they take those 29 models

and they give them all equal weight

because normally when you do a survey

you would weight it uh by the number of

people you talk to right if you're going

to take a an average of a bunch of

surveys about let's say vaccine uh

Effectiveness or something like that the

thing that would make it logical to

average them is that they're

individually smallish

studies so if you add them together

you've got enough at least people

involved to say something but what is it

you're averaging if you're averaging

climate models

what what is the uh metaanalysis logic

that adding them together and taking the

average is

anything like how what how does it even

make

sense yeah the the metaanalysis at least

makes sense even though it's in

it's horoscopes but at least there's a

little bit of logic to it if the only

wrong with the studies was some some of

them were

underpowered then adding adding them

together would be exactly the right

solution but if you have completely you

know just people looking at variables on

their own and databases on their own

what is it you're

averaging just the outcomes and I'm not

sure there's I'm not sure there's any

logic to that

or why would you even assume that the

average is

useful right there's no logic to say

that the average would be useful in this

specific case there are lots of cases

where the average is exactly what you

want want but I don't see any internal

logic to

this all right how many so you don't

know how many models are added to the

total new models you don't know how many

are retired you don't know how they

picked the 29 models and you don't know

if they added one more variable someday

to the 54 they have if it would reverse

the entire direction of the

curve let me say the the faster version

of all this nobody can predict the

future

F nobody can predict the future that's

never been a thing ever ever right you

you can say maybe that human nature

stays consistent over time and that that

gives you a little bit of that history

repeats feel but even that's fake right

but you could definitely say all right

next year humans will be selfish and you

know susceptible to cognitive dissonance

yeah that's fair but you don't know

anything about the variables in

nature all

right um let's talk about that goop

debate I saw a little of it and I

watched a bunch of clips and um there's

the if you didn't watch it the four

participants that are not Trump are V

ramaswami and Chris Christie and Nikki

hilly and uh that other guy who's the

other guy who's the fourth person in the

stage Des sanctimonious something yeah

somebody named Ron was also there uh but

he did not make any highlight Ron didn't

make any highlight

films the highlight films left him

out

now

uh here's what I take away from the

whole

thing um it was easy to observe that

people just thought their favorite

person

won uh I was watching David Pacman uh

when he was observing it as an observer

so I was watching him observe in real

time and his take was that Chris

Christie won easily it was like Chris

Christie's night now Pacman's a Democrat

you know famous Democrat and do you

think that what he was responding to was

the quality of Christie's arguments or

was it that Christie hates Trump the

most obviously it's because TR Christie

is the one who says Trump's the problem

obviously right now did he really

believe that Chris Christie did the best

job I think so yeah I don't think he was

lying I think that we all had our

subjective reality reinforced right if

you were Nikki H's Camp you thought she

won if you were in D santis Camp you

thought he won by not making news you

know not being crazy if you were in v v

Camp as I am you think he won and I do

right so everybody agreed with what they

thought was going to happen before it

happened so so you could ignore

everybody's opinion who of who won right

that's useless but there were some

highlights uh van Jones said he was

literally shaking after listening to

V uh and what he called his smooth and

condescending way and he's more

dangerous than Trump because he could

out outlive Trump by 50 years and you

might be seeing

a tyrant in the making those are my

words but um he says that the's

embracement of the quote replacement

theory that we'll talk about is one step

from Nazi

propaganda what do you take from Van

Jones reaction to

V do you say to yourself my God I had

not thought of it that way but van Jones

might have a good point about this this

uh Brown fellow becoming the next

Hiller or do you say that's the only

only one he's worried

about to me it looks like van Jones is

only worried about one candidate who

isn't

Trump so does that make you like V less

knowing he's the one that scares van

Jones the

most well if you believe that the reason

he's scared is the risk of totalitarian

racism then I

guess I guess you haven't listened to

anything V said that I I feel as if if

this analysis of aake has to ignore

everything he stands for the books he's

written every TV appearance and

everything he's ever posted which is

100% uh Merit and not

race he's the most anti-racist candidate

of all

time by far he is the furthest from a

racist Nazi

of any major candidate in the history of

the United

States that's true he he says that the

loudest and he's the one that says you

got to include white people and white

men if you're being serious about Merit

if you're being serious about not being

a

racist who's the who's the other Brown

leader who

says how about white people are not

discriminated against either

yes definitely don't discriminate

against anybody else but why are you

discriminating against white

people he's the only

one

yeah the comment says Scott is a V's

propaganda

Minister how about he's how about I'm

just endorsing him for president looks

the same I

guess all right some more uh things

happen

um so uh Megan Kelly asked Nikki hilly

aren't you too tight with the banks and

the billionaires to win over the gop's

working class base good question and she

said uh we will take support from

anybody I don't I don't ask them what

their policies are they ask me what my

policies are nicely done nicely done uh

I don't I don't think Nikki H is my

first choice or even third or fourth

choice for president but that that's a

good

answer that's the Willie Brown answer I

always talk about where you should you

should just go right at it so denying

that you're taking money from somebody

is weak and denying you know sort of

just restating your policies kind of

weak but she says it directly we'll take

money from anybody they ask me what my

policies are that's the way it works

it's not the other way around that is a

cool strong answer I liked it all right

uh went super hard at them and he had

quite a few moments one of his moments

was he challenged his competitors to

name the three provinces in Ukraine that

they're trying they're trying to

protect

now number one it's a messed up question

meaning that I don't think you need to

know the names of the

provinces the same as I didn't believe

that U George Bush Senior really needed

to know the cost of a price of bread do

you remember that gotcha when somebody

asked George Bush Senior if he knew the

price of a loaf of bread and he

didn't that really was

unimportant because if he understands

you know the inflation rate he kind of

gets it you know you don't need to be

shopping for a loaf of bread yourself

that was always dumb so when uh V used

the loaf of bread trick I'll call it to

challenge them to name the three

provinces

uh Nikki hilly got a look on her face

that V called out as a blank

expression now this was the brilliant

part this was brilliant so much like the

uh you you've heard the auditory

illusion of uh uh what is it green

needle and the other uh Yan and Laurel

Laurel and Yanni and all that stuff

so when uh Nikki hilly made a let's say

an exaggerated expression on her face to

that comment you in her like her mouth

especially when and sort of a smirk I

looked at the smirk and I said is that a

blank expression or is that a smirk

because a smirk says I'm going to kill

you and you I have the goods but if the

smirk was a uh-oh I'm in trouble well

then it's say exact

opposite so when V looked called her out

and pointed to her and said look at the

blank Expressions he primed you to see

it as a blank

expression and it was

brilliant that that was that was

probably the smartest uh in the moment

play you'll ever see in your life

because when he called it down as a

blank expression you saw it that way if

he had not called it out do you know how

you might have seen

it how many of you watched the debate

and noticed that eventually Nikki hilly

did say the names of the three provinces

without prompting did anybody see her do

it nope you didn't even see it I did I I

saw

it because she did it when somebody was

talking over her so one of the others or

more of them were talking over her and

after the conversation had gone for a

while she sort of leaned into the mic

and just said the names of the provinces

so if you're wondering what the smirk

was for she showed you that she actually

knew the names of the provinces but she

did a bad job of clearing out the space

so that when she delivered her killshot

that she knew the names of the provinces

you could hear it and it would be her

moment so I think you know you can't

read mines I can't read her mind but I

did observe personally her saying the

names of the provinces now did did she

have to think about it probably I would

I'd have to like think about it for a

moment it's like could I come up with

the three and then I think V said

something about you know acting like she

got one of them wrong or something

Crimea or something

and um cuz there can you give me a fact

check there are three provinces but that

doesn't include Crimea right

crimea's would it's its own thing

so so she got you know she may have

known she may have gotten close or she

may have had an answer that the audience

would recognize or would think was the

right answer but um so I'm going to give

vake an A+ for creating that

situation it was a good one for priming

us to see her as a blank blank face and

also the other people and then also

talking over her when she had a chance

and the talking over her when she had a

chance to redeem herself that also

worked right so you might say to

yourself that was really kind of

sneaky you know weasy debate technique

to which I say that's all these debates

are the all the debates are are people

looking for their little weasly tricky

moments it's not about the cleverness of

their argument if it were about the

solidness of the argument disantis would

look like a winner you know at least

half of the debates was never about that

it's about creating the energy in the

moment and the you know can you do it

again kind of vibe so if you didn't like

V you liked him even less CU he was so

strong in the debate if you liked him

you said oh he scored all the Good Hits

and Etc uh another we'll give give some

more moments here uh so V said that he

believe he said why am I the only person

on the stage uh at least who you can say

that and they listed several things that

are really controversial that he says he

believes now that other people are

afraid to say they believe so the first

one is that January 6 now looks like it

was an inside job now he says looks like

it

was which is the fairest way to say it

if he said it was I think that'd be

going too far but he's really smart

about knowing where that line is so he

says it looks like it it it was an

inside job and it does it looks like it

I I also do not declare that it

was but based on what we've seen I'd say

the hypothesis that it was an inside job

is dominant you're more likely than than

the opposite but I don't know for sure

then he also said uh the government lied

about 91 and Saudi Arabian involvement

lied for 20

years I I'm not totally up on that topic

but sounds like that's about right uh

that the 2020 election was stolen from

Trump now when he says stolen he doesn't

mean that the vote was miscounted you

know he's talking about more uh you

platform manipulation and uh the

suppression of free speech and all that

which is

valid and then here's where the Trouble

Comes or does it you've heard of this

thing called the the Great

replacement I know you've heard of it

it's the idea that uh generally comes

from a very right-wing uh conservative

types and they say that uh you remember

the um Charlottesville March and the

Marchers were saying they will not

replace us talking about uh

Jews and that that's just like a sliver

of the the larger concept but then if

you look at the border it looks like

there's some kind of well some would say

I'll say some would say that it looks

like the open border is an obvious

attempt to replace the current

majorities with Browner majorities that

are more likely to vote

Democrat now vake is taking I think the

uh the border is open and they're

bringing in lots of future Democrat

voters to replace us meaning you know us

in this case would be conservatives not

white people so when V says replacement

he's not talking about brown

people because he's brown right he he's

not talking about I think they want

brown people to replace

vake that's not what he's saying uh but

he's he's he's he's definitely dancing

close to the Sun here because people

like van Jones are going to hear it as

the racist version but if you hear it as

the why is the Border open and non

citizens are pouring in and changing the

nature of of our country in ways that

maybe he doesn't like or you don't

like so this is really dangerous and

provocative

but I think what he's trying to do is

revive um free

speech that that's what I see in this

comment I don't see in this comment any

kind of you know uh dog whistle I I

don't think he's about the dog whistle I

think this is more about the beginning

of reclaiming the great replacement from

it's only what racist talk about to uh

I'm just looking at the math you just

brought in 8 million people that weren't

here

before are are are they having an an

impact on our uh let's say ability to um

manage the country The Way We Were of

course they do of course might it might

be a good impact or it might be a bad

impact but it's certainly a a replacing

what was here in a general sense impact

but I don't think it's a ra a racial

comment I think has more to do with

um how how people think

actually all right so we'll see if he

can get away from that little hole he

dug himself a little hole because should

he become president or presidential

candidate he's going to have to explain

this for the rest of his career like

they'll they'll never drop this but he

is good enough that he could take the

gun from their hand and flip it around

so if you imagine vake answering the

question hey is this great replacement

thing sort of a Nazi thing he would

obliterate whoever asked him that

question like that would be another

moment that he would Sparkle because you

should be able to obliterate that

dumbass question he could do it all

right um

and then he went after Nikki hilly for

saying that uh when he had criticized

her in Prior debate uh Nikki Hil said

suggested that maybe he had a quote

woman problem maybe he had a woman

problem well that's not quite a nice

thing to say for one Republican to

another because aren't the Republicans

the ones who are supposed to sort of not

talk like that and not act like it's

some kind of weird woke Dei thing that's

kind of opposite of being a democr or of

a republican at the moment so V Answers

by saying I don't have a woman problem

uh Nikki has a corruption problem and

then he held up his notes and on one

page he had written uh Nikki equals

corrupt did you see that moment when he

when he held it up and showed that was

all that was on his

page it was visual it made the

news and you'll remember it

forever perfect

perfect um then he said uh that Nikki

hilly this is a woman who will send your

kids to die so she can buy a bigger

house talking about her preferences for

more warlike

policies this is a woman who will send

your kids to die so she can buy a bigger

house you could you could

write a doctoral thesis on that one

sentence it's so perfect persuasion

Perfection because you know I always

tell you that uh fear is the best

persuasion right fear is the best

persuasion what is more scary than

sending your kid to die that's pretty

scary and what is more visual than send

to die so you can buy a bigger

house so you got the bigger house you

got your visual you got your son dying

that's also visual but it's also fear

one

sentence do you do you understand how

good he is at

this yeah this is a skill level that

we've I don't think we've ever seen it

before honestly I'm I'm not aware of

ever seeing anybody who operated at this

level including Trump yeah Trump is a

singular character I always resist

comparing him to anything because his

own method just can't be duplicated you

you can't take his method so he just

sort of operates in his own you know zip

code and he is just Trump As Trump in

fact that's all I say about him now

Trump is Trump that that's the good news

and the bad news Trump is Trump you know

why why is he leading right now in the

polls because Trump is

Trump it explains a lot you no nobody

else is him if anybody else could be him

they might be leading in the polls too

but Trump is Trump there's only one

there will never be another one if you

like that there's nobody else to vote

for

all right um so that was pretty artistic

fromes um she called her uh she says

she's the donor's she has donor Puppet

Masters I like Puppet Master too because

you can see the puppet strings visual

visual visual just so good on the visual

stuff and then he says directly that he

rejects identity politics he says two

chromosome two X chromosomes uh does not

IM you from

criticism oh thank

you yeah vake slamming Nicky Hy for

being uh too

woke that is the show I wanted to

watch that one speaks to every part of

my

body I can feel

that right there are a lot of things

that you say oh that's a good

intellectual poter I like that policy

that's a good policy when he said two

exm zones do not imun it doesn't

immunize you from criticism and he

rejects identity politics I could feel

it like in my body I can feel that

that's a whole different level

yeah so there's some uh controversy

about I guess the rumble feed that was

covering the uh the debate I guess it

glitched out when um somebody maybe

Megan Kelly asked about the warp speed

you know the getting the vaccin Nations

fast with Trump and so people are saying

oh that's a coincidence that it cut out

just on that question but it wasn't

coincidence it was just technical

problem there it is very unlikely that

Rumble would cut out on a republican

debate let me say that again there's not

really any chance that Rumble

intentionally cut a feed at any point

during a republican debate that is not a

possibility there's no real world

possibility that that happen at

all all right um what

else so the rock notice I didn't mention

DeSantis I feel like DeSantis is just a

running out the

clock you know sort of waiting around to

see if anything happens with Trump but

not really trying too hard to win at

this point I I think he's just trying to

do an honest attempt because he has

backers and they want him to do it just

looks like I mean he did not seem

engaged at he he just did his good

DeSantis job and by the way the I I have

the

funniest or unusual take on

DeSantis DeSantis is the best

politician that doesn't interest

me so so it's like a

compliment actually that's just a

complete compliment do you know why he

doesn't interest me

because he doesn't do crazy every

day there's no crazy he just like

sort of does good things that his base

wants them to do he's a great politician

in terms of

execution um but for for the presidency

if you're running against the Trump

you're running against a superstar he

doesn't have Superstar energy to to

level up to you know the Taylor Swift of

of

politicians so it's it's terribly unfair

and if Des santis comes back around in

some subsequent year and runs for

president I I can see supporting him

yeah he he's a solid

solid um

patriotic good servant to the people I

think so The Rock Dwayne The Rock

Johnson uh did some mysterious meeting

with the military Folks at the

Pentagon um after you know long ago

saying that uh the parties wanted him to

run for president the parties I love the

way he says it making it seem like he

you know even the Democrats and even the

Republicans both sides yes it's the

parties oh don't don't ask me which side

I mean they all want me so he's very

smart to not kill the rumor because the

longer the rumor goes the more fun it is

for him and more free attention he gets

so he's smart to keep it going but I

would say it's unlikely that he was

talking to the Pentagon to line up his

support for running for president or to

do his research before he ran for

president or any of that the most likely

scenario is he has some business with

the

Pentagon could be he's doing a movie

might want some support from the

military could be the military wants him

to be sort of an ambassador to uh

improve recruitment he' got to be

perfect for that so I doubt that it's

because he's running for president but

it's fun it's fun to think about

it speaking of

fun axios is reporting that Melania uh

thinks Tucker Carlson would be a great

VP for uh

Trump uh because he's he's sort of he's

sort of the more

articulate version of trump with very

similar attitudes about things now I

don't think it's going to be Tucker

because I don't think Tucker

would um be Reckless enough to take the

job it it seems like Tucker is in sort

of an ideal place for his media life and

unless he's looking for a radical change

to that which would surprise me I don't

think he's going to even consider it but

it's a lot of fun isn't

it it's a lot of fun I I tell myself

okay like just game that out in your

mind

question number one would Trump do

better in the election if Tucker is his

vice president go would would he would

Trump do better in the

election almost all knows wow about 80%

knows on locals what do you think

YouTube oh YouTube is more yeses well

also lot of NOS I should have waited all

right more NOS than yeses so so a lot of

you don't think he would change the

outcome here here's why Tucker would be

a positive Tucker

is one of

the I'd

say top five best communicators in all

of politics would you agree with that

he's a top five best Communicator in all

of politics so therefore he some would

say and therefore he would be a good

vice presidential uh run mate here's

what I say you get all that for

free Tucker is still going to be talking

you still going to have a huge

platform no matter what and you know

he's going to be supportive of trump

because he said so directly so Trump can

get all the benefit of Tucker's

communication

Excellence without any of the

reputational harm of saying oh 10 years

ago Tucker did a thing oh 5 years ago

Tucker said this thing that could be

interpreted two ways he he could just

take all the good for free with none of

the

pain because if he could find a VP who

didn't have any of the controversy that

Tucker brings

naturally then he can get all of

Tucker's goodness plus a solid you know

backup candidate that helps him for his

age especially I think I think Trump has

to go

young because the age question will be

Salient if he gets

elected and um I think VI is more

obvious choice but we'll

see

um the competence crisis is real

apparently there's this case going on to

see if Trump should be denied being on

the ballot in some states so Colorado is

looking at that and the Colorado Supreme

Court Judge uh William Hood III said in

the process of uh discussing it and uh

judging it he said quote in some ways

January 6 uh seems like a poster child

for Insurrection in other words

indicating that the judge uh believes

that Insurrection is largely obviously

proven now is that bad

news if he thinks that the Insurrection

is sort of

obvious well it's bad news for this

judge

because it makes him look like an

idiot how how exactly is it obvious that

an unarmed trespass is anything more

than at best delaying a process for a

few hours or a few days you know may

maybe the Supreme Court has to look at

it that's it that that was the highest

level of risk a short delay Supreme

Court looks at it

rules how does a judge not understand

that that this is an incompetence

problem isn't it am I wrong to me this

looks like basic competence is just

missing yeah we'll

see

um now here's what I think about

Trump's uh language lately so I think

axios was pointing this out as well so

he's he's used language that his critics

are saying hey that's very well it's not

Hitler like but it's Hitler

adjacent well that's not quite dictator

talk but you're getting real

close well that's not exactly what the

Nazis say but it reminds me of them so

is he doing the dumbest thing in the

world by allowing people to frame him as

a dictator it it almost looks like he's

doing it intentionally especially when

he said um that he would would only be a

dictator for one day he said quote uh

we're closing the border and we're

drilling drilling drilling after that uh

I'm not a dictator so just one day I'll

just be a dictator for one day after

that not a dictator now when I first

heard it my first reaction was oh why

are you doing this like this is just the

worst idea his biggest problem is that

they're going to call him a dictator he

knows that so why would he use language

that most of us would recognize would

make you be label a dictator why would

you do that well I have a hypothesis I

don't know that it's true but it goes

like

this he might be playing what I call the

narrow Ravine strategy now this is one I

have used myself in the past and you

might recognize it from some of my past

the narrow Ravine means you allow your

enemies to Bunch up in in a place where

it's really easy to you know shoot down

and kill them so you're basically you're

Hing them into the most vulnerable place

for them while they believe they're

winning so the thing that gets them into

the narrow Ravine in the first place is

they say ahha we've got you trapped

you're going to be trapped in the narrow

Ravine and then they chase you down the

narrow Ravine but you've got all your

people on the top and they shoot down

into the narrow Ravine and kill him so

it's basically a trap the narrow Ravine

trap so we see him saying things which

are making his critics say oh salivate

salivate he keeps saying things that's

going to make it easy for

us easy for us to uh to take him out by

labeling him a dictator and so they're

like all right we got our plan everybody

everybody here's our plan we're going to

go full dictator on Trump he's making it

easy he keeps saying all these dictator

things and he

is what's another what what's another

reason he might be doing it well I think

he may have given you a little wink in a

nod when he said he would be a dictator

for one day just to get a couple of

things

done and here's what I think he's

telling you he's going to milk it

because there's nothing easier in theory

this doesn't mean he'll do it but in

theory there would be nothing easier to

persuade than to persuade people that he

wasn't a

dictator it could be the easiest thing

and the way you would do it is by

mocking it you just make a joke out of

it did he make a joke out of it when he

said oh I might be a dictator for one

day just one day yes yes he did that was

literally making light of it he never

gave it wait if he had said dictator why

I'm in favor of free speech and you guys

are against free speech and here are my

three other reasons why I'm not a

dictator and what would the audience

hear dictator dictator dictator well

you're very defensive aren't you you you

you seem very defensive about this

dictator thing why are you so defensive

you know why why does this attack really

get under your skin you know why why are

you melting down over this must be true

because the way you're reacting to it

right that would be the mistake it's

also the way a classic politician would

respond I'm no dictator the other side

might be acting more like dictators than

me let me give you these laundry list of

reasons doesn't work at all but what are

they reporting about it they're they

actually axios literally

reported it was a wink and a

nod

the the news actually picked up that

that it was a wink in a nod now a wink

in a nod is not

mockery but it's a

signal that it's

coming oh it's

coming I think that he's playing the

narrow Ravine followed by the mockery

cannons I think the mockery cannons are

are uh just on hold and once he gets the

Democrats do fully commit and it might

even be months from now I mean it could

be next summer just let them just call

him a dictator while he's leading in the

polls because as long as he's leading

the polls everything's

good gets his nomination over the summer

and then goes full mockery cannons on

the only thing that they've accused him

for for a year and they're going to say

it's not working and

they're going to have to come up with

something new at the last minute which

is always a tough tough thing

so I think he's leading them into the

narrow Ravine on this dictator thing

because objectively speaking If he if he

eventually mocks it and then people

start looking at you know the opposite

evidence that maybe it's the Democrats

were the the power hungry

people to me it's looking like it might

be a really strong play but there's a

lot of assumptions I'm making my first

assumption is that he's fully

aware of what he's doing and that it's a

narrow Ravine play I think the the wink

and the nod about dictator for a

day does tell you that he's not going to

take it

seriously and that he's going to keep it

in that frame and if he keeps pushing

that frame it's going to be glorious

it's going to be

glorious all

right meanwhile uh I guess there are

more voting machine company lawsuits

against uh I guess smart mtic is going

after Mike Lindell for his claims about

uh their machines they're going after

Newsmax and then Dominion is also going

after

Newsmax so all that action might happen

over the summer which

would um potentially being embarrassing

I guess but the other thing is em

embarrassing for Trump I suppose but the

other possibility is that there will be

a lot of

Discovery why is it that nobody's

required the voting machine companies to

show us

their um

code I see this is the part I don't

understand may maybe somebody can

explain this if somebody's a lawyer if

I'm a lawyer and I say if I've made an

accusation that that your voting

machines um

cheated and then they sue me because

there's no evidence that they cheated

which is the case

you no no convincing evidence that I'm

aware

of doesn't Mike Lindell have every right

to make them show all of their

proprietary

software and if they don't show their

proprietary software doesn't he

win because he makes a claim that they

can't disprove without showing their

software and they can't do that because

it's

proprietary the the worst that they

could prove

is that he hasn't proven his

claim but I think in order for him to be

guilty they have to sort of prove that

it's not true do I have that right that

in order to Prevail they have to prove

that his claim is false how do they do

that unless they show their unless they

uh open themselves up for a full audit

and that's never going to

happen how how did they prove that they

couldn't have changed it without being

detected unless they show every part of

their

system there is a possibility that these

voting machine

companies are being encouraged by the

Democrats to do what they're doing

because it looks bad for

Trump it's a possibility that the people

who least want this law these lawsuits

are dominion and

smartmatic they might not want to do

this but they might have a lot of

pressure from people who make decisions

about what voting machines get put into

what areas so in other words their

customers might be pushing them their

customers meaning

Democrats

so here's what I would look for I would

look for the answer to this question

does this open up the uh the machine

companies to Greater scrutiny than they

would ever agree

to it's a big question isn't it I don't

know the answer to it so I'm looking for

actually maybe some wisdom

here all

right

um now here's interesting news

apparently the Saudis and France are

talking sort of privately about how to

figure out what to do with

Gaza after the the fighting stops

now do any of you remember I said the

best solution might be to get a Saudi

Arabia involved in the the endstate

solution because and and that maybe it's

part of a larger deal to normalize

relations did I say that in public or am

I imagining

it I need a fact check I did say that in

public right and it looks like it's

happening to me this was the

most productive possibility doesn't mean

it'll work but the most productive

possibility is that Saudi wants to do a

deal presumably in which you know they

normalize relationships with Israel for

for purely Financial basic obvious

reasons right it's just in saudi's best

interest and I think they have a leader

that could get it

done so if they're looking to make a

breakthrough in the larger piece for the

area which the Saudis would like

wouldn't don't you think the Crown

Prince would like to elevate his status

in the region by being a

peacemaker can you imagine anything that

would be better for Saudi Arabia and

better for the Crown Prince than to be

seen as the the person who finally

pulled something together that

worked there's nothing there's nothing

that would be better for Saudi Arabia

nothing in my opinion but I'm not very

good as an expert at the Middle East but

to me it looks like it'd be the best

thing so that might be productive we'll

see but the uh initial offer looks like

a loser uh the rumor is that what the

reported plan would be or at least this

is you know maybe the working

conversation about what it might be is

they would strip Gaza of

arms

um which I don't know if that's even

possible do you think you could keep

heavy weapons out of Gaza even no matter

how hard you tried I don't know

maybe set up local governance well what

is local

governance what is local governance

because there's no way that Israel is

going to you know abdicate control so

does that mean that they have a local

government but the security is still

handled by others cuz it's who handles

the security who who is in

charge so that part is

unstated uh and to unlock Israeli prison

doors and let 5,000 prisoners out and

that maybe this has to do more with

normalizing relationships with Israel

that might be the big play here anyway I

don't know if any of this will be useful

but it's exactly the right

conversation um and uh to me it looks

like the most fruitful path there are 50

interns were now put together a letter

uh interns in the White House against

Joe Biden's uh handling of Israel and

Hamas and uh says that they're ignoring

the pleas of the American people blah

blah blah how how many inter are there

40 interns not 50 how many interns are

there uh in the White

House are there more than 40

interns that that sounds like a lot of

interns that sounds like too many

doesn't

it all right

um so I love this because it's another

example of uh I'm guessing that these

interns are very diverse you want to

make a guess do you think the the

interns are a little extra

diverse so they probably have some Dei

um some Dei uh let's say objectives when

they got their interns and now they have

40 of them that object to the

administration that hired them in a

pretty significant way so it makes me

wonder if they think that worked out for

them so we'll see how that

goes um the Texan which is a publication

reports that uh I guess Texas the

Attorney General uh Texas Attorney

General is ass suing the government for

weaponizing censorship against the daily

wire and the Federalist so the daily

wire and the Federalist I guess are the

would they be the plaintiffs do I have

that right in other words in order for

the suit to have meaning there has to be

victims so I think they would represent

the victims I think that's how it works

and the idea would be that uh the uh the

Democrats um put together a censorship

architecture of these fake cutouts Etc

and

influenced uh social media companies for

the purpose of

censorship what do you think about this

I think this has a good

chance because as far as I know the the

factual basis for this lawsuit is well

demonstr ated and now public meaning

that you know from the Twitter files and

basically everything that Michael

shellenberger is doing and Matt

taibe as and uh yeah and Congress I

think they have enough evidence to make

this

case I think they do so this will be

interesting Texas to the rescue

again

huh so we'll see

we shall see I think that's

important all

right uh yeah Mike Ben is the the best

voice on the uh what do they call it the

censor censorship industrial complex I

call it the brainwashing industrial

complex I think

censorship well that gets to the

Constitutional question the best you

know cuz the government can't do

censorship I think that if you want to

understand it on the sort of common

sensical level it's not

censorship on the on the Practical level

it's

brainwashing they don't just want some

people not to talk they want to change

what you think and so brainwashing is

the

scarier

crime that the censorship is sort of how

you get to the crime but the crime is

the brainwashing it's just that the

constitutional part is the

censorship all

right um censorship or

deprogramming uh let's see I'm being

prompted to talk about Congressman

Thomas

Massie all right let me tell you what

I've learned so Breitbart and uh Joel

Pollock in particular

uh was giving Thomas Massie some heat

for a meme that used Z Zion was part of

the mean and I said to well I said here

um I don't really see where that was

anti-semitic so here's the

counterargument so if you want to

understand how anybody would see that as

anti-semitic here's the counter

argument that that language is more

commonly used

by uh uh let's say the worst racists on

the right who believe that uh the word

Zion is closer to a global Jewish

conspiracy idea and not what the

dictionary tells you because the

dictionary just says it's about uh

Israel's statehood and supporting it

right so I looked at all the definitions

and the definitions were all the same

it's just about Israel being a state and

sporting it so I thought well what's

wrong with using that

word if every definition is a perfectly

innocent definition what's wrong but all

words mean something in context only

would you agree words don't have just a

meaning and a context every word in

fact that was a big point in my book

reframe your brain one of one of the

chapters makes a big point of this words

take on um meaning beyond the word so

you can look at the dictionary and there

will be the base meaning but that's not

everything the word means right we we

put Power into words and because a

certain group of people have used that

Zion word as part of their Ultra

anti-semitic uh

narrative that anybody else who uses it

is whether they like it or not is taking

be on all that weight so we could argue

all day about the specific definition of

the word but it does have the effect of

giving some um let's say giving some

oxygen to the worst anti-semitic parts

of the country so if you want to stop

somebody from giving oxygen to the worst

people in the

world you call it out when they use the

word just so people know there there's

sort of a line here

gurgle I'm just telling you both sides

right if you want to know what side I

take I take the I take the side of

Thomas Massie because he used the words

the way the dictionary uses them he's a

nerd and nerds use words the way the

dictionary uses them and and I think

that's the whole story now but is it

also fair for somebody to point out that

you're getting real close to that line

that you don't want to give any Oxygen

to yes it is absolutely fair to point

out that those words carry more meaning

than the speaker may have

intended that is

fair right but I but I but I'm always

going to side with the Free Speech if

you're using an English word in an

English word way to make a point that's

not

racist I'm okay with that but I'm also

I'm also okay with warning somebody that

they're getting close to a line that's

okay

too can I agree with both of

them I'm going to agree with both of

them today all right but largely because

I like both of them personally have you

ever notice how hard it is to disagree

with somebody you

like right so I love Joel Pollock and I

love Thomas Massie so I'm just going to

agree with both of them and move

on all right

um did you watch the squid games no I've

never seen the squid games it doesn't

look like something I'd like I don't

know um yeah all right I'm seeing lots

of reactions here but I think we've done

the job that we wanted to do today oh my

God more than more than enough uh

YouTube thanks for joining I enjoyed I

enjoyed you and we'll see you tomorrow

bye for now