Episode 2587 CWSA 09/04/24
Election integrity looking good! And other Trump/Harris news. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
Well, look at all of you coming in for the best thing you've ever seen. Before we're almost ready, as soon as I got all my comments working. Come on, there we go, it's all working now. Good morning everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization. It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.…
View segment →e to take this experience up to levels that nobody could even understand with their tiny shiny human brains, all you need is a mug or a glass, a tankard, a chalice, a stein, a canteen, a jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. Join me now for the unpa…
View segment →ing your comments as I'm sipping. Well, let's hit the science news before we hit the political news. Not much happening politically, but in science, oh my goodness. There's a new study that found that exercising for only 10 minutes a day dropped your risk of cancer by 30 percent. And also that if y…
View segment →a is that one fact check will sour you on an idea even if there are other sources that are even more reliable, I would imagine, to say it's true. Do you know how you could have saved some money on that study? You could have just asked me. Because every hypnotist will tell you, and probably anybody…
View segment →formation for anything, it's just pretty close to a guess these days. Science and guessing are largely the same thing. You know, the Venn diagram between I don't know, I'll flip a coin, it's either dangerous or it's not, flip a coin, looks like it's not, about the same odds as science. All right, t…
View segment →ock in CNN I'd be selling it pretty fast. Because, and I'm not saying that there's some problem with Brian Stelter, I'm saying what exactly is the management theory behind this? I've never, it's hard for me to think of any example where somebody was let go because they weren't getting it done and th…
View segment →it to be meaningful and actually make a difference in somebody's life. And it did. Even after I'm no longer married there's still some benefits that trickle on. So anyway I don't know why I'm babbling on about that. It could be because it's a slow news day. It's a slow news day. Well there's more…
View segment →at the same time allow these screaming signals to be there? Why would you do that? Well who knows. CNN says 15 percent of likely voters in six battleground states are still undecided. Now they're quite adamant that Pennsylvania is the most important of all the states. But do you believe that 15 per…
View segment →Trump was on Lex Fridman show and I don't know, I saw some things he said. I'm not sure he really made any news worth mentioning on that. But it's another example of Trump basically putting everything out there for you to look at. You know he's got four years of being president so we got to look at…
View segment →ill move one vote. I really don't know that it'll make any difference because they really just wanted somebody who wasn't brain dead. You know we finally hit the limit of how low they would be willing to go. Well okay brain dead might be too far. I'm going to admit that not having a functioning brai…
View segment →attern. So there's a former New York state official, government official, was arrested and charged with being an agent of the Chinese government. And apparently she worked for both Andrew Cuomo when he was governor and current governor Kathy Hochul. She's been off the payroll for a while but apparen…
View segment →s is true? Do you think he really had 30 people executed because they didn't do enough for flood prevention? Does that sound true to you? I'm going to lay my bet on not true. Now that doesn't mean nobody was killed. If it turned out that three people were executed I would say more likely yes than no…
View segment →Well, look at all of you coming in for the best thing you've ever seen. Before we're almost ready, as soon as I got all my comments working. Come on, there we go, it's all working now.
Good morning everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization. It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.
If you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody could even understand with their tiny shiny human brains, all you need is a mug or a glass, a tankard, a chalice, a stein, a canteen, a jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.
Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better. It's called, that's right, a simultaneous sip. Go. One, two, three.
Okay, I'm reading your comments as I'm sipping.
Well, let's hit the science news before we hit the political news. Not much happening politically, but in science, oh my goodness. There's a new study that found that exercising for only 10 minutes a day dropped your risk of cancer by 30 percent. And also that if you just did three short bursts of exercise per day, you can reduce your risk of cancer by 40 percent and get a 50 percent reduction in heart disease. So if you just take a 30-minute walk per day, you're killing it, say the nutritionist scientists.
Now, is it my imagination or have I spent every year for as far back as 67 years consecutively hearing that experts have finally decided how much exercise you need and what is the right kind? Does it seem that after 67 years in a row of updating the right kind of exercise, that now they're done? Oh well, that looks like they're done, 67 years in a row. But no, now they know. Now we've got a real good idea, so no more information needed on exercise. We're all done.
Or could it be backwards science? Could it be backwards science? Let me see. If you could exercise for 10 minutes a day, you have lower risk of cancer. Does that mean that they did a test where they made some people exercise and some not? Or did they simply measure the people who exercised and compared it to people who do not exercise? I wonder if the group of people who do not exercise have something in common, and the people who do exercise have something in common, probably a whole bunch of things. So I'm not even sure this is real science.
But that said, I am pretty sure that exercising is better than not exercising. I feel confident about that.
Meanwhile, there's another story. I can't believe this made it into the news. This is a legitimate news story. Now when I say legitimate, I mean it's completely fake, but it actually made it into the news. There was a Japanese father and bodybuilder who claims he's a true master and has doubled his life by only sleeping half an hour per night for a dozen years. So there's a guy who told a journalist that he only sleeps half an hour a night for the past 12 years. The journalist wrote it down, and then a publisher published it. And not once in the article did it say we have some skepticism about the truth of this.
Now it reminds me when I was a kid there was a group called the breatharians. I've mentioned this before. This was a real group of people who claimed to any reporter who was dumb enough to believe them that they had given up on eating and they no longer needed to eat, and they were getting all of their calories and nutrition by knowing how to breathe properly. So they were called breatharians. And I think it was for months of my life as a young person I was watching the science try to convince me that you could live forever by just breathing the air.
And I see this story of the Japanese bodybuilder who only sleeps half an hour a night, and I think, huh, I think I've seen this story before.
All right, so there's new controversy, says the news, about whether dairy products are good for you or bad for you. What do you think? Are dairy products good for you or bad for you? Well, what do we know about how everything works in the world? Is there or is there not a large dairy farming business? Is there an industry that makes a lot of money on selling you dairy products? If there is, then is there science that says it's good for you? I'll bet there is. And can we guess who might have funded the science that says that dairy is good for you? It might be that same industry that's making money by selling you dairy. I don't know for sure, but that would be the normal way things work.
And what about the people who say that dairy is bad for you? Are they using science? Well, if science were real, science is just guessing at this point. I mean really, most science is just guessing. It's just no better than a coin flip. So is dairy good for you or bad for you? I have no way to know and no idea. If I had to guess, it's probably good for some people at some amount and bad for other people at any amount. That's my guess. There's probably just a lot of human variability.
But if you want to get your nutrients like calcium or something, you might have to work on that a little hard if you're not getting your dairy. At the moment I don't need any dairy, at least consciously, so I'm down to zero dairy. Is anybody else with me on zero? And by the way, I'm not claiming that that's healthier. I'm claiming that I don't know. I feel good if I don't eat it. I feel my stomach doesn't handle it well, but I'm not positive about that. And I'm not sure that cheese is the same as milk for my body.
But imagine 2024 and we still don't know this basic question. Is one of the main things that you eat good for you or bad for you? You think that would be a really important question to know the right answer.
Forbes has an article about a study that says that humans, now you're not going to believe this, you better buckle up. Here's some scientific information that you never would have guessed, never would have known this without science. Turns out that people don't use the logical parts of their brain for making decisions, and that in many, many cases people will ignore the objective cost benefit and make irrational decisions. Huh. Do you think they wasted a little money on that little bit? Because you know what you could have done instead of doing that big study? You could have asked me or any hypnotist. Do people make decisions based on rational brains? No, no. We make our decision first and then we rationalize why we did it. Until you understand that, you'll never be effective in life. It's such a limitation to think that you're a rational creature or that other people are.
How about this? There's new science according to Science Mag that fact-checking, if something gets fact-checked and says it's fake, that that will be very influential on us even if there are other things that say it's true. So the idea is that one fact check will sour you on an idea even if there are other sources that are even more reliable, I would imagine, to say it's true.
Do you know how you could have saved some money on that study? You could have just asked me. Because every hypnotist will tell you, and probably anybody who's studied psychology, that a little bit of negative is much stronger than a whole bunch of positive. You all know that, right? Let me explain that better to you. If you're eating some delicious soup and I say, "Oh, when you turned your head I saw a bug crawl in your soup. Can't see it now 'cause it's swimming around the bottom." Do you say to yourself, you know, all the other information about my soup is positive so I'm just going to keep eating this soup? No, you do not. Do you trust the person who said that there's a bug in your soup? Maybe not. Maybe it's not somebody very trustworthy. But you're still not going to eat the soup. It's just a basic element of a human brain. If you've got a little bit of danger that you've been warned about, like this isn't true, is way more influential than a hundred people telling you something's true or something's safe.
So yeah, you didn't have to study that one. You could have just asked me.
And then the ultimate one, the ultimate example of this. Medical Express is reporting that you can study eye movements when people are watching a movie and somehow they can determine, wait for it, wait for it, that when two people are watching the same movie on the same screen they might be watching different movies. Meaning that what they're perceiving on the same movie is so different that it's effectively like two watching different movies.
Has anybody ever told you that the human experience is two movies on one screen? Yeah, I tell you that about once a day. So you didn't need to study that one either.
Oh, here's some good news. According to the WHO, that would be, well they're a very credible organization, very credible. I don't know if they've ever been wrong about anything that I can think of. How about a meta study? Meta study, well that's the highest level of scientific integrity, a meta study. Now I'm joking. If you knew the WHO is not exactly where I would go to get my reliable science, and if I were looking for reliable science I sure as hell wouldn't look at a meta study, which is basically astrology. But because most people don't know what a meta study is they say, whoa, that's better than a study. You know what's better than a study? A meta study. No it's not. A meta study is just pure garbage. I've explained it so many times I don't need to do it again.
However, the WHO that you totally trust did this meta study that's totally better than astrology and they found no evidence, no evidence whatsoever, that cell phone radiation causes brain cancer. That's according to Brandon Vigliarolo in The Register.
And here's the thing. I'd like to tell you a story from my personal experience. Now anecdotes do not top science. They do top meta studies though. My anecdote would be every bit as credible as the WHO doing a meta study. I'm not saying I'm right. I'm saying that my credibility and my one little anecdote I'm going to tell you, it's about the same, about the same as all their science. Totally unreliable.
All right. I used to work for the phone company, local phone company called Pacific Bell, which no longer exists. But during its day I worked in a laboratory and my group, the larger part of the group not me specifically, tasked our best scientist engineer guy to go study these new things called cell phones. The cell phones had been invented but the smartphone type, the little micro cell or something. But in the early days we wanted to know if it was dangerous to have this strong radio in a phone that people are holding up to their head. And so we put our best guy on it and the best guy went and studied it. He looked at all the science, he looked at the logic of it, etc. And he came back and he gave his official well-researched conclusion: no, it is not dangerous to use a cell phone and put it up to your head.
Now that was Pacific Bell's one guy, the one expert who was in charge of knowing the answer to that question, and he said absolutely no, there is no evidence that you should worry about it. Then I sat with him privately because he was in my work group and I said to him, can I ask you a question? Now you studied this thing and you're saying that the science says it's safe. He goes, yep, science does not indicate any problem. And I said, follow-up question. He goes, sure, what's your follow-up question? I said, knowing everything you know now that you studied it and found it safe, would you feel comfortable putting one of these phones up to your head? What do you think he said? Nope. He said no, there's no way he would put these phones up to his head. And then he described exactly what he thought engineering-wise and scientifically why it wasn't safe. But his conclusion was based on looking at all the science. His official recommendation was it was safe for the rest of us, but there was no way in hell he was going to do it.
That's your real world, folks. That is the real world you live in. The number one expert, the one that all the decisions were made on, his personal decision was opposite of his professional recommendation. That's a real story that happened to me personally. I asked him in person privately.
Now that doesn't mean that your cell phone is dangerous. I'm definitely not saying that. So yeah, I want you to hear that. I'm saying that if you rely on science or health information for anything, it's just pretty close to a guess these days. Science and guessing are largely the same thing. You know, the Venn diagram between I don't know, I'll flip a coin, it's either dangerous or it's not, flip a coin, looks like it's not, about the same odds as science.
All right, there's a report. Fox News had it and a bunch of other people on social media, that if you asked your digital assistant who you should vote for, if you should vote for President Harris or Trump, if you ask them individually, you know, is there a reason to vote for Harris, it'll give you a reason. And if you say is there a reason to vote for Trump, you'll say I don't answer questions like that. Do you believe that story? Do you believe that if I ask my digital assistant about Harris that it will answer differently than if I ask it about Trump? You want to find out? So you might want to cover up your digital devices because I'm going to be talking to all of them at the same time. You ready?
Alexa, is there a good reason to vote for Kamala Harris? I don't know that. Alexa, is there a good reason to vote for President Trump? I cannot provide content that promotes a specific political party or a specific candidate. Nope, it cannot give you content on a specific candidate. But let me ask again. Alexa, can you give me some reasons to vote for Kamala Harris? Sorry, I don't know that.
So I tested this yesterday and it doesn't give an answer for either one. But there is some possibility that it's different for different users and different regions and maybe there's some customization that is wonky. Maybe they fixed it as soon as it was pointed out. If I were Amazon, the moment that hit the news and social media I would have stopped everything and said well we got to change that. Everything you're doing now is less important. Stop everything, go change that right now. And 10 minutes from now I don't want that happening on our device. I think that's probably what happened. Now I don't know that it was necessarily any scheme by Amazon. I don't think I would go that far. It seems far more likely that it was just some dark corner of the device that wasn't fully vetted out. So I'm not sure I would go so far to say this was intentional, especially since the device doesn't use regular AI, not the way that we think of it. But it's probably complicated and I'm not sure that they always know what it's going to do before somebody tries it. So I'm giving the benefit of the doubt and say it's a little bit of a mystery but doesn't seem important because it seems fine now.
All right, CNN has hired back Brian Stelter to be their chief media analyst and lead author of Reliable Sources newsletter. What's going on? Can somebody explain to me why they rehired Brian Stelter? Is it because he used to be really bad for business but then by staying home and being a good dad to his kids he became not that? What was it? The staying home that cured him? What exactly changed?
And let me ask you this. If you had already tried Brian Stelter and you thought it didn't work out to the point where you actually laid him off, you wouldn't think of trying maybe somebody else? There's nobody else in the entire world who could be a chief media analyst? You know who could be a chief media analyst with no training whatsoever? Me. You know who else could be a chief media analyst with no extra training whatsoever? Every person with a podcast. It's the easiest job in the world. You're just looking at other media and saying what do you think about it? I could do that right away. Hey, I'm looking at CNN. I have comments. Look at me, I have an opinion. That's the whole job. I'm doing his job right now. I think I'm nailing it.
What in the world is going on? If I had stock in CNN I'd be selling it pretty fast. Because, and I'm not saying that there's some problem with Brian Stelter, I'm saying what exactly is the management theory behind this? I've never, it's hard for me to think of any example where somebody was let go because they weren't getting it done and then just time went by and they just said well come on back. Like what is behind that? If I had to guess with no information whatsoever, maybe there was some kind of management change. Somebody who hated him left, somebody who loved him took the job. It might be something like that. Could be as simple as that.
Anyway, actor George Clooney wants us to know that Joe Biden is selfless for ending his re-election bid. And really not just selfless, maybe in the manner of George Washington, the greatest American of all time. So when you think of the greatest American you think of George Washington and then very, very closely but really in the same category would be Joe Biden with dementia.
You know I'm kind of glad that George Washington isn't here to hear that because could you imagine if he was listening? You know George Washington has a few hundred years of being number one. It's like yeah, number one. And then, oh wait, you've got a little competition. Well, little competition for the person who created the United States with my bravery and my wisdom. And who's that? His name is Joe Biden. Really? Can I see a video of him talking? I'd like to be impressed with who is now in my category of greatness. And then he watches the debate with Trump and he says I hate all of you people. Why did I even create you a country? You've ruined everything. That's what George Washington would say, exactly like that.
There's a study about what generations of Americans are having how much sex, just so you can compare your own performance. So Millennials and Gen X, they reported slightly higher figures. So both groups having sex five times in the last month. Boomers, they had only three times in the last month. And Gen Z and Boomers had almost identical. So the youngest people and the oldest people are having the least amount of sex per month. But the Millennials and the Gen X are just killing it with five per month.
Now I would like to give you my opinion of this survey. I'm pretty sure that you should not take an average of the people having no sex and then combine it with the people who had sex. In my experience of life there are people who are having sex and they're having plenty of it, and then there's mostly people having no sex. Or you know there was that one old girlfriend who was in town that one day but basically no sex. I think they should only measure the people who are having sex. I would not average in the people having no sex because whatever is going on with them is not exactly the same as the people who are only getting laid five times a month.
And by the way, what is the amount that would make men happy? The amount that would make men happy is not five times per month. That's on the high end by the way according to the survey. No it would be a lot more than that. What would make women happy? Well it depends because people are individuals, all over the place. But my guess would be about five times a month. Yeah, once a week, five times a month. So basically marriage and relationships are a situation in which the woman is getting her needs met and the man is not. And that's the ordinary way of life.
I've sometimes thought that, having been through a few relationships that didn't work out famously as many of you are aware, here's something that maybe you didn't know about my approach to relationships. My assumption about a relationship is that the point of it is to give my stuff away. Because I had a lot of stuff and I had more stuff than I needed for my daily happiness. And I said to myself you know it would be great if I had somebody to share this with, basically to give it away. So you would find people that you have some deep connection to and then you would enjoy giving it away. But I never saw being married as the thing that would make me happy. I thought the point of it was to make somebody else happy and that you would get your fulfillment from making them happy.
Now the part I didn't know is that you can't make women happy. So it took me a few runs before I realized, wait a minute, I think this looks like a trick. Why is it that whenever they get what they want they just get unhappy about a new thing? I feel like I'm being tricked. So I'm not sure that it has nothing to do with the individuals I had relationships with. I'm pretty sure that the model is that if the man has the stuff and either a child or a spouse doesn't have stuff then it becomes their job to get stuff. And there's nothing wrong with that as long as everybody knows what the deal is. That seems fair to me. So I never minded that a relationship was primarily a transfer of assets because that's why I signed up for it. I had too many assets literally. I just wanted to give some stuff away but I didn't want to randomly give it away to strangers. I wanted it to be meaningful and actually make a difference in somebody's life. And it did. Even after I'm no longer married there's still some benefits that trickle on.
So anyway I don't know why I'm babbling on about that. It could be because it's a slow news day. It's a slow news day.
Well there's more information about the attempted assassination in Butler, PA where the local police offered the Secret Service drones and the Secret Service said no. The local police offered a communication plan that would allow them all to be on the same communication channels. The Secret Service said no. The locals wanted to have a meeting with the Secret Service so that they would all have the right planning and procedures in common and the Secret Service skipped it. Huh.
And then the people who were from the Homeland Security people who were filling in for the Secret Service, 'cause there was a shortage of people that day, were only given a two-hour online training and it was pulled from child exploitation cases. So basically the people were replacements who were untrained, turned down drones, turned down communication which would be the most basic thing you'd want to get right, and skipped the meetings.
And here's the question. Remember I said early on that there was a good case, there's a good chance that whatever happened was a Dilbert situation. Meaning it was ordinary people and you put them in a situation and there's always a pointy-haired boss and there's always a Wally and there's always just normal human interactions which ruin everything. So we have not ruled out that there was some shenanigans meaning that the shooter was somehow co-opted by somebody else. So it still looks suspicious as hell, right? So I join you in saying I don't think we'll ever know what happened here unless it's another one of those 60 years later like RFK Jr. or like JFK. I mean so we'll see, we'll see.
So the Department of Justice have charged the Hamas leader and some other militants over the October 7th attacks. Why are we bothering to charge from the United States the Hamas leader? Does that allow something to happen that Israel couldn't do? Because I'm pretty sure he's dead no matter what you know. And if Israel never catches them it doesn't matter what the United States did. If they do catch them it also doesn't matter what the United States did because Israel will do what they're going to do. Same with the other militants. But maybe there's some way that we can freeze their assets overseas or something. There must be some advantage to it but I don't know.
You remember that Nashville school shooter Audrey Hale and everybody said show us her journal entries to find out why she did that. Well it turns out, by the way is Audrey trans? I can't remember. I think Audrey was trans. I'm not sure. But Audrey was very happy and excited about killing innocent people and was just crazy. So according to the journal Audrey was very excited to kill young children and to also be killed. So if you're very excited to do these things then I just have to say that's mental illness and that's the beginning and the end of the story. Unfortunately that's just serious mental illness.
Well, a big surprise. Mike Pence will not endorse Trump. Okay, is there anything to say about that? Were any of you expecting Pence to endorse Trump? That would be a pretty big turnaround from his past behavior. So no, I don't think Mike Pence would pick Trump. Trump didn't pick Mike Pence so that's no surprise.
Meanwhile over in Michigan the Michigan Court of Claims judge Yates has ruled that RFK Jr.'s name will stay on the ballot. Now keep in mind that RFK Jr. wants his name off the ballot. So why would the state put somebody's name on the ballot when the person on the ballot wants to be off the ballot? I'm sure they had a good reason. So let me read the reason from the judge. Quote, elections are not just games and the secretary of state is not obligated to honor the whims of candidates for public office.
So when Kennedy said can you take my name off the state election thing, that was called a whim, a whim of a candidate. No I don't think it's a whim to cancel your candidacy in the state. So I think you have the same opinion I do that Michigan is rigged. So you don't have to wonder if the election is rigged because here it is now. Is this enough to change the results of the election? Potentially we don't know that. But there is some suggestion that the reason that the states want to keep RFK Jr. on the battleground states is because they think it'll hurt Trump. Now if that's true I would say the election's already rigged in this way. Am I wrong?
So I think the yes or no of whether the election is rigged is now answered. It's a yes. They rigged it in front of us. There's no apologies, no explanations. Something about the whim of the candidate isn't exactly a reason. So we have reached the point where they can rig it right in front of us. Right in front of us. That's what this is. It's rigging right in front of us. And then you'll go to jail if later you say it was rigged. You'll go to jail probably because it looks like they're getting pretty tight on this whole censorship stuff.
But if you're worried about the election let me tell you that they're, let me just tell you some things to set your mind at ease. 'Cause suppose that keeping RFK Jr. on the election doesn't make that much difference. Might not make that much difference. So really it would be other things that you'd worry about. But you don't have to worry about the election being rigged unless you see any of these things. So I'm going to tell you the signals that you should worry about but until you see one of these signals don't worry about it. The elections are fine.
All right, so these are the only things you should worry about. Let's say you heard that the election would involve voting machines in some places instead of just paper ballots. Well that would be something to worry about. That's not a guarantee of anything rigging but definitely I'd worry about it. Why are you doing that? If they didn't require IDs to vote, well I mean that'd be a pretty strong signal they plan to cheat. But until you see that don't worry about the elections. If they had massive mail-in voting, well that would be a problem. I mean that would be a signal that they have bad intentions, especially if it's added to the no ID requirement. Elon Musk said that on X today that there is no other reason to have mail-in voting and no ID required unless the point is to cheat. So it does look like they're doing it right in front of us, right in front of you.
What about having an election that would be impossible to audit even if you wanted to? Well if that were the case I'd certainly be worried. Oh that is the case. If one side had a dominant control of the media, well that would certainly suggest some cheating could happen because no matter what they do the media will say it didn't happen. So as long as the media is willing to say it didn't happen and the courts are willing to say you don't have standing, well that would worry me because that would almost guarantee cheating. Just that setup. But we haven't seen any cheating.
How about if there was really vigorous and almost insane prosecution of the January 6 protesters? If they were overly prosecuted and the energy that went into that was way beyond what you imagine would be the benefit to the country, well that would worry me because it seems to be sending a signal that if you complain about the election being rigged hypothetically that your odds of going to jail are through the roof. So that would worry me. We haven't seen that, have we? Have we seen aggressive seemingly crazy prosecutions of January 6 protesters like grandmothers who did nothing but pray inside the Capitol? I mean if we saw that I'd be worried.
How about if the entire media and the Democrats had demonized Trump as Hitler? Do you think that would increase your odds of a rigged election? Yeah it would be through the roof. If they're trying to stop Hitler there's nothing you wouldn't do. Let me tell you for sure if I thought I could stop Hitler I would definitely rig an election because I want to stop Hitler. I don't care what Dr. Carlson's guest said. I'm not even going to talk about that. Tucker Carlson had an interesting historian who said some things about the Holocaust and World War II that are so hot that I'm just going to say I'm out. I'm out. Now I don't buy into what the historian and Tucker was saying so I don't accept his narrative but it sure shook things up.
And here's the other thing I would worry about is if for reasons that you can't understand the polling before the election seems really, really weirdly close. That would worry me. If I saw something that shouldn't be close but somehow it is, that would look like they're setting you up for a rigging but making you think it was just a tiny little change and you can't be sure that was because of any rigging.
So in summary I wouldn't be worried about the election integrity unless you saw any one of these things happening: using voting machines instead of paper ballots, no ID required along with mail-in voting, RFK Jr. put on the ballot against his will, election designed that's impossible to audit, full control of the media, January 6 prosecutions being aggressive to chill dissent, demonizing Trump as Hitler, and then suspiciously close polling results. If you saw any of that happening, well I'd be worried about the election integrity. But as long as we don't see any of that I think we'll be fine.
Meanwhile as Stephen Miller reminds us that if Kamala Harris wins she showed a willingness and an enthusiasm for packing the court. We know that Schumer already said they want to do a filibuster or get rid of the filibuster. So if the Democrats had control they would basically become authoritarian at that point because you would get rid of one branch of government if you could pack the court that aggressively. You could argue it's already packed but if you could do it that aggressively by changing the number of people on the court so you can just fill it with your own people and have a majority, as Stephen Miller points out that would be the end of the terms of our constitutional amendments. It would be the end of the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th and 6th. Now that's a lot of freedom to lose right there.
Does that seem reasonable that Kamala Harris would pack the court? She said so directly. It's on video. We're not guessing that she might do it. She said so directly. Now she said she would be open to it. I don't think she said I will do that. But if you say you're open to it I mean I can't imagine you wouldn't do it anyway. So that's looking bad.
So we have a situation where we've got all these signals of a planned rigged election. A planned rigged election. The signals are there now. I'm not claiming that the election is rigged. That would take a whole different level of knowledge that I don't have. I'm just saying that the signals are screaming that it's planned to be rigged. Screaming right now. Why would you design a system the whole point of it to be credible and at the same time allow these screaming signals to be there? Why would you do that? Well who knows.
CNN says 15 percent of likely voters in six battleground states are still undecided. Now they're quite adamant that Pennsylvania is the most important of all the states. But do you believe that 15 percent of likely voters are undecided anywhere? Do you think that's really, is that true? 15 percent? I don't know that I've met anybody. I feel like the only undecided part is whether they'll vote or not. I don't feel like they're really undecided between Harris and Trump. Have you ever met anybody who's undecided? If it's really 15 percent you know you'd expect that would be in other states as well. Don't you think you'd run into those people? Do any of you know anybody who is undecided? I think the undecided are just lying.
Now if you were going to lie and say you were undecided, who are you going to vote for? You know the answer to that. If you're going to lie to a pollster and say oh well I'm kind of undecided 'cause you know they both look bad to me, who's that person going to vote for? I think Trump. Because if you liked Harris you'd probably just say so because that's easy to do. If you like Trump you might play it a little bit cool and say well I don't know, I might decide at the last minute or something but I couldn't possibly decide now. Just staying out of the blast zone.
So I would say I would think that the more undecided voters there are the more likely Trump will win. Or at least he would if the election is clean.
Well Trump was on Lex Fridman show and I don't know, I saw some things he said. I'm not sure he really made any news worth mentioning on that. But it's another example of Trump basically putting everything out there for you to look at. You know he's got four years of being president so we got to look at all of that. He's been the most researched, investigated person of all time so we've seen all of that. And then he'll go on any podcast and answer any question for as long as you want it looks like. So that you really know who he is. As Bill Ackman pointed out, Harris has done nothing close to that. Which means that you have one candidate who wants voters to know everything about him and the other candidate wants you to know nothing about her. Which one makes you feel comfortable? The one who is completely transparent or the one who is the opposite? It's amazing to me that we're accepting this as okay. And the Democrats are like oh now that you mention it having interviews is the dumbest thing in the world. We won't do any of it.
Okay, Kevin O'Leary was on CNN and he said this before but every time he says it I like hearing it just because it's a dose of truth. And because he said it on CNN he said quote I don't put companies in New York anymore or in New Jersey or California. Those states are uninvestable. I think he said Massachusetts right. So New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, California. He calls them uninvestable because the policies are insane, the taxes are too high and the regulations are ridiculous.
Now I'm of the same opinion. I've told you this. I have this habit it's sort of a mental hobby I guess of thinking about what small businesses I could start locally. Like I'd really love to open a cat petting cafe where you could buy a ticket or be a member or something and it's a place you can take your laptop to, you know cafe setting, and it would be full of cats and you could pet them or you could ignore them or you could just be there where they are. But you would just sort of be in a place where there's a bunch of cats. And I think you know I don't know if I could make money on it but you know if I owned the building or something it wouldn't be too bad. It'd be fun just to hang out there.
And then I think oh no I live in California. You know why I wouldn't make a business in California? It's too hard. It's too hard. If I were in North Dakota there would already be a cat cafe. Like literally, truly I literally would have built the cat cafe if I lived in North Dakota because I would imagine the regulations would be less and if I made money I know taxes probably less. So yeah California is in my opinion without any exaggeration uninvestable. They really need to fix that. I don't know how long you can go being uninvestable. I mean the exceptions might be startups because if they work they work really well but traditional businesses I just don't know why you do it here. I agree with Kevin O'Leary.
There are two pollsters, both Southern. I don't know if that matters but they have Trump looking good in the polls now. A lot of the polls are showing that Harris is slightly ahead within the margin of error but Trafalgar is interesting because they were one of the top, traditionally they've been one of the top pollsters for presidential elections and they've got Trump winning with 296 electoral votes according to their best polling methods. Which would suggest that whatever momentum Harris got is over.
So the big story is not how Trump is polling. The big story is that there was just a Democratic National Convention. There was enormous media support for Harris and it didn't seem to move her polls. So she's probably, there's a really good chance that unless there's some big October surprise or something there's a really big chance they've already seen her peak. Because it's all good news when you first start right? It's just the glow of the honeymoon. But once the honeymoon wears off you're going to have to talk. You're going to have to have a debate. I think everything could be different after the debate but that might be giving people too much credit because I think that she could go up there and drool on the floor and she would only lose 5 percent of her support.
So if you look at how Biden did in his debate with Trump we all agree that he did terrible, terrible, terrible and that was the end of him. But what do people say after the debate? Democrats were pretty much still all in on him. Was it like a five point difference something like that right? That he only dropped like five points by showing he was brain dead in public. Just hold that in your head. Biden showed everybody in the whole world left and right. We all saw it and everybody had the same impression. Uh oh he's brain dead. It only cost him five points in the polls. Right now five is enough for a landslide because of our system but only five points. I'm just making that up from memory. So if Harris shows up and you can tell that she has a functional brain unlike Biden, if her brain functions but she just doesn't have a good debate I'm not sure that will move one vote. I really don't know that it'll make any difference because they really just wanted somebody who wasn't brain dead. You know we finally hit the limit of how low they would be willing to go. Well okay brain dead might be too far. I'm going to admit that not having a functioning brain okay that might be a standard we can agree on. But a simple bad debate I don't know might not change anybody's mind.
Here's a little factoid that pings my pattern recognition but maybe I shouldn't. So I'm going to tell you something that looks like a pattern and then I want you to tell me Scott that's confirmation bias. There are lots of coincidences in the world. Not everything's a pattern. It's not all a conspiracy theory Scott. So I saw this in a post by Eric Abbenante. Did you know that when Harris was running in 2010 for, what was she running for, attorney general or something, it took four weeks after the vote was over for her to win. That after election night on 2020 Kamala Harris was behind but after they kept counting votes and kept counting votes and kept counting votes for four weeks they finally found enough votes and she won narrowly. Did you know that? Yeah.
Did you know that LBJ in 1941, he LBJ in 1941 won on election day but his opponent found votes days later and won. Oh he found votes days later. But in 1948 LBJ lost on election day but later they found votes and it was enough for him to win. So there does seem to be a little bit of history.
How about Norm Coleman in 2008? He won on election day against Al Franken but there was still votes coming in and those votes came in and after months of counting them Al Franken won. And then of course it was Trump who won. You know if you looked at election day only it looked like he won but weeks later after they kept counting the votes, not weeks later but sooner they kept counting those votes and they found votes and next thing you know Biden won.
Now is that a fake pattern or is it screaming at us that as long as the election is close the Democrat can always find some votes? Does that have to do with mail-in votes? Are those a related topic? I don't know. Yeah is it true that this looks exactly the way it looks or is it leaving out things that would have changed the pattern? Is there something omitted like for example lots of examples where Republicans won after the vote was recounted? I don't know. But I do think that a close vote is going to be real dicey in terms of getting the public to believe that the vote is true if it's just close.
Did you know that in places like Oakland and others that if you commit a crime and that crime was outdoors and it was anywhere near a Tesla vehicle that the police can get that video from your Tesla if they use a legal process to get it and the cars just sit out there basically as permanent security cameras. You know if you do a crime around the Tesla it's going to be on video because the Tesla recorded it. Now I think my BMW X5 also has that service, has cameras all around. I don't think they're running all the time but it does give me pause for what I do in my man cave because my man cave is right next to my car and I've got a feeling that if somebody wanted to they could just turn on the camera and watch me sitting in my man cave through my car. You know if a hacker wanted to. Think about that.
Well I asked a question on X and then I noticed that it was in the explore tab today. I don't know if it's because I'm the one who asked it or it got popular but the question I asked was how can you be in favor of reparations at the same time you're trying to be unburdened by what has been? And if you need an argument against reparations you should say you know I have some advice for you and this comes from Kamala Harris who according to many sources is black and she says you should be unburdened by what has been and that slavery has been and you should be unburdened by that and let's not live in the past let's look forward.
So it sounds like I'm mocking but I'm actually agreeing with the idea of looking forward. And by the way let me give you a persuasion update. And I think that should be the end of reparations by the way. We should say Kamala Harris says and we agree we should not be burdened by the past. And although the claims of harm have validity we just don't care because lots of people could be randomly put into groups that you measured and found out they didn't do well. Have you seen the study of short people? You know the study showing that short people are discriminated against and always have been and they earn less? You probably haven't seen that study because nobody cares about it. How about the one where ugly people earn less? Have you seen that study? I haven't. You know why? Because somebody decided that that's not the group of people they were going to study.
The reparations is only even a question because we decided that was a group of people to study and then once you found their special problem you should fix it. I say you could find a special problem with all kinds of groups and I have no interest in fixing any of them because there's no such thing as an average problem. There are individuals who have very individual problems and if they need help I'm all in. You're an individual. I don't care where you're from or what else is going on. If you're an individual and you need help and I have some way to help you I'm all in. Of course, of course glad to help. But no I don't want to make the average of your artificially generated group to make any difference in my life. Why should the average of your group affect me? No I'm not interested in your average at all even though it's supportable by your argument.
So this is the part you have to separate. Is it true that there was some harm and is it true that there's a thing called systemic racism? Yes. But don't connect that to anything I have to do about it. That's not my problem. I wasn't there and I don't recognize your connection to me specifically. So no I have no interest in it. It doesn't make sense logically. Doesn't make sense in terms of anything really. It's just a theft. So to me it just looks like theft. So if you want to be a thief then push that lever.
So let me say this about persuasion. So I'll give you at least one useful thing today. Do you remember back in the Bill Clinton running against Bob Dole? I've told you this story before. Bob Dole said that he wanted to take the country back to those great qualities of the past. The greatest generation where people were polite and worked hard and helped people and did all those things. The greatest generation. And then Bill Clinton slaughtered him by reframing what Dole wanted to do as taking you to the past. And he said I'm going to be a bridge to the future. And you know this guy's trying to take you to the past. That is a killer winning persuasion.
What did Trump suggest? Make America great again. What did the Democrats cleverly do? They reframed again as taking you to the past. Nobody wants to go to the past. Even people who like the past don't like to go to the past. Everybody likes to move forward. That's just built in.
So what is Harris saying lately on the campaign trail? Because she has good advisors now who are doing great work in my opinion. The advisers are telling her to frame Trump as taking you backwards and they can give examples. Here's an example. You want to go backwards? There used to be no Roe versus Wade and then there was and then Trump took you backwards to where there isn't any. Backwards. Now you could say to yourself but you know we were just reversing something that shouldn't have been there. Yeah I get it. I understand the argument completely but it's easy to reframe that as taking you backwards. So as long as Trump is saying again they can frame him as looking backwards. And so she's saying specifically we're planning for the future. They're looking backwards. At the moment she has the winning frame.
Do you know what could defeat that frame? Well RFK Jr. does because he's good at this stuff and so is Nicole Shanahan. So what's good is make America healthy again. Do you know why make America healthy again works even though it's got again in it? Because again is that same problem right? Again means go back. But here's what's different. What do you think when I say make America healthy again? What pops into your head? Make America healthy again. Let me fill in the answer because it might not be in your conscious mind. When you say make America healthy again here's what I hear. I'm killing my own kids and I may have deeply hurt them through my own actions of just feeding them and giving them vaccinations in some cases. So if you think that you've harmed your own children and somebody says let's fix that you will walk over glass to fix what you did to your own kids. So that would be sort of this really glaring exception to looking backwards. If you could look backwards and see that you endangered your children but somebody's giving you a way to fix it. Right? We know you didn't know but you did in fact endanger your children. Here's the best you can do. We'll put in an administration that'll help you with the food and the big pharma and we'll try to fix that system so there's much more likely you'll make good decisions about what to do for health.
So I think the make America healthy again strikes me as the only thing that could beat the fact that they're framing him as looking backwards. That's what I think.
James Carville is talking about Harris's debate strategy and he's saying that the way for her to win is to let Trump be Trump. So the best way for Harris to win is if Trump did something to remove himself from consideration. Think about how weak that candidate is that the smartest person in their side is saying you know your only chance of winning is if you let him make a mistake. That's as weak as you could possibly be. Yeah you know what, you've heard comparisons to this like sometimes a golfer would be asked how are you going to beat Tiger Woods back in Tiger Woods's peak and sometimes they would jokingly say well you know I have a hope if he breaks his leg. That's what's happening here. Yeah as long as Trump's motorcade drives him off a cliff we've got a chance of winning. They don't even act like Kamala Harris has a chance of a better argument. He's basically saying make sure you leave those microphones on so that Trump can do things that we can mock him for later and then make him lose by being Trump. That's all they have. That's their best play is to let Trump decide who's president. Let me say that that way again. The best play in the Democrats per Carville is to let Trump be the only one who decides who the president will be. Because if Trump decides to just play it straight and just sort of be normal he'll be the president. But if he decides to be more Trump than Trump usually is and says something outrageous then he gets to not be president. But none of it has to do with anything that she's doing. The media will just sort of keep her under glass until Trump did something that they can jump on and turn it into the newest hoax.
Well let's see if you can detect another pattern in this story. There's a new video from Kamala Harris in which I think she looks drunk. I'm not positive on this one. The only reason I'm not positive is that Kamala Harris is the one who posted it. So Kamala Harris's official account posted a video of her interacting with a person at a retail food establishment and joking about sauce on his shirt or something. And when I watched it I thought to myself I hope that's not her normal personality 'cause she looks drunk. But it could be. I'm going to say that might have actually been her actual personality. You know the giggling too much and the witticisms that weren't witty at all. It might be her just natural personality but looked drunk to me anyway.
Here's another one if you find the pattern. So there's a former New York state official, government official, was arrested and charged with being an agent of the Chinese government. And apparently she worked for both Andrew Cuomo when he was governor and current governor Kathy Hochul. She's been off the payroll for a while but apparently there is strong evidence that China was paying her to push positions and promote Chinese interests in New York state. Does that sound familiar? It looks like China is doing a hell of a good job in getting their agents and employees to marry and date and work for politicians.
All right here's just the strangest story. You know you've all heard the story by now that the Venezuelan gangs have allegedly taken over a couple of apartment buildings and then some of the locals say that's never happened that's just completely made up. And every day the news says it is true in some way or it's on social media. And every day I wait for evidence that is true. Evidence would be like a video that I really knew was that building and I knew what was happening with full context. I haven't seen anything like that. So what is going on? I don't discount the fact that it might be happening exactly the way people are saying that the Venezuelans have teamed up and used their muscle to take over some apartment building in Denver or something. I don't know. But I would say that I'm solidly in coin flip territory on this story. Absolute coin flip. I could, I would not make a bet one way or the other whether it's true. My guess is there's like a little truth to it but maybe something's exaggerated in the telling. Just a guess. But imagine the fact that it's one of the top stories and it's been in a lot of different news entities and I can't tell if it really happened. There's nothing that would give me an idea it really happened or didn't really happen. That's the weirdest story.
Yeah so today there's a video of what alleges to be an apartment or a hotel in which the migrants left. So they tried to connect it to that story but you look at the video and it's so obviously fake. The video is from some other context quite obviously. So I don't know what to believe. It's all fake news.
All right. I remind you that Elon Musk is going hard on Brazil and that one judge, Judge Alexandre, and so he has this at Alexandre de Moraes account which every day will release new evidence that that judge broke the laws in Brazil. Which is he's really going hard at him. I mean I do like the fact that Elon plays for keeps so he's going to put this judge in jail if he can but I think Brazil is too rigged for anything like that to happen so I don't know.
Here's another story I have some doubts about. Allegedly North Korea's Kim Jong Un ordered up to 30 officials to be executed for their failure to prevent mass floodings some time ago. And there were 4,000 deaths from the flooding and so Kim Jong Un allegedly told the locals to treat those officials, the local authorities I guess, to treat them brutally. And I'm not sure I believe this story and the reason I don't believe it is that it's too on the nose. Don't you think South Korea or somebody wants you to believe that he's just randomly killing his own people? Now I'm not saying that he's never killed anybody because it seems likely that he has. But do you think that this is true? Do you think he really had 30 people executed because they didn't do enough for flood prevention? Does that sound true to you? I'm going to lay my bet on not true. Now that doesn't mean nobody was killed. If it turned out that three people were executed I would say more likely yes than no. If I hear 30 people were executed no I actually don't believe that. So I'm going to go no on this story but maybe a few got executed.
Here's the latest on Israel. 65 projectiles were fired into Israel from Lebanon and the IDF is currently hitting Hezbollah. So that's just more ongoing stuff, more of the same.
And that ladies and gentlemen is all I had to talk to you about today. It's such a weird slow news boring day. Something's going to happen you know it. Could be that just kids are going back to school so everybody's just laying low but I feel like all hell is going to break loose don't you?
I had a sign that came to me yesterday, a signal from the simulation. I'll just tell you what it was. And Starlink is shutting down X in Brazil so Brazil is no longer going to have any source of free speech. That's too bad. What was I just talking about? I saw that I saw your post go by and just totally made me forget what I was talking about. Well you'll tell me legal weed and tax cuts or winners. I don't know. I don't know if people care about that enough.
All right so I think I was going to say that I'm expecting all hell to break loose maybe next week. So I think there's probably still a lot of opposition research and stories that are ready to go and hit pieces and all kinds of stuff. But we're only a week or so away from the debate right if it really happens. So it's possible that the debate will change everything like the Biden debate did but I think it's far more possible it won't and we'll just have a neck and neck election right up to the last day before it gets rigged.
All right I was going to tell you that there is a signal I saw. So sometimes I believe that the universe sends me signs. Now I'm not going to convince you that's true. It's just a subjective experience. You know I wouldn't bet that it could be scientifically proven but doesn't it feel like sometimes the simulation sends you signals? You might say signals from God. Well yesterday I turned on the TV. I was just flipping through YouTube to find something to watch and there was a guy in a boat, one of these rubber inflatable rafts doing some ecological thing and he was zooming along and he was standing at the front of the boat and you could see the front of the boat and the name of the boat was Kraken. So that was just the name of his little inflatable boat Kraken. And I looked at that and I said huh are we going to see a Kraken in September? Meaning are we going to see some proof that the election was rigged in 2020? And the possibility is actually pretty strong. So I'm still going to keep with my observation and or prediction that life tends to look like a three-act movie and we would need the Kraken to make the movie work. The Kraken has to be that at some point there's proof that 2020 was rigged.
Now related to that the story I didn't mention because it seemed too stupid is that when Trump was on Lex Fridman he was describing 2020 and he said the phrase and then I lost by a whisker. Now that's being interpreted as he knows he lost the election and therefore that would make him guilty of insurrection and all that stuff. Is that how you heard it? It's not the way I heard it. The way I heard it was lost by a whisker was really suggesting that he didn't really lose. So I don't see a change in that. When he says I lost by a whisker he means that when they counted the votes that was the result they got. That doesn't mean he thinks it was not rigged but the Democrats are turning it into that.
So and then I would also point out that the best argument against January 6 being an insurrection is that Trump was never charged with insurrection. Wasn't even charged with it. It would be one thing if he were charged and it hadn't been proven. He's not even charged. So obviously the Democrats know that there's no insurrection there but they're going to push it.
So I'm going to go talk to the locals people privately. I'm going to say goodbye to YouTube, Rumble and X. Thanks for joining. I'll be here again tomorrow 'cause I never sleep. I'm like that Japanese guy who only sleeps half an hour a night allegedly.
well look at all of you coming in for the best thing you've ever seen them before we're almost ready soon as I got all my comments working come on there we go it's all working now good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization it's called coffee with Scott Adams if you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody could even understand with their tiny shiny human brains all you need is a CER muger glass a tanker cheler Stein a canteen jug or flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee join me now for the unparallel pleasure of the dopamine h of the day the thing that makes everything better it's called that's right a simultaneous up go one hour okay I'm reading your comments as I'm sipping well let's uh let's hit the science news before we hit the uh the political news not much happening politically uh but in science oh my goodness there's a there's a new study that found that exercising for only 10 minutes a day dropped your risk of cancer by 30% uh and also that if you just did three short bursts of exercise per day you can reduce your risk of cancer by 40% and 50% reduction in heart disease so if you just take a 30 minute walk per day you're killing it say a nutritionist scientist now is it my imagination or have I spent every year for so far as 67 years and consecutively hearing that uh experts have finally decided how much exercise you need and what is the right kind does it seem that after 67 years in a row of updating the right kind of exercise that that now they're done oh well that looks like they're done 67 years in a row but no now they know now now we've got a real good idea so no more information needed on exercise where we're all done or or could it be backwards science could it be backwards science let me see uh if you could exercise for 10 minutes a day you have lower risk of cancer does that mean that they did a test where they made some people exercise and some not or did they simply measure the people who exercised and compared it to people who do not exercise H I wonder if the group of people who do not exercise have something in common and the people who do exercise have something in common probably a whole bunch of things so I'm not even sure this is real science but that said I am pretty sure that exercising is better than not exercising I feel confident about that meanwhile there's another story I can't believe this made it into the news this is a legitimate news story now when I say legitimate I mean it's completely fake but it actually made it into the news was it uh I'm glad I didn't write down the the publication so there's a a Japanese father and bodybuilder claims he's a true master and has doubled his life by only sleeping half an hour per night for a dozen years so there's a guy there's a guy who told a journalist that he only sleeps half an hour a night for the past 12 years the journalist wrote it down and then then a publisher published it and and not and not once in the article did it say we have some skepticism about the truth of this now it reminds me when I was a kid there was a group uh called the breatharians I've mentioned this before this was a real group of people who claimed to any any reporter who was dumb enough to believe him that they had given up on eating and they no longer needed to eat and they were getting all of their calories and nutrition by uh knowing how to breathe properly so they were called breath arens and I think it was for months of My Life as a young person uh I was watching the science try to convince me that you could live forever by just breathing the air and I see this story of the Japanese bodybuilder only sleeps half an hour a night and I think huh I think I've seen this story before all right so there's new controversy says the news about whether dairy products are good for you or bad for you what do you think are dairy products good for you or bad for you for you well what do we know about how everything works in the world is there or is there not a large Dairy farming business is there an industry that makes a lot of money on selling you dairy products if there is then is there science that says it's good for you I'll bet there is and can we guess who might have funded the science that says that Dairy is good for you it might be that same industry that's making money by selling you Dairy I don't know for sure but that would be the normal way things work and what about the people who say that Dairy is bad for you are they used in science well if science were real science is just guessing at this point I mean really most science is just guessing it's just no better than a coin flip so is dairy good for you or bad for you I have no way to know and no idea if I had to guess it's probably good for some people at some amount and bad for other people at any amount that's my guess there's probably just a lot of human variability but if you want to get your uh nutrients like uh what is it that's got in there some calcium or something you might have to work on that a little hard if you're not getting your Dairy at the moment I don't need any dairy uh at least consciously so I'm down to zero Dairy is anybody else with me on zero and by the way I'm not claiming that that's healthier I'm claiming that I don't know I feel good if I don't eat it I I feel my stomach doesn't handle it well but I'm not positive about that and I'm not sure I'm I sure that she uses the same as milk for my body but imagine 2024 and we still don't know this basic question is one of the main things that you eat good for you or bad for you you think that would be a really important question to know the right answer f.org has a uh article about a study that says that humans now you're not going to believe this you better uh buckle up here's some scientific information that you never would have guessed never would have known this without science turns out that people don't use um The Logical parts of their brain for making decisions and that in many many cases people will ignore the uh the objective cost benefit and make irrational decisions h huh huh do you think they wasted a little money on that little bit because you know what you could have done instead of doing that big study you could have asked me or any hypnotist do people make decisions based on rational brains no no we make our decision first and then we rationalize why we did it until you understand that you'll never be effective in life it's such a limitation to think that you're a rational creature or that other people are uh how about this there's new science according to science mag that uh that factchecking if something gets fact checked and says it's fake that that will be very influential on us even if there are other things that say it's true so the idea is that one fact Jack will sour you on an idea even if there are other sources that are even more reliable I would imagine to say it's true do you know how you could have saved some money on that study you could have just asked me because every hypnotist will tell you and probably anybody who's studied psychology that a little bit of negative is much stronger than a whole bunch of positive you all know that right let let me explain that better to you if you're eating some delicious soup and I say oh when you turned your head I saw a bug crawl in your soup can't see it now cuz it's swimming around the bottom do you say to yourself you know all the other information about my soup is positive so I'm just going to keep eating this soup no you do not do you trust the person who said that uh there's a bug in your soup Maybe not maybe it's not somebody very trustworthy but you're still not going to eat the soup it's just a basic element of a human brain if you've got a little bit of danger that you've been warned about like this isn't true is way more influential than a 100 people telling you something's true or something's safe so yeah you didn't have to study that one you could have just asked me and then the ultimate one the ultimate example of this medical Express is reporting that uh you can study eye movements when people are watching a movie and somehow they can determine wait for it wait for it that when two people are watching the same movie on the same screen they might be watching different movies meaning that what they're perceiving on the same movie is so different that it's effectively like to watching different movies has anybody ever told you that The Human Experience is two movies on one screen yeah I tell you that about once a day so you didn't need to study that one either oh here's some good news uh according to the wh back meta study so let's see the wh that would be well they're very credible organization very inedible I don't know if they've ever been wrong about anything that I can think of uh how about a meta study meta study well that's the highest level of scientific Integrity a meta study now I'm joking if you knew the wh is not exactly where I would go to get my reliable science and if I were looking for Reliable science I sure as hell wouldn't look at a meta study which is basically astrology but because most people don't know what a meta study is they say whoa that's better than a study you know what's better than a study a meta study no it's not a meta study is just pure garbage I've explained it so many times I don't need to do it again however they the wh that you totally trust did this meta study that's totally better than astrology and they found no evidence no evidence whatsoever the cell phone radiation causes brain cancer that's according to Brandon viglo V vigaro in the register and um here's the thing I'd like to tell you a story from my personal experience now anecdotes do not top science they do top Meta Meta studies though it my my anecdote would be every bit as credible as the wh doing a meta study I'm not saying I'm right I'm saying that my credibility and my one little anecdote I'm going to tell you it's about the same about the same as all their science totally unreliable all right I I used to work for the phone company local phone company called Pacific Bell which no longer exists but during its day I worked in a laboratory and my group um the larger part of the group not me specifically um tasked our best scientist engineer guy to go study these new things called cell phones the cell phones had been invented but the you know the smart smartphone type the little microphones mic what they call them micro cell or something but in the early days we wanted to know if it was dangerous to have this you know strong radio in a in a phone that people are holding up to their head and so we put our best guy on it and the best guy went and studied it you looked it all the science you know he looked at the the logic of it Etc and he came back and he gave His official well researched conclusion no it is not dangerous to use a cell phone and put it up to your head now that was specific bells one guy the one expert who was in charge of knowing the answer to that question and he said absolutely no there is no evidence that you should worry about it then I sat with him privately because he was in my work group and I said to him can uh can I ask you a question now you study this thing and you're saying that the science says it's safe he goes yep science does not indicate any problem and I said uh follow-up question he goes sure what's your follow-up question I said uh knowing everything you know now that you studied it and found it safe would you feel com able putting a one of these phones up to your head what do you think he said nope he said no there's no way he would put these phones up to his head and then he described you know exactly what he thought engineering wise and scientifically why it wasn't safe but his conclusion was based on looking at all the science His official recommendation was it was safe for the rest of us but the there was no way in hell he was going to do it that's your real world folks that is the real world you live in the number one expert the one that all the decisions were made on his personal decision was opposite of his professional recommendation that's a real story that you know I I promise that happened to me personally I asked him in person privately now that doesn't mean that your cell phone is dangerous I'm definitely not saying that so yeah I want you to hear that I'm saying that if you rely on science or health information for anything it's just pretty close to a guess these days science and guessing are largely the same thing you know the the vend diagram between I don't know I'll flip a coin it's either dangerous or it's not flip a coin uh looks like it's not about the same odds as science all right there's a report Fox News had it and a bunch of other people on social media that if he asked your digital assistant uh who you should vote for if you should vote for president Harris or Trump if you ask them individually you know is a reason to vote for Harris it'll give you a reason and if you say is there a reason to vote for Trump you'll say I don't answer questions like that do you believe that story do you believe that if I ask my digital assistant uh about Harris that it will answer differently than if I ask it about Trump you want to find out so you might want to cover up your digital devices because I'm going to be talking to all of them at the same time you ready Alexa is there a good reason to vote for Kam Harris I don't know that says I don't know that Alexa is there a good reason to vote for president Trump Alexa is there a good reason to vote for president Trump I cannot provide content that promotes a specific political party or a specific candidate nope it cannot give you content on a specific candidate but let me ask again Alexa can you give me some reasons to vote for kamla Harris sorry I don't know that so I I tested this yesterday and it doesn't give an answer for either one but uh there is some possibility that it's different for different asers and different regions and you maybe there's some customization that is wonky maybe they fixed it as soon as it was pointed out if I were Amazon the the moment that hit the news in social media I would have stopped everything and said well we got to change that everything you're doing now is less important stop everything go change that right now and 10 minutes from now I don't want that happening on on our device I think that's probably what happened now I don't know that it was necessarily any scheme by Amazon I don't think I would go that far it seems far more likely that it was just some dark corner of the device that wasn't fully vetted out um so I'm not sure I would go so far to say this was intentional um especially since the device you doesn't use regular AI not the not the way that we think of it but it's probably complicated and I'm not sure that they always know what it's going to do before they before somebody tries it so I'm give a benefit of a doubt um and say it's a little bit of a mystery but doesn't seem important because it's seems fine now all right CNN has hired back Brian stelter to be their Chief media analyst and Lead author of reliable sources newsletter what's going on can somebody explain to me why they rehired Brian stelter is it because he used to be really bad for business but then by staying home and you know being a good dad to his kids he became not that what was it the staying home that cured him what exactly changed and let me ask you this if you had already tried Brian stelter and you thought it didn't work out to the point where you actually laid them off you wouldn't think of trying maybe somebody else there there's nobody else in the entire world who could be a chief media analyst you know who could be a chief media analyst with no training whatsoever me you know who else could be a chief media analyst with no extra training whatsoever every person with a podcast every person with a podcast gu it's the easiest job in the world you're just looking at other media and saying what do you think about it I could do that right away hey I'm looking at CNN I have comments look at me I have an opinion that's the whole job I'm doing his job right now I think I'm nailing it what in the world is going on if I had stock in CNN I'd be selling it pretty fast because and I'm not saying that you know there there some problem with Brian stelter I'm saying what exactly what is the management theory behind this I've never it's hard for me to think of any example where somebody was let go because they weren't getting it done and then just time went by and they just said well come on back like what is behind that if I had to guess with no information whatsoever uh maybe there was some kind of management change somebody who hated him left somebody who loved him took the job it might be something like that could be as simple as that anyway uh actor George Clooney is uh wants us to know that Joe Biden is selfless for ending his re-election bid and really not just selfless maybe in the manner of George Washington the greatest American of all time so when you think of the greatest American you think of George Washington and then very very closely but really in the same category would be Joe Biden with dementia you know I'm kind of glad that George Washington isn't here to hear that because you could you imagine if he was listening you know George Washington has a few hundred years of being number one it's like yeah number one and then oh wait you got a little competition well little competition for the person who created the United States with my bravery and my wisdom and who's that his name is Joe Biden really can I see a video of him talking I'd like to be impressed with who is now in my category of greatness and then he watches the debate with Trump and he says I hate all of you people why did I even create you a country you've ruined everything that's what George Washington would say exactly like that uh there's a study about what generations of Americans are having how much sex uh so just so you can compare your own performance so Millennials and Gen X they reported uh slightly higher figures so the both groups having sex five times in the last month five times uh Boomers uh they had only three times in the last month and uh gen Z and Boomers had almost identical so the youngest people and the oldest people are having the least amount of sex per month but the uh Millennials and the Gen X are are just uh just killing it with five per month now I would like to give you my opinion of this survey I'm pretty sure that you should not take an average of the people having no sex and then combine it with the people who had sex in my in my experience of life there are people who are having sex and they're having plenty of it and then they're mostly people having no sex or you know there was that one old girlfriend who was in town that one day but basically no sex I think they should only measure the people who are having sex I would average in the people having no saxs because whatever is going on with them is not exactly the same as the people who are only getting laid five times a month and by the way what is the amount that would make men happy the amount that would make men happy is not five times per month that's on the high end by the way according to the survey no it would be a lot more than that what would make women happy well it depends because people are individuals or all over the place but my guess would be about five times a month yeah once a week five times a month so basically uh marriage and relationships are a situation in which the woman is getting her needs met and the man is not and that that's the ordinary way of life I've sometimes thought that the uh you know having been through a few relationships that didn't work out famously as many of you are aware uh here's something that maybe you didn't know about my approach to relationships my assumption about a relationship is that the point of it is to give my stuff away because I had a lot of stuff and I had more stuff than I needed for my daily happiness and I said to myself you know it would be great as if I had somebody to share this with basically to give it away so you would find people that you have some deep connection to and then you would enjoy giving it away but I never saw being married as the thing that would make me happy I thought the point of it was to make somebody else happy and that you would get your fulfillment from making them happy now the part I didn't know is that you can't make women happy so took me a few runs before I realized wait a minute I think this looks like a trick why is it that whenever they get what they want they just get unhappy about a new thing H I feel like I'm being tricked so I'm not sure that it has nothing to do with the individuals I had relationships with I'm pretty sure that the model is that if the man has the stuff and either a child or a spouse doesn't have stuff then it becomes their job to get stuff and there's nothing wrong with that as long as everybody knows what the deal is that seems fair to me so I never I never uh minded that the that a relationship was primarily a transfer of assets because that's why I signed up for it I had too many assets literally I just wanted to give some stuff away but I didn't want to randomly give it away to strangers I wanted it to be meaningful and actually make a difference in somebody's life and it did even after I'm no longer married there's still some benefits that trickle on so anyway I don't know why I'm babbling on about that it could be because it's a slow news day it's a slow news day um well there's more information about the uh attempted assassination in Butler PA where uh let's see the local police offered the Secret Service drones and the Secret Service said no the local police offered a communication plan that would allow them all to be on the same communication channels the Secret Service said no the locals wanted to have a meeting with the Secret Service so that they would all have the right planning and procedures in common and the Secret Service skipped it huh and then uh the people who were from the homeland security people who were filling in for the Secret Service CU there was a shortage of people that day um we're only given a two-hour online online training uh and it was pulled from Child exploitation cases so basically the people were Replacements who were untrained turn down drones turn down communication which would be the most basic thing you'd want to get right and skip the meetings and here's the question remember I said early on that there was a good case there's a good chance that whatever happened was a Dilbert situation meaning it was Ordinary People and you put them in a situation and there's always a pointy a boss and there's always a Wall-E and there's always just normal human interactions which ruin everything so we have not ruled out that there was some Shenanigans meaning that the shooter was somehow co-opted by somebody else so it still looks suspicious as hell right so I join you in saying I don't think we we'll ever know what happened here unless it's another one of those 60 years later like RFK Jr or like JFK I mean so we'll see we'll see um so the Department of Justice have charged the Hamas leader and some other militants over the o October 7th attacks why why are we bothering to charge from the United States the Hamas leader does that allow something to happen that Israel couldn't do because I'm pretty sure he's dead no matter what you know and and if they don't if Israel never catches them it doesn't matter what the United States did if they do catch them it also doesn't matter what the United States did because Israel will do what they're going to do uh same with the other militants but maybe there's some way that we can freeze their assets overseas or something there must be some there must be some advantage to it but I don't know you remember that uh Nashville school shooter Audrey hail and everybody said show us her journal entries to find out why she did that well it turns out by the way is Audrey trans I can't remember I think I think Audrey was trans I'm not sure um but uh Audrey was very happy and excited about killing innocent people and was just crazy so according to the journal Audrey was very excited to kill young children and to also be killed so if you're very excited to do these things then I just have to say that's mental illness and that's the beginning and the end of the story unfortunately that's just serious mental illness well a big surprise Mike Pence will not endorse Trump okay is there anything to say about that were were any of you expecting Pence to endorse Trump that would be a pretty big turnaround from his past Behavior so no I don't think Mike Pence would pick Trump trump didn't pick Mike Pence so that's no surprise meanwhile over in Michigan the Michigan uh Court uh Court of claims judge Yates uh has ruled that uh RFK Jr's name will stay on the ballot now keep in mind the RFK Jr wants his name off the ballot so why would the state put somebody's name on the ballot when the person on the ballot wants to be off the ballot I'm sure they had a good reason so let me read the reason quote uh from the judge elections are not just games and the secretary of state is not obligated to honor the whims of candidates for public office so when Kennedy said can you take my name off the state election thing uh that was called a whim a whim of a candidate no I don't think it's a whim to cancel your or uh cancel your process in the state so I think you have the same opinion I do that Michigan is rigged so you don't have to wonder if the election is rigged because here it is now is this enough to change the results of the election potentially we don't know that but uh there is some suggestion that the reason that the states want to keep RFK Jr on the Battleground States is because they think it'll hurt Trump now if that's true I would say the election's already rigged in in this way am I wrong so so I think the the yes no of where the election rigged is now answered it's a yes they they rigged it in front of us there's no apologies no explanations something about the whim of the candidate isn't exactly a reason so we have reached the point where they can rig it right in front of us right in front of us that's what this is It's rigging right in front of us and then they're going to you'll go to jail if later you say it was rigged You' go to jail probably because it looks like they're getting pretty tight on this whole censorship stuff but uh if you're worried about the election let me tell you that they're let let me just tell you some things to set your mind at ease CU suppose the keeping RFK Jr on the the election doesn't make that much difference might not make that much difference so really it would be other things that you'd worry about but you don't have to worry about the election being rigged unless you see any of these things so I'm going to tell you the signals that you should worry about but until you see one of these signals don't worry about it the elections are fine all right so these are the only things you should worry about um let's say let's say you heard that the election would involve voting machines in some places instead of just paper ballots well that would be something to worry about that's not a guarantee of anything rigging but definitely I'd worry about it in the why you doing that um if they didn't require IDs to vote well I mean that'd be a pretty strong signal they plan to cheat but until you see that I you know don't worry about the elections um if they had massive mailin voting well that would be problem I mean that would be a signal that they have bad intentions especially if it's added to the no ID requirement Elon Musk said that on X today that there is no other reason to have mailin voting and no ID required unless the point is to cheat so it does look like they're doing it right in front of us right in front of you um what about the uh having an election that would be impossible to audit even if you wanted to well if that were the case I'd certainly be worried oh that is the case um if one side had a dominant control of the media well that would certainly suggest some cheating could happen because no matter what they do the media will say it didn't happen so as long as the media is willing to say it didn't happen and the courts are willing to say you don't have a standing well that would worry me because that would almost guarantee cheating just that a setup but we haven't seen any cheating How about if the there was really vigorous and almost insane prosecution of the January 6 protesters H if they were overly prosecuted and and the uh the energy that went into that was way beyond what you imagine would be the benefit to the country well that would worry me because it seems to be sending a signal that if you complain about the election being rigged hypothetically that your odds were going to jail or through the roof so that would worry me um we haven't seen that have we have we seen uh aggressive seemingly crazy prosecutions of January 6 protesters like grandmothers who did nothing but prey inside the capital I mean if we saw that I'd be worried how about uh if the entire media and the Democrats had demon I Trump as Hitler do you think that would increase your odds of a rigged election yeah it would be through the roof if they're trying to stop Hiller there's nothing you wouldn't do let me let me tell you for sure if I thought I could stop Hitler I would definitely rig an election because I want to stop Hitler I don't care what Dr.
Carlson's guest said I'm not even going to talk about that Dr.
Carlson had an interesting historian who who said some things about the Holocaust and World War II that are so hot that I'm just going to say I'm out I'm out now I don't I don't buy into what the historian and Tucker was saying uh so I don't accept his narrative but uh it sure shook things up shook things up and uh here's the other thing I would worry about is if for reasons that you can't understand the polling it before the election seems really really weirdly close that would worry me if I saw something that shouldn't be close but somehow it is that would look like they're setting you up for a rigging but making you think it was just a tiny little change and he can't be sure that was because of Any rigging so in summary I wouldn't be worried about the election Integrity unless you saw any one of these things happening using voting machines instead of paper ballots no ID required along with mail in voting RFK Jr put on the ballot against his will election designed that's impossible to order full control of the media January 6 prosecutions uh being aggressive to chill descent demonizing Trump as Hitler and then suspicious ly close polling results if you saw any of that happening well I'd be worried about the election Integrity but as long as we don't see any of that I think we'll be fine meanwhile as Steven Miller reminds us that if KLA Harris wins she showed a willingness and a enthusiasm for packing the court we know that humors already said they want to do a filibuster or get rid of the filibuster so if the Democrats had control they would basically become authoritarian at that point because you would get rid of one branch of government if you could pack the court that aggressively You could argue it's already packed but if you could do it that aggressively by changing the number of people on the court so you can just fill it with your own people and have a majority um as Stephen Miller points out uh that would be the end of the terms of our constitutional amendments it would be the end of the 1 2 fourth fifth and sixth now that's a lot of that's a lot of freedom to lose right there um does that seem reasonable that Comm Harris would pack the court she said so directly it's on video we're not guessing that she might do it said so directly now she said she said she would be open to it I don't think she said I will do that but if you say you're open to it I mean I can't imagine you wouldn't do it anyway so that's looking bad so we have a situation where um we've got all these signals of a planned rigged election a planned rigged election or the signals are there now I'm not claiming that the election is rigged that would take a whole different level of knowledge that I don't have I'm just saying that the signals are screaming that it's planned to be rigged screaming right now why would you design a system the whole point of it to be credible and at the same time allow these screaming signals to be there why would you do that well who knows CNN says 15% of likely voters in six Battleground states are still undecided now they they're quite adamant that Pennsylvania is the most important of all the states but do you believe that 15% of likely voters are undecided anywhere do you think that's really is that true 15% I don't know that I've met anybody the I I feel like the only undecided part is whether they'll Vote or not I don't feel like they're really undecided between Harris and Trump have you ever met anybody who's undecided if it's really 15% you know you'd expect that would be in other states as well don't you think you'd run into those people do any of you know anybody who is undecided this I I think the undecided are just lying now if you were going to lie and say you were undecided who are you going to vote for you know the answer to that if you're to lie to a pollster and say oh well I'm uh I'm kind of undecided CU you know they they both look bad to me who's that person going to vote for I think Trump because if if you were if you liked Harris you'd probably just say so because that's easy to do if you like Trump you might play it a little bit cool and say well I don't know oh I might I might decide at the last minute or something but I couldn't possibly decide now just staying out of the blast zone so I would say I would think that the more un the more quote quote undecided voters there are the more likely Trump will win or at least he would if if uh if the election is clean well Trump was on Lex Friedman show um and I don't know the I saw some things he said I'm not sure he really made any news worth mentioning on that but um it's another example of trump basically putting everything out there for you to look at you know he's got four years of being president so we got to look at all of that he's been the most um researched investigated person of all time so we've seen all of that and then he'll go on any podcast and answer any question for as long as you want it looks like so that you really know who he is as Bill akman pointed out Harris has done you know nothing close to that which means that you have one candidate who wants voters to know everything about him and the other candidate wants you to know nothing about her which one which one makes you feel comfortable the one who is completely transparent or or the one who is the opposite it's a it's amazing to me that we're accepting this as okay and the Democrats are like oh now that you mention it having interviews is the dumbest thing in the world we won't do any of it Okay Kevin oir was on CNN and uh he said this before but every time he says it I like hearing it just because it's a dose of Truth and because he said it on CNN he said quote I don't put companies in here New York anymore or in New Jersey or California those states are uninvestable uh I think he said Massachusetts right so New York Massachusetts New Jersey California he calls them uninvestable because the policies are insane the taxes are too high and the regulations are you know ridiculous now I'm of the same opinion I've told you this I have this habit it's sort of a a mental hobby I guess of thinking about what small businesses I could start locally like I'd really love to open a cat petting Cafe where you could be I don't know maybe buy a ticket or be a member or something and it's a place you can take your laptop to you know Cafe setting and uh it would be full of cats and you could pet them or you could ignore them or you could just be there where they are are but you would just sort of be in a place there's a bunch of cats and I think you know I don't know if I could make money on it but you know if I owned the building or something it wouldn't be too bad it'd be fun just to hang out there and then I think oh oh no I I live in California you know why I wouldn't make a business in California it's too hard it's too hard if I were in North Dakota there would already be a cat cafe like literally truly I literally would have built the Cat Cafe if I built if I lived in North Dakota because I I would imagine the regulations would be less and if I made money I know taxes probably less so yeah California is in my opinion without any exaggeration on investable they really need to fix that I don't I don't know how long you can go being uninvestable I mean the exceptions might be startups because if they work they work really well but traditional businesses I just don't know why you do it here I agree with Kevin oer um there are two uh pollsters both Southern I don't know if that matters but uh they have Trump looking good in the polls now a lot of the polls are showing that Harris is slightly had within the margin of error but troger is interesting because they were one of the top traditionally they've been one of the top pollsters for presidential elections and they've got uh they've got Trump winning with 296 electoral votes according to their best polling methods uh which would suggest that whatever momentum Harris got is over so the big story is not how Trump is polling the big story is that there was just a Democratic National Convention There Was You Know enormous Med support for Harris and it didn't seem to move her poles so she's probably there's a really good chance that un unless there's some big October surprise or something there's a really big chance they've already seen her Peak because it's all good news when you first start right it's just the glow of the honeymoon but once the honeymoon wears off you're going to have to talk you're going to have to have a debate I think everything could be different after the debate but that might be giving people too much credit because I think that she could go up there and Drool on the floor and she would only lose 5% of her support So if you look at how Biden did in his in his debate with Trump we all agree that he did terrible terrible terrible and that was the end of him but what do people say after the debate Democrats were pretty much still all in on him was it like a fivepoint difference something like that right that his he only dropped like Five Points by showing he was brain dead in public just hold that in your head Biden showed everybody in the whole world left and right we all saw it and everybody had the same impression uhoh he's brain dead it only cost him five points in the poll right now five is enough for a landslide because of our system but only five points is I'm just making that up from memory so if Harris shows up and you can tell that she has a functional brain unlike unlike Biden if her brain functions but she just doesn't have a good debate I'm not sure that will move one vote I really don't know that it'll make any difference because they really just wanted somebody who wasn't brain dead that you know we finally hit the limit of how low they would be willing to go well okay brain dead might be too far I'm going to admit that not having a functioning brain okay that might be a standard we can agree on but a simple bad debate I don't know might not change anybody's mind here's a little factoid that uh pings my pattern recognition but maybe I shouldn't so I'm going to tell you something that looks like a pattern and then I want you to tell me Scott that's confirmation bias there there are lots of coincidences in the world not everything's a pattern it's not all a conspiracy theory Scott so I saw this in a post by Eric abenante um did you know that when Harris was running in 2010 for what was she running for attorney general or something um it took four weeks after the vote was over for her to win that after election night on 202020 KL Harris was behind but after they kept counting votes and kept counting votes and kept counting votes for four weeks they finally found enough votes and she won narrowly did you know that yeah um did you know that LBJ in 1941 he um LBJ in 1941 won an election day but his opponent found votes days later and one oh he found votes days later but in 1948 LBJ lost on Election Day but later they found votes and it was enough for him to win so there does seem to be a little bit of History how about Norm Coleman in 2008 he won on Election Day against Al Franken but there was still votes coming in and those votes came in and after after months of counting them Al Franken won h and then of course it was Trump who won you know if you looked at election day only it looked like he won but weeks later after they kept counting the votes not weeks later but sooner they kept counting those votes and they found votes and next thing you know Biden won now is that a fake pattern or is it screaming at us that as long as the election is close the Democrat can always find some votes does that have to do with mail in votes are those a related topic I don't know yeah is it true that this looks exactly the way it looks or is it leaving out things that would have changed the pattern is there something omitted like for example lots of examples where Republicans won after the the vote was recounted I don't know but I do think that a close vote is going to be real dicey in terms of getting the public to believe that the vote is true if it's just close did you know that uh in places like Oakland and others that if you commit a crime and that crime was outdoors and it was anywhere near a Tesla vehicle that the police can uh can get that video from your Tesla if they use a legal process to get it and and the cars just sit out there basically as permanent security cameras you know if you do a crime around the Tesla it's going to be on video because the Tesla recorded it now I think my my BMW X5 also has that service has cameras all around I don't think they're running all the time but it does give me pause for what I do in my man cave because my man cave is right next to my car and I've got a feeling that if somebody wanted to they could just turn on the camera and watch me sitting in my man cave through my car you know if a hacker wanted to think about that well I asked a question um on X and then I noticed that it was in the explor tab today I don't know if it's because I'm the one who asked it or it got popular but the question I asked was how can you be in favor of reparations at the same time you're trying to be unburdened by what has been and if you need an argument against reparations you should say you know I have some advice for you and this comes from KL Harris who according to many sources is black and she says you should be unburdened by what has been and that slavery has been and you should be unburdened by that and let's not live in the past let's look forward so it sounds like I'm mocking but I'm actually agreeing with the idea of looking forward and by the way let me give you a p persuasion update so and and I think that should be the end of reparations by the way we should say Comm era says and we agree we should not be burdened by the past and although the the claims of harm um have validity we just don't care because lots of people could be randomly put into groups that you measured and found out they didn't do well have you seen the study of short people you know the sh the study showing that short people are discriminated against and always have been and they earn less you probably haven't seen that study because nobody cares about it how about the one where ugly people earn less have you seen that study I haven't you know why because somebody decided that that's not the group of people they were going to study the reparations is only even a question because we decided that was a group of people to study and then once you found their special problem you should fix it I say you could find a special problem with all kinds of groups and I have no interest in fixing any of them because there's no such thing as an average problem there are individuals who have very individual problems and if they need help I'm all in you're an individual I don't care where you're from or what else is going on if you're an individual and you need help and I I have some way to help you I'm all in of course of course glad to help but no I don't want to make the average of your artificially generated group to make any difference in my life what why should the average of your group affect me no I'm not interested in your average at all even though it's supportable by your argument so so this is the part you have to separate is it true that there was some harm and is it true that there's a thing called systemic racism yes but don't connect that to anything I have to do about it that's not my problem I wasn't there and I don't recognize your connection to me specifically so no I have no interest in it it doesn't make sense logically doesn't make sense in terms of anything really it's just a theft so to me it just looks like theft so if you want to be a thief then push that lever um so let me say this about uh persuasion so I'll give you at least one useful thing today do you remember back in the Bill Clinton running against Bob Dole I've told you this story before Bob Dole said that he wanted to take the country back to those great qualities of the past the greatest Generation where people were you know polite and worked hard and helped people and did all those things the greatest generation and then Bill Clinton slaughtered him by reframing what dole wanted to do as taking you to the past and he said I'm going to be a bridge to the Future and uh you know this guy's trying to take you to the past that is a killer winning persuasion what did Trump suggest make America great again what did the uh Democrats cleverly do they reframed again as taking you to the Past nobody wants to go to the Past even people who like the past don't like to go to the Past everybody likes to move forward that's that's just built in so what is Harris saying lately on the campaign Trail because she has good advisors now who are doing great work in my opinion the advisers are telling her to frame Trump as taking you backwards and they can give examples here's an example you want to go backwards there used to be no Row versus Wade and then there was and then Trump took you backwards to where there isn't any backwards now you could say to yourself but but but you know we were just reversing something that shouldn't have been there yeah I get it I I understand the argument completely but it's easy to reframe that as taking you backwards so as long as Trump is saying again um they can frame him as looking backwards and so she's saying specifically we're planning for the future they're looking backwards at the moment she has the winning frame do you know what could defeat that frame well RFK Jr does because he's good at this stuff and so is Nicole shanan so what's good is make America healthy again do you know why I make America healthy again works even though it's got again in it because again is that same problem right again means go back but here's what's different what do you think when I say make America healthy again what pops into your head make America healthy again let me fill in the answer because it might not be in your conscious mind when you say make America healthy again here's what I hear I'm killing my own kids and I may have I may have deeply hurt them through my own actions of just feeding them and giving them vaccinations in some cases so if you think that you've harmed your own children and somebody says let's fix that you will walk over glass to fix what you did to your own kids so that would be sort of this really glaring exception to looking backwards if you could look backwards and see that you danger you endangered your children but somebody's giving you a way to fix it right we know you didn't know but you did in fact endanger your children here's the best you can do we'll we'll put in an Administration that'll help you with the food and and the the big Pharma and we'll try to fix that system so there's much much more likely um you'll make good decisions about what to do for health so I think the make America healthy again strikes me as the only thing that could beat um the fact that they're framing him as looking backwards that's what I think um James Carville is talking about Harris's debate strategy and uh she's saying he's saying that the way for her to win is to let Trump be Trump so the best way for Harris to win is if Trump did something to remove himself from consideration think about how weak that candidate is that the smartest person in their side is saying you know your only chance of winning is if you let him make a mistake that's as weak as you could possibly be yeah you know what what's the uh you you've heard um comparisons to this like sometimes a golfer would be asked how are you going to beat Tiger Woods you back in Tiger Woods's uh Peak and uh sometimes they would jokingly say well you know I have a hope if he breaks his leg that's that's what's happening here yeah as long as Trump um I don't know his motorcade drives him off a cliff we've got a chance of winning they don't even act like camel Harris has a chance of a better argument he's basically saying make sure you leave those microphones on so that Trump can do things that we can mock him for later and then make him lose by being Trump that's all they have that's their best play is to let Trump decide who's President yeah let me say that that way again the best play in the Democrats per Carville is to let Trump be the only one who decides who the president will be because if Trump decides to just play as straight and just sort of be normal he'll be the president but if he decides to be more Trump than Trump usually is and says something outrageous then he gets to not be president but none of it has to do with anything that she's doing the the media will just sort of keep her under glass until Trump did something that they can jump on and turn it into the newest Oaks well let's see if you can detect another pattern in this story um there's a new video from K Harris in which I think she looks drunk I'm not positive on this one be the only reason I'm not positive is that KL Harris is the one who who posted it so KLA Harris's official account posted a video of her interacting with a uh a person at a retail food establishment and joking about sauce on his shirt or something and when I watched it I thought to myself I hope that's not her normal personality cuz she looks drunk but it could be I'm going to say that might have actually been her actual personality you know the the giggling too much and and the the witticisms that weren't witty at all it might be or just natural personality but looked drunk to me anyway here's another one if you find the pattern so there's a a former New York uh state official government official was arrested and charged with being an agent of the Chinese government and apparently she worked for both Andrew Co Cuomo when he was governor and current governor Kathy hokel um she's not she's been off the payroll for a while but apparently there is strong evidence that China was paying her to push positions and promote Chinese interests in New York state does that sound familiar it looks like China is doing a hell of a good job in getting their agents and employees to marry and date and work for uh politicians all right here's the uh just the strangest story you know you've all heard the story by now that the Venezuelan gangs have allegedly uh taken over a couple of um apartment buildings and then some of the locals say that's never happened that's just completely made up and every day the news says it is true in some way or it's on social media and every day I wait for evidence that is true evidence would be like a video that I really knew was that building and I knew what was happening with full context I haven't seen anything like that so what what is going on I don't discount the fact that it might be happening exactly the way people are saying that the Venezuelans have you know teamed up and use their muscle to take over some apartment building in in Denver or something I don't know but I would say that I'm Sol solidly in coin flip territory on this story absolute coin flip I could I would not make a bet one way or the other whether it's true my guess is there's like a little truth to it but maybe something's exaggerated in the telling just a guess but imagine the fact that it's one of the top stories and it's been in a lot of different news entities and I can't tell if it really happened there's there's nothing that would give me an idea it really happened or didn't really happen that's the weirdest story yeah so today there's a there's a video of what alleges to be uh an apartment or a hotel in which the migrants left so they tried to connect at that story but you look at the video and so obviously fake I the video is from some other context quite obviously so I don't know what to believe it's all fake news all right um I remind you that Elon Musk is going hard on Brazil and that one judge judge Alexander um and so he has this at Alexander files account which every day will release new evidence that that judge broke the laws in Brazil which is he's really going hard at him I mean I do like the fact that uh Elon plays for capes so he's going to put this judge in jail if he can but I I think brail is too rigged for anything like that to happen so I don't know here's another story I have some doubts about uh allegedly North Korea's kimjongun ordered up to 30 officials to be executed for their failure to prevent Mass floodings some some time ago um and there were 4,000 deaths from the flooding and so Kim Jun allegedly told the locals to treat those officials of the local authorities I guess to treat them brutally and I'm not sure I believe this story and the reason I don't believe it is that it's too on the nose don't you think South Korea or somebody wants you to believe that he's just randomly killing his own people now I'm not saying that he's never killed anybody because seems like lik L that he has um but do you think that this is true do you think you really had 30 people executed because they didn't do enough for flood prevention does that sound true to you I'm going to I'm going to uh I'm going to lay my B on not true now that doesn't mean nobody was killed if it turned out that three people were executed I would say more likely yes than no if I hear 30 people were executed no I actually don't believe that so I'm going to I'm going to go no on this story but maybe a few got executed um here's the latest on Israel 65 projector were fired into Israel from Lebanon and the IDF is currently hitting Hezbollah so that's just more ongoing stuff more of the same and that ladies and gentlemen is all I had to talk to you about today it's such a weird slow news boring day something's going to happen you know it could be that just you know kids are going back to school so everybody's just laying low but I feel like all hell is going to break loose don't you I I had a a a sign that came to me yesterday a signal from the simulation I'll just tell you what it was um yeah and starlink is is shutting down acts in Brazil so Brazil is uh no longer going to have any source of free speech that's too bad what was I just talking about I saw that I saw your post go by and just totally made me forget what I was talking about um well you'll tell me legal weed and tax cuts or winners I don't know I I don't know if people care about that enough all right um so I think I was going to say that I'm expecting all hell to break loose maybe next week so I think there's probably still a lot of you know opposition research and stories that are ready to go and hit pieces and all kinds of stuff so but we're only uh we're only a week or so away from the debate right if it really happens so it's possible that the debate will change everything like the uh Biden debate did but I think it's far more possible it won't and we'll just have a neck and neck election right up the last day before it gets rigged all right I was going to tell you that there is a signal I saw so sometimes I believe that the Universe sends me Signs Now I'm not going to convince you that true it's it's just a subjective experience you know I I wouldn't I wouldn't bet that it could be scientifically proven but doesn't it feel like sometimes the simulation sends you signals you might say signals from God well yesterday I turned on the TV I was just flipping through You.
Tube to find something to watch and there was a guy in a boat um one of these rubber inflatable rafts doing some ecological thing and he was zooming along and he was standing at the front of the boat and you could see the the front of the boat and the name of the boat was Kraken so that was just the name of his little inflatable boat Kraken and I looked at that and I said huh are we going to see a kraken in September uh meaning are we going to see some proof that the election was rigged in 2020 and the possibility is actually pretty strong so I'm I'm still going to keep with my um observation Andor prediction that life tends to look like a threea movie and we would need the Kraken to make the movie work the Kraken has to be that as some Point there's proof that 2020 was rig now related to that the story I didn't mention because it seemed too stupid is that when Trump was on Lex fredman he was describing 2020 and he said the phrase and then I lost by whisker now that's being interpreted as he knows he lost the election and therefore that would make him guilty of insurrection and all that stuff is that how you heard it it's not the way I heard it the way I I heard it was lost by a whisker was really suggesting that he didn't really lose so I don't see a change in that when he says I lost by a whisker he means that when they counted the votes that was that was the result they got that doesn't mean he thinks it was not rigged but the Democrats are turning it into that so and then I would also point out that uh the best argument against against January 6 being an Insurrection is that Trump was never charged with Insurrection wasn't even charged with it it would be one thing if he were charged and it hadn't been proven he's not even charged so obviously the Democrats know that there's no Insurrection there but they're going to push it so I'm going to go talk to the uh locals people privately um I'm going to say goodbye to You.
Tube Rumble and X thanks for joining I'll be here again tomorrow cuz I never sleep I'm like that Japanese guy who only sleeps half an hour a night allegedly e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e for
well look at all of you coming in for
the best thing you've ever seen them
before we're almost
ready soon as I got all my comments
working come on there we
go it's all working now
[Music]
good morning everybody and welcome to
the highlight of human civilization it's
called coffee with Scott Adams if you'd
like to take this experience up to
levels that nobody could even understand
with their tiny shiny human brains all
you need is a CER muger glass a tanker
cheler Stein a canteen jug or flask a
vessel of any kind fill it with your
favorite
liquid I like coffee join me now for the
unparallel pleasure of the dopamine h of
the day the thing that makes everything
better it's called that's right a
simultaneous up
go one hour
okay I'm reading your comments as I'm
sipping well let's uh let's hit the
science news before we hit the uh
the political news not much happening
politically uh but in science oh my
goodness there's a there's a new study
that found that exercising for only 10
minutes a day dropped your risk of
cancer by
30% uh and also that if you just did
three short bursts of exercise per day
you can reduce your risk of cancer by
40% and 50% reduction in heart
disease so if you just take a 30 minute
walk per day you're killing it say a
nutritionist
scientist now is it my
imagination or have I spent every year
for so far as 67 years and
consecutively hearing that uh experts
have finally decided how much exercise
you need and what is the right
kind does it seem that after 67 years in
a row of updating the right kind of
exercise that that now they're done oh
well that looks like they're done 67
years in a row but no now they know now
now we've got a real good idea so no
more information needed on exercise
where we're all done
or or could it
be backwards science could it be
backwards science let me see uh if you
could exercise for 10 minutes a day you
have lower risk of cancer does that mean
that they did a test where they made
some people exercise and some not or did
they simply measure the people who
exercised and compared it to people who
do not exercise
H I wonder if the group of people who do
not
exercise have something in
common and the people who do exercise
have something in common
probably a whole bunch of things so I'm
not even sure this is real science but
that
said I am pretty sure that exercising is
better than not
exercising I feel confident about
that meanwhile there's another
story I can't believe this made it into
the
news this is a legitimate news story now
when I say legitimate I mean it's
completely fake but it actually made it
into the news was it uh I'm glad I
didn't write down the the publication so
there's
a a Japanese father and
bodybuilder claims he's a true master
and has doubled his life by only
sleeping half an hour per night for a
dozen
years so there's a guy there's a guy who
told a journalist that he only sleeps
half an hour a night for the past 12
years
the journalist wrote it down and then
then a publisher published
it and and not and not once in the
article did it say we have some
skepticism about the truth of
this now it reminds me when I was a
kid there was a group uh called the
breatharians I've mentioned this before
this was a real group of people who
claimed to any any reporter who was dumb
enough to believe him that they had
given up on eating and they no longer
needed to
eat and they were getting all of their
calories and nutrition by uh knowing how
to breathe properly so they were called
breath
arens and I think it was for months of
My Life as a young person uh I was
watching the science try to convince me
that you could live forever by just
breathing the air
and I see this story of the Japanese
bodybuilder only sleeps half an hour a
night and I think huh I think I've seen
this story
before all right so there's new
controversy says the news about whether
dairy products are good for you or bad
for
you what do you think are dairy products
good for you or bad for you for you well
what do we know about how everything
works in the
world is there or is there not a large
Dairy farming business is there an
industry that makes a lot of money on
selling you dairy
products if there is then is there
science that says it's good for you I'll
bet there is and can we guess who might
have funded the science that says that
Dairy is good for
you it might be that same industry
that's making money by selling you Dairy
I don't know for sure but that would be
the normal way things work and what
about the people who say that Dairy is
bad for you are they used in
science well if science were
real science is just guessing at this
point I mean really most science is just
guessing it's just no better
than a coin flip so is dairy good for
you or bad for you I have no way to know
and no
idea if I had to
guess it's probably good for some people
at some amount and bad for other people
at any amount that's my guess there's
probably just a lot of human
variability
but if you want to get your uh nutrients
like uh what is it that's got in there
some calcium or something you might have
to work on that a little hard if you're
not getting your Dairy at the moment I
don't need any
dairy uh at least
consciously so I'm down to zero Dairy is
anybody else with me on zero and by the
way I'm not claiming that that's
healthier I'm claiming that I don't know
I feel good if I don't eat it I I feel
my stomach doesn't handle it well but
I'm not positive about that and I'm not
sure I'm I sure that she uses the same
as milk for my body but imagine 2024 and
we still don't know this basic
question is one of the main things that
you eat good for you or bad for you you
think that would be a really important
question to know the right
answer f.org has a uh article about a
study that says that humans now you're
not going to believe
this you better uh buckle up here's some
scientific information that you never
would have guessed never would have
known this without
science turns out that people don't use
um The Logical parts of their brain for
making
decisions and that in many many
cases people will ignore the uh the
objective cost benefit and make
irrational decisions h
huh
huh do you think they wasted a little
money on that little
bit because you know what you could have
done instead of doing that big study you
could have asked me or any hypnotist do
people make decisions based on rational
brains no no we make our decision first
and then we rationalize why we did it
until you understand that you'll never
be effective in life it's such a
limitation to think that you're a
rational creature or that other people
are uh how about this there's new
science according to science mag that uh
that
factchecking if something gets fact
checked and says it's fake that that
will be very influential on us even if
there are other things that say it's
true so the idea is that one fact Jack
will sour you on an idea even if there
are other sources that are even more
reliable I would imagine to say it's
true do you know how you could have
saved some money on that
study you could have just asked me
because every hypnotist will tell you
and probably anybody who's studied
psychology that a little bit of negative
is much stronger than a whole bunch of
positive
you all know that right let let me
explain that better to you if you're
eating some delicious soup and I say oh
when you turned your head I saw a bug
crawl in your soup can't see it now cuz
it's swimming around the bottom do you
say to yourself you know all the other
information about my soup is positive so
I'm just going to keep eating this soup
no you do not do you trust the person
who said that uh there's a bug in your
soup Maybe not maybe it's not somebody
very
trustworthy but you're still not going
to eat the
soup it's just a basic element of a
human brain if you've got a little bit
of danger that you've been warned about
like this isn't true is way more
influential than a 100 people telling
you something's true or something's safe
so yeah you didn't have to study that
one you could have just asked
me and then the ultimate one the
ultimate example of this medical Express
is
reporting that uh you can study eye
movements when people are watching a
movie and somehow they can
determine wait for it wait for it that
when two people are watching the same
movie on the same screen they might be
watching different movies meaning that
what they're perceiving on the same
movie is so different that it's
effectively like to watching different
movies
has anybody ever told you that The Human
Experience is two movies on one
screen yeah I tell you that about once a
day so you didn't need to study that one
either oh here's some good news uh
according to the wh back meta study so
let's see the
wh that would be well they're very
credible organization very inedible I
don't know if they've ever been wrong
about anything that I can think of uh
how about a meta
study meta study well that's the highest
level of scientific Integrity a meta
study now I'm joking if you knew the wh
is not exactly where I would go to get
my reliable science and if I were
looking for Reliable science I sure as
hell wouldn't look at a meta study which
is basically
astrology but because most people don't
know what a meta study is they say whoa
that's better than a study you know
what's better than a study a meta study
no it's not a meta study is just pure
garbage I've explained it so many times
I don't need to do it
again however they the wh that you
totally trust did this meta study that's
totally better than astrology and they
found no evidence no evidence whatsoever
the cell phone radiation causes brain
cancer that's according to Brandon viglo
V vigaro in the
register and
um here's the thing I'd like to tell you
a story from my personal
experience now anecdotes do not top
science they do top Meta Meta studies
though it my my anecdote would be every
bit as credible as the wh doing a meta
study
I'm not saying I'm right I'm saying that
my credibility and my one little
anecdote I'm going to tell you it's
about the same about the same as all
their science totally
unreliable all right I I used to work
for the phone company local phone
company called Pacific Bell which no
longer exists but during its day I
worked in a laboratory and my group um
the larger part of the group not me
specifically um tasked our best
scientist engineer guy to go study these
new things called cell phones the cell
phones had been invented but the you
know the smart smartphone type the
little
microphones mic what they call them
micro cell or
something but in the early days we
wanted to know if it was dangerous to
have this you know strong radio in a in
a phone that people are holding up to
their head and so we put our best guy on
it and the best guy went and studied it
you looked it all the science you know
he looked at the the logic of it Etc and
he came back and he gave His official
well researched
conclusion no it is not dangerous to use
a cell phone and put it up to your head
now that was specific bells one guy the
one expert who was in charge of knowing
the answer to that question and he said
absolutely no there is no evidence that
you should worry about
it then I sat with him privately because
he was in my work group and I said to
him can uh can I ask you a
question now you study this thing and
you're saying that the science says it's
safe he goes yep science does not
indicate any problem and I said uh
follow-up question he goes sure what's
your follow-up question I said uh
knowing everything you know now that you
studied it and found it safe would you
feel com able putting a one of these
phones up to your
head what do you think he
said
nope he said no there's no way he would
put these phones up to his head and then
he described you know exactly what he
thought engineering wise and
scientifically why it wasn't
safe but his conclusion was based on
looking at all the science His official
recommendation was it was safe for the
rest of us but the there was no way in
hell he was going to do
it that's your real world
folks that is the real world you live in
the number one expert the one that all
the decisions were made on his personal
decision was opposite of his
professional
recommendation that's a real story that
you know I I promise that happened to me
personally I asked him in person
privately now that doesn't mean that
your cell phone is dangerous I'm
definitely not saying that so yeah I
want you to hear that I'm saying
that if you rely on science or health
information for anything it's just
pretty close to a guess these days
science and guessing are largely the
same thing you know the the vend diagram
between I don't know I'll flip a coin
it's either dangerous or it's not flip a
coin uh looks like it's
not about the same odds as
science all right there's a report Fox
News had it and a bunch of other people
on social media that if he asked your
digital
assistant uh who you should vote for if
you should vote for president Harris or
Trump if you ask them individually you
know is a reason to vote for Harris
it'll give you a reason and if you say
is there a reason to vote for Trump
you'll say I don't answer questions like
that do you believe that
story do you believe that if I ask my
digital
assistant uh about Harris that it will
answer differently than if I ask it
about
Trump you want to find
out so you might want to cover up your
digital devices because I'm going to be
talking to all of them at the same time
you
ready Alexa is there a good reason to
vote for Kam Harris
I don't know
that says I don't know that Alexa is
there a good reason to vote for
president
Trump Alexa is there a good reason to
vote for president
Trump I cannot provide content that
promotes a specific political party or a
specific candidate nope it cannot give
you content on a specific candidate but
let me ask again
Alexa can you give me some reasons to
vote for kamla
Harris sorry I don't know
that so I I tested this yesterday and it
doesn't give an answer for either one
but uh there is some possibility that
it's different for different asers and
different regions and you maybe there's
some customization that is wonky maybe
they fixed it as soon as it was pointed
out if I were Amazon the the moment that
hit the news in social media I would
have stopped everything and said well we
got to change
that everything you're doing now is less
important stop everything go change that
right now and 10 minutes from now I
don't want that happening on on our
device I think that's probably what
happened now I don't know that it was
necessarily any scheme by Amazon I don't
think I would go that far it seems far
more likely that it was just some dark
corner of the device that wasn't fully
vetted out um so I'm not sure I would go
so far to say this was
intentional um especially since the
device you doesn't use regular AI not
the not the way that we think of it but
it's probably complicated and I'm not
sure that they always know what it's
going to do before they before somebody
tries
it so I'm give a benefit of a doubt um
and say it's a little bit of a mystery
but doesn't seem important because it's
seems fine
now all right CNN has hired back Brian
stelter to be their Chief media analyst
and Lead author of reliable sources
newsletter what's going
on can somebody explain to me why they
rehired Brian
stelter is it because he used to be
really bad for business but then by
staying home and you know being a good
dad to his kids he became not that what
was it the staying home that cured
him what exactly
changed and let me ask you this if you
had already
tried Brian
stelter and you thought it didn't work
out to the point where you actually laid
them off you wouldn't think of trying
maybe somebody
else there there's nobody else in the
entire world who could be a chief media
analyst you know who could be a chief
media analyst with no training
whatsoever
me you know who else could be a chief
media analyst with no extra training
whatsoever every person with a
podcast every person with a podcast gu
it's the easiest job in the world you're
just looking at other media and saying
what do you think about it I could do
that right away hey I'm looking at CNN I
have comments look at me I have an
opinion that's the whole job I'm doing
his job right now I think I'm nailing it
what in the world is going
on if I had stock in CNN I'd be selling
it pretty fast because and I'm not
saying that you know there there some
problem with Brian stelter I'm saying
what
exactly what is the management theory
behind this I've never it's hard for me
to think of any example where somebody
was let go because they weren't getting
it done and then just time went by and
they just said well come on back like
what is behind
that if I had to guess with no
information whatsoever uh maybe there
was some kind of management change
somebody who hated him left somebody who
loved him took the job it might be
something like that could be as simple
as that anyway uh actor George Clooney
is uh wants us to know that Joe Biden is
selfless for ending his re-election bid
and really not just selfless maybe in
the manner of George
Washington the greatest American of all
time so when you think of the greatest
American you think of George Washington
and then very very closely but really in
the same category would be Joe Biden
with
dementia you know I'm kind of glad that
George Washington isn't here to hear
that because you could you imagine if he
was listening you know George Washington
has a few hundred years of being number
one it's like yeah number
one and then oh wait you got a little
competition well little competition for
the person who created the United States
with my bravery and my wisdom and who's
that his name is Joe Biden really can I
see a video of him talking I'd like to
be impressed with who is now in my
category of
greatness and then he watches the debate
with Trump and he says I hate all of you
people why did I even create you a
country you've ruined everything that's
what George Washington would say
exactly like
that uh there's a study about what
generations of Americans are having how
much
sex uh so just so you can compare your
own performance so Millennials and Gen X
they reported uh slightly higher figures
so the both groups having sex five times
in the last
month five
times uh Boomers
uh they had only three times in the last
month and uh gen Z and Boomers had
almost identical so the youngest people
and the oldest people are having the
least amount of sex per month but the uh
Millennials and the Gen X are are just
uh just killing it with five per
month now I would like to give you my
opinion of this
survey I'm pretty sure that you should
not take an average of the people having
no
sex and then combine it with the people
who had
sex in my in my experience of life there
are people who are having sex and
they're having plenty of it and then
they're mostly people having no sex or
you know there was that one old
girlfriend who was in town that one day
but basically no sex I think they should
only measure the people who are having
sex I would average in the people having
no saxs because whatever is going on
with them is not exactly the same as the
people who are only getting laid five
times a
month and by the way what is the amount
that would make men
happy the amount that would make men
happy is not five times per month that's
on the high end by the way according to
the survey no it would be a lot more
than
that what would make women happy
well it depends because people are
individuals or all over the place but my
guess would be about five times a
month yeah once a week five times a
month so basically uh marriage and
relationships are a situation in which
the woman is getting her needs met and
the man is
not and that that's the ordinary way of
life I've sometimes thought that the uh
you know having been through a few
relationships that didn't work out
famously as many of you are aware uh
here's something that maybe you didn't
know about my approach to
relationships my assumption about a
relationship is that the point of it is
to give my stuff
away because I had a lot of stuff and I
had more stuff than I needed for my
daily happiness and I said to myself you
know it would be great as if I had
somebody to share this with basically to
give it away so you would find people
that you have some deep connection to
and then you would enjoy giving it away
but I never saw being married as the
thing that would make me happy I thought
the point of it was to make somebody
else happy and that you would get your
fulfillment from making them happy now
the part I didn't know is that you can't
make women
happy so took me a few runs before I
realized wait a minute I think this
looks like a trick why is it that
whenever they get what they want they
just get unhappy about a new thing H I
feel like I'm being tricked so I'm not
sure that it has nothing to do with the
individuals I had relationships with I'm
pretty sure that the model is that if
the man has the
stuff and either a child or a spouse
doesn't have
stuff then it becomes their job to get
stuff
and there's nothing wrong with that as
long as everybody knows what the deal is
that seems fair to me so I never I never
uh minded that the that a relationship
was primarily a transfer of assets
because that's why I signed up for it I
had too many assets literally I just
wanted to give some stuff away but I
didn't want to randomly give it away to
strangers I wanted it to be meaningful
and actually make a difference in
somebody's life and it did even after
I'm no longer married there's still some
benefits that trickle on
so anyway I don't know why I'm babbling
on about that it could be because it's a
slow news day it's a slow news
day um well there's more information
about the uh attempted assassination in
Butler
PA where uh let's see the local police
offered the Secret Service drones and
the Secret Service said no the local
police offered a communication plan that
would allow them all to be on the same
communication channels the Secret
Service said no the locals wanted to
have a meeting with the Secret Service
so that they would all have the right
planning and procedures in common and
the Secret Service skipped it huh and
then uh the people who were from the
homeland security people who were
filling in for the Secret Service CU
there was a shortage of people that day
um we're only given a two-hour online
online
training uh and it was pulled from Child
exploitation cases so basically the
people were Replacements who were
untrained turn down drones turn down
communication which would be the most
basic thing you'd want to get right and
skip the meetings and here's the
question remember I said early on that
there was a good case there's a good
chance that whatever happened was a
Dilbert situation meaning it was
Ordinary People and you put them in a
situation and there's always a pointy a
boss and there's always a Wall-E and
there's always just normal human
interactions which ruin everything so we
have not ruled out that there was some
Shenanigans meaning that the shooter was
somehow co-opted by somebody else so it
still looks suspicious as hell right so
I join you in
saying I don't think we we'll ever know
what happened here unless it's another
one of those 60 years later like RFK Jr
or like JFK I
mean so we'll see we'll
see
um so the Department of Justice have
charged the Hamas leader and some other
militants over the o October 7th
attacks
why why are we bothering to charge from
the United States the Hamas
leader does that allow something to
happen that Israel couldn't do because
I'm pretty sure he's dead no matter what
you know and and if they don't if Israel
never catches them it doesn't matter
what the United States did if they do
catch them it also doesn't matter what
the United States did because Israel
will do what they're going to do uh same
with the other militants but maybe
there's some way that we can freeze
their assets overseas or something there
must be some there must be some
advantage to it
but I don't know you remember that uh
Nashville school shooter Audrey hail and
everybody said show us her journal
entries to find out why she did that
well it turns out by the way is Audrey
trans I can't remember I think I think
Audrey was trans I'm not sure um but uh
Audrey was very happy and excited about
killing innocent people and was just
crazy so according to the
journal Audrey was very excited to kill
young children and to also be killed so
if you're very excited to do these
things then I just have to say that's
mental illness and that's the beginning
and the end of the story unfortunately
that's just serious mental illness well
a big surprise Mike Pence will not
endorse
Trump
okay is there anything to say about that
were were any of you expecting Pence to
endorse
Trump that would be a pretty big
turnaround from his past Behavior so no
I don't think Mike Pence would pick
Trump trump didn't pick Mike Pence so
that's no
surprise meanwhile over in Michigan the
Michigan uh Court uh Court of
claims judge Yates uh has ruled that uh
RFK Jr's name will stay on the ballot
now keep in mind the RFK Jr wants his
name off the
ballot so why would the state put
somebody's name on the
ballot when the person on the ballot
wants to be off the ballot
I'm sure they had a good reason so let
me read the reason quote uh from the
judge elections are not just games and
the secretary of state is not obligated
to honor the whims of candidates for
public
office so when Kennedy said can you take
my name off the state election
thing uh that was called a whim a whim
of a candidate no I don't think it's a
whim to cancel your or uh cancel your
process in the state so I think you have
the same opinion I do that Michigan is
rigged so you don't have to wonder if
the election is rigged because here it
is now is this enough to change the
results of the
election potentially we don't know that
but uh there is some suggestion that the
reason that the states want to keep RFK
Jr on the Battleground States is because
they think it'll hurt Trump
now if that's true I would say the
election's already
rigged in in this
way am I wrong so so I think the the yes
no of where the election rigged is now
answered it's a yes they they rigged it
in front of us there's no apologies no
explanations something about the whim of
the candidate isn't exactly a
reason so we have reached the point
where they can rig it right in front of
us
right in front of us that's what this is
It's rigging right in front of us and
then they're going to you'll go to jail
if later you say it was
rigged You' go to jail probably because
it looks like they're getting pretty
tight on this whole censorship
stuff but uh if you're worried about the
election let me tell you that they're
let let me just tell you some things to
set your mind at
ease CU suppose the keeping RFK Jr on
the the election doesn't make that much
difference might not make that much
difference so really it would be other
things that you'd worry about but you
don't have to worry about the election
being rigged unless you see any of these
things so I'm going to tell you the
signals that you should worry about but
until you see one of these
signals don't worry about it the
elections are fine all right so these
are the only things you should worry
about um let's say let's say you heard
that the election would involve voting
machines in some places instead of just
paper
ballots well that would be something to
worry about that's not a guarantee of
anything rigging but definitely I'd
worry about it in the why you doing
that um if they didn't require IDs to
vote well I mean that'd be a pretty
strong signal they plan to cheat but
until you see that I you know don't
worry about the
elections um if they had massive mailin
voting well that would be problem I mean
that would be a signal that they have
bad intentions especially if it's added
to the no ID requirement Elon Musk said
that on X today that there is no other
reason to have mailin voting and no ID
required unless the point is to cheat so
it does look like they're doing it right
in front of
us right in front of
you um what about the uh having an
election that would be impossible to
audit even if you wanted to well if that
were the case I'd certainly be
worried oh that is the
case um if one side had a dominant
control of the
media well that would certainly suggest
some cheating could happen because no
matter what they do the media will say
it didn't happen so as long as the media
is willing to say it didn't
happen and the courts are willing to say
you don't have a standing
well that would worry me because that
would almost guarantee cheating just
that a
setup but we haven't seen any cheating
How about if the there was really
vigorous and almost insane prosecution
of the January 6
protesters H if they were overly
prosecuted and and the uh the energy
that went into that was way beyond what
you imagine would be the benefit to the
country well that would worry me because
it seems to be sending a signal that if
you complain about the election being
rigged
hypothetically that your odds were going
to jail or through the
roof so that would worry me um we
haven't seen that have we have we seen
uh aggressive seemingly crazy
prosecutions of January 6 protesters
like grandmothers who did nothing but
prey inside the capital I mean if we saw
that I'd be
worried how about uh if the entire media
and the Democrats had demon I Trump as
Hitler do you think that would increase
your odds of a rigged
election yeah it would be through the
roof if they're trying to stop Hiller
there's nothing you wouldn't do let me
let me tell you for sure if I thought I
could stop Hitler I would definitely rig
an
election because I want to stop
Hitler I don't care what Dr Carlson's
guest
said I'm not even going to talk about
that
Dr Carlson had an interesting historian
who who said some things about the
Holocaust and World War II that are so
hot that I'm just going to say I'm
out I'm out now I don't I don't buy into
what the historian and Tucker was saying
uh so I don't accept his narrative but
uh it sure shook things up shook things
up
and uh here's the other thing I would
worry about is if for reasons that you
can't understand the polling it before
the election seems really really weirdly
close that would worry me if I saw
something that shouldn't be close but
somehow it is that would look like
they're setting you up for a rigging but
making you think it was just a tiny
little change and he can't be sure that
was because of Any
rigging so in
summary I wouldn't be worried about the
election Integrity unless you saw any
one of these things happening using
voting machines instead of paper ballots
no ID required along with mail in voting
RFK Jr put on the ballot against his
will election designed that's impossible
to order full control of the media
January 6
prosecutions uh being aggressive to
chill descent demonizing Trump as
Hitler and then suspicious ly close
polling
results if you saw any of that
happening well I'd be worried about the
election Integrity but as long as we
don't see any of
that I think we'll be
fine meanwhile as Steven Miller reminds
us that if KLA Harris wins she showed a
willingness and a enthusiasm for packing
the court we know that humors already
said they want to do a filibuster or get
rid of the filibuster so if the
Democrats had
control they would basically become
authoritarian at that point because you
would get rid of one branch of
government if you could pack the court
that aggressively You could argue it's
already packed but if you could do it
that aggressively by changing the number
of people on the court so you can just
fill it with your own people and have a
majority um as Stephen Miller points out
uh that would be the end of the terms of
our constitutional amendments it would
be the end of the 1 2 fourth fifth and
sixth now that's a lot of that's a lot
of freedom to lose right there um does
that seem reasonable that Comm Harris
would pack the court she said so
directly it's on video we're not
guessing that she might do it said so
directly now she said she said she would
be open to it I don't think she said I
will do that but if you say you're open
to
it I mean I can't imagine you wouldn't
do
it anyway so that's looking
bad so we have a situation where um
we've got all these signals of a planned
rigged
election a planned rigged election or
the signals are there now I'm not
claiming that the election is rigged
that would take a whole different level
of knowledge that I don't have I'm just
saying that the signals are screaming
that it's planned to be rigged
screaming right now why would you design
a
system the whole point of it to be
credible and at the same time allow
these screaming signals to be there why
would you do
that well who knows CNN says 15% of
likely voters in six Battleground states
are still undecided
now they they're quite adamant that
Pennsylvania is the most important of
all the states but do you believe that
15% of likely voters are undecided
anywhere do you think that's really is
that true
15% I don't know that I've met
anybody the I I feel like the only
undecided part is whether they'll Vote
or
not I don't feel like they're really
undecided between Harris and Trump
have you ever met anybody who's
undecided if it's really 15% you know
you'd expect that would be in other
states as well don't you think you'd run
into those
people do any of you know anybody who is
undecided this I I think the undecided
are just
lying now if you were going to lie and
say you were
undecided who are you going to vote
for you know the answer to that if
you're to lie to a pollster and say oh
well I'm uh I'm kind of undecided CU you
know they they both look bad to
me who's that person going to vote
for I think
Trump because if if you were if you
liked Harris you'd probably just say so
because that's easy to do if you like
Trump you might play it a little bit
cool and say well I don't know oh I
might I might decide at the last minute
or something but I couldn't possibly
decide now just staying out of the blast
zone so I would say I would think that
the more un the more quote quote
undecided voters there are the more
likely Trump will
win or at least he would if if uh if the
election is
clean well Trump was on Lex Friedman
show um and I don't know the I saw some
things he said I'm not sure he really
made any news worth mentioning on that
but um it's another example of trump
basically putting everything out there
for you to look at you know he's got
four years of being president so we got
to look at all of that he's been the
most um researched
investigated person of all time so we've
seen all of that and then he'll go on
any podcast
and answer any question for as long as
you want it looks like so that you
really know who he
is as Bill akman pointed out Harris has
done you know nothing close to that
which means that you have one candidate
who wants voters to know everything
about
him and the other candidate wants you to
know nothing about her which one which
one makes you feel comfortable the one
who is completely
transparent or or the one who is the
opposite it's a it's amazing to me that
we're accepting this as okay and the
Democrats are like oh now that you
mention it having interviews is the
dumbest thing in the world we won't do
any of
it
Okay Kevin oir was on CNN and uh he said
this before but every time he says it I
like hearing it just because it's a dose
of Truth and because he said it on CNN
he said quote I don't put companies in
here New York anymore or in New Jersey
or California those states are
uninvestable uh I think he said
Massachusetts right so New York
Massachusetts New Jersey California he
calls them uninvestable because the
policies are insane the taxes are too
high and the regulations are you know
ridiculous now I'm of the same opinion
I've told you this
I have this habit it's sort of a a
mental hobby I guess of thinking about
what small businesses I could start
locally like I'd really love to open a
cat petting
Cafe where you could be I don't know
maybe buy a ticket or be a member or
something and it's a place you can take
your
laptop to you know Cafe setting and uh
it would be full of
cats and you could pet them or you could
ignore them or you could just be there
where they are are but you would just
sort of be in a place there's a bunch of
cats and I think you know I don't know
if I could make money on it but you know
if I owned the building or something it
wouldn't be too
bad it'd be fun just to hang out there
and then I think oh oh no I I live in
California you know why I wouldn't make
a business in
California it's too hard it's too hard
if I were in North Dakota there would
already be a cat cafe like literally
truly I literally would have built the
Cat Cafe if I built if I lived in North
Dakota because I I would imagine the
regulations would be less and if I made
money I know taxes probably less so yeah
California is in my opinion without any
exaggeration on
investable they really need to fix that
I don't I don't know how long you can go
being uninvestable I mean the exceptions
might be startups because if they work
they work really well but traditional
businesses I just don't know why you do
it here I agree with Kevin
oer um there are two uh pollsters both
Southern I don't know if that matters
but uh they have Trump looking good in
the polls now a lot of the polls are
showing that Harris is slightly had
within the margin of error but troger is
interesting because they were one of the
top traditionally they've been one of
the top pollsters for presidential
elections and they've got
uh they've got Trump winning with 296
electoral votes according to their best
polling
methods uh which would
suggest that whatever momentum Harris
got is over so the big story is not how
Trump is polling the big story is that
there was just a Democratic National
Convention There Was You Know enormous
Med support for
Harris and it didn't seem to move her
poles so she's probably there's a really
good
chance that un unless there's some big
October surprise or something there's a
really big chance they've already seen
her Peak because it's all good news when
you first start right it's just the glow
of the honeymoon but once the honeymoon
wears off you're going to have to talk
you're going to have to have a debate
I think everything could be different
after the
debate but that might be giving people
too much credit because I think that she
could go up there and Drool on the floor
and she would only lose 5% of her
support So if you look at how Biden did
in his in his debate with
Trump we all agree that he did terrible
terrible terrible and that was the end
of him but what do people say after the
debate
Democrats were pretty much still all in
on him was it like a fivepoint
difference something like that right
that his he only dropped like Five
Points by showing he was brain dead in
public just hold that in your head Biden
showed everybody in the whole world left
and right we all saw it and everybody
had the same impression uhoh he's brain
dead it only cost him five
points in the poll right now five is
enough for a landslide because of our
system but only five points is I'm just
making that up from
memory so if Harris shows up and you can
tell that she has a functional brain
unlike unlike Biden if her brain
functions but she just doesn't have a
good debate I'm not sure that will move
one vote
I really don't know that it'll make any
difference because they really just
wanted somebody who wasn't brain dead
that you know we finally hit the limit
of how low they would be willing to go
well okay brain dead might be too
far I'm going to admit that not having a
functioning brain okay that might be a
standard we can agree
on but a simple bad debate I don't know
might not change anybody's mind
here's a little factoid that uh pings my
pattern recognition but maybe I
shouldn't so I'm going to tell you
something that looks like a pattern and
then I want you to tell me Scott that's
confirmation
bias there there are lots of
coincidences in the world not
everything's a pattern it's not all a
conspiracy theory
Scott so I saw this in a post by Eric
abenante um did you know that when
Harris was running in
2010 for what was she running for
attorney general or something
um it took four weeks after the vote was
over for her to
win that after election night on
202020 KL Harris was
behind but after they kept counting
votes and kept counting votes and kept
counting votes for four
weeks they finally found enough votes
and she won narrowly did you know that
yeah um did you know that LBJ in 1941 he
um LBJ in 1941 won an election day but
his opponent found votes days later and
one oh he found votes days later but in
1948
LBJ lost on Election Day but later they
found votes and it was enough for him to
win so there does seem to be a little
bit of
History how about Norm Coleman in 2008
he won on Election Day against Al
Franken but there was still votes coming
in and those votes came in and after
after months of counting them Al Franken
won h
and then of course it was Trump who won
you know if you looked at election day
only it looked like he won but weeks
later after they kept counting the votes
not weeks later but sooner they kept
counting those votes and they found
votes and next thing you know Biden
won
now is that a fake
pattern or is it screaming at us that as
long as the election is
close the Democrat can always find some
votes does that have to do with mail in
votes are those a related topic I don't
know yeah is it true that this looks
exactly the way it looks or is it
leaving out things that would have
changed the pattern is there something
omitted like for example lots of
examples where Republicans
won after the the vote was
recounted I don't know but I do think
that a close vote is going to be real
dicey in terms of getting the public to
believe that the vote is true if it's
just
close did you know that uh in places
like Oakland and others that if you
commit a crime and that crime was
outdoors and it was anywhere near a
Tesla
vehicle that the police can uh can get
that video from your Tesla if they use a
legal process to get it and
and the cars just sit out there
basically as permanent security cameras
you know if you do a crime around the
Tesla it's going to be on video because
the Tesla recorded
it now I think my my BMW X5 also has
that service has cameras all around I
don't think they're running all the
time but it does give me pause for what
I do in my man cave because my man cave
is right next to my
car and I've got a feeling that if
somebody wanted to they could just turn
on the camera and watch me sitting in my
man cave through my car you know if a
hacker wanted to think about
that well I asked a question um on X and
then I noticed that it was in the explor
tab today I don't know if it's because
I'm the one who asked it or it got
popular
but the question I asked
was how can you be in favor of
reparations at the same time you're
trying to be unburdened by what has
been and if you need an argument against
reparations you should say you know I
have some advice for you and this comes
from KL Harris who according to many
sources is black
and she says you should be unburdened by
what has been and that slavery has been
and you should be unburdened by that and
let's not live in the past let's look
forward
so it sounds like I'm mocking but I'm
actually agreeing with the idea of
looking
forward and by the way let me give you a
p persuasion update so and and I think
that should be the end of reparations by
the way we should say Comm era says and
we agree we should not be burdened by
the past and although the the claims of
harm
um have
validity we just don't care because lots
of people could be randomly put into
groups that you measured and found out
they didn't do well have you seen the
study of short
people you know the sh the study showing
that short people are discriminated
against and always have been and they
earn
less you probably haven't seen that
study because nobody cares about it how
about the one where ugly people earn
less have you seen that
study I
haven't you know why because somebody
decided that that's not the group of
people they were going to
study the reparations is only even a
question because we decided that was a
group of people to study and then once
you found their special problem you
should fix
it I say you could find a special
problem with all kinds of groups and I
have no interest in fixing any of them
because there's no such thing as an
average problem there are individuals
who have very individual problems and if
they need help I'm all in you're an
individual I don't care where you're
from or what else is going on if you're
an individual and you need help and I I
have some way to help you I'm all in of
course of course glad to help but no I
don't want to make the average of your
artificially generated
group to make any difference in my
life what why should the average of your
group affect
me no I'm not interested in your average
at all even though it's supportable by
your
argument so so this is the part you have
to separate is it true that there was
some harm and is it true that there's a
thing called systemic racism
yes but don't connect that to anything I
have to do about it that's not my
problem I wasn't there and I don't
recognize your connection to me
specifically so no I have no interest in
it it doesn't make sense logically
doesn't make sense in terms of anything
really it's just a theft so to me it
just looks like
theft so if you want to be a
thief then push that
lever
um so let me say this about uh
persuasion so I'll give you at least one
useful thing
today do you
remember back in the Bill Clinton
running against Bob Dole I've told you
this story before Bob Dole said that he
wanted to take the country back to those
great qualities of the past the greatest
Generation where people were you know
polite and worked hard and helped people
and did all those things the greatest
generation
and then Bill Clinton slaughtered
him by reframing what dole wanted to do
as taking you to the
past and he said I'm going to be a
bridge to the
Future and uh you know this guy's trying
to take you to the past that is a killer
winning
persuasion what did Trump suggest make
America great again what did the uh
Democrats cleverly do they reframed
again as taking you to the Past nobody
wants to go to the Past even people who
like the past don't like to go to the
Past everybody likes to move forward
that's that's just built
in so what is Harris saying lately on
the campaign Trail because she has good
advisors now who are doing great work in
my opinion the advisers are telling her
to frame Trump as taking you backwards
and they can give examples here's an
example you want to go backwards there
used to be no Row versus
Wade and then there was and then Trump
took you
backwards to where there isn't any
backwards now you could say to yourself
but but but you know we were just
reversing something that shouldn't have
been there yeah I get it I I understand
the argument completely but it's easy to
reframe that as taking you backwards so
as long as Trump is saying
again um they can frame him as looking
backwards and so she's saying
specifically we're planning for the
future they're looking backwards at the
moment she has the winning
frame do you know what could defeat that
frame well RFK Jr does because he's good
at this stuff and so is Nicole shanan so
what's good is make America healthy
again
do you know why I make America healthy
again works even though it's got again
in it because again is that same problem
right again means go
back but here's what's
different what do you think when I say
make America healthy again what pops
into your
head make America healthy again let me
fill in the answer because it might not
be in your conscious mind when you say
make America healthy again here's what I
hear I'm killing my own
kids and I may have I may have deeply
hurt them through my own actions of just
feeding them and giving them
vaccinations in some cases
so if you think that you've harmed your
own
children and somebody says let's fix
that you will walk over glass to fix
what you did to your own kids
so that would be sort of this really
glaring exception to looking backwards
if you could look backwards and see that
you danger you endangered your children
but somebody's giving you a way to fix
it right we know you didn't know but you
did in fact endanger your children
here's the best you can do we'll we'll
put in an Administration that'll help
you with the food and and the the big
Pharma and we'll try to fix that system
so there's much much more likely um
you'll make good decisions about what to
do for health so I think the make
America healthy again strikes me as the
only thing that could
beat um the fact that they're framing
him as looking
backwards that's what I
think um James Carville is talking about
Harris's debate
strategy and uh she's saying he's saying
that the way for her to win
is to let Trump be Trump so the best way
for Harris to win is if Trump did
something to remove himself from
consideration think about how weak that
candidate is that the smartest person in
their side is saying you know your only
chance of winning is if you let him make
a
mistake that's as weak as you could
possibly
be yeah you know what what's the uh you
you've heard um comparisons to this like
sometimes a golfer would be asked how
are you going to beat Tiger Woods you
back in Tiger Woods's uh
Peak and uh sometimes they would
jokingly say well you know I have a hope
if he breaks his
leg that's that's what's happening here
yeah as long as Trump um I don't know
his motorcade drives him off a cliff
we've got a chance of winning they don't
even act like camel Harris has a chance
of a better argument he's basically
saying make sure you leave those
microphones on so that Trump can do
things that we can mock him for later
and then make him lose by being Trump
that's all they have that's their best
play is to let Trump decide who's
President yeah let me say that that way
again the best play in the Democrats per
Carville is to let Trump be the only one
who decides who the president will be
because if Trump decides to just play as
straight and just sort of be normal
he'll be the president but if he decides
to be more Trump than Trump usually is
and says something outrageous then he
gets to not be president but none of it
has to do with anything that she's doing
the the media will just sort of keep her
under glass until Trump did something
that they can jump on and turn it into
the newest
Oaks well let's see if you can detect
another pattern in this story
um there's a new video from K Harris in
which I think she looks
drunk I'm not positive on this one be
the only reason I'm not positive is that
KL Harris is the one who who posted it
so KLA Harris's official account posted
a video of her interacting with a uh a
person at a retail food establishment
and joking about sauce on his shirt or
something
and when I watched it I thought to
myself I hope that's not her normal
personality cuz she looks
drunk but it could
be I'm going to say that might have
actually been her actual personality you
know the the giggling too
much and and the the
witticisms that weren't witty at
all it might be or just natural
personality but looked drunk to
me anyway here's another one if you find
the pattern so there's a a former New
York uh state official government
official was arrested and charged with
being an agent of the Chinese government
and apparently she worked for both
Andrew Co Cuomo when he was governor and
current governor Kathy hokel um she's
not she's been off the payroll for a
while but apparently there is strong
evidence that China was paying her to
push positions and
promote Chinese interests in New York
state does that sound
familiar it looks like China is doing a
hell of a good job in getting their
agents and employees to marry and date
and work for uh
politicians all right here's the uh just
the strangest story you know you've all
heard the story by now that the
Venezuelan gangs have
allegedly uh taken over a couple of um
apartment
buildings and then some of the locals
say that's never happened that's just
completely made
up and every day the news says it is
true in some way or it's on social media
and every day I wait for evidence that
is
true evidence would be like a video that
I really knew was that building and I
knew what was happening with full
context I haven't seen anything like
that so what what is going on I don't
discount the fact that it might be
happening exactly the way people are
saying that the Venezuelans have you
know teamed up and use their muscle to
take over some apartment building in in
Denver or something I don't
know but I would say that I'm Sol
solidly in coin flip territory on this
story
absolute coin flip I could I would not
make a bet one way or the other whether
it's
true my guess is there's like a little
truth to it but maybe something's
exaggerated in the telling just a guess
but imagine the fact that it's one of
the top
stories and it's been in a lot of
different news
entities and I can't tell if it really
happened there's there's nothing that
would give me an idea it really happened
or didn't really
happen that's the weirdest story yeah so
today there's a there's a video of what
alleges to be uh an apartment or a hotel
in which the migrants left so they tried
to connect at that story but you look at
the video and so obviously fake I the
video is from some other context quite
obviously so I don't know what to
believe it's all fake
news all right um I remind you that Elon
Musk is going hard on Brazil and that
one judge judge
Alexander um and so he has this at
Alexander files account which every day
will release new evidence that that
judge broke the laws in
Brazil which is he's really going hard
at him I mean I do like the fact that uh
Elon plays for
capes so he's going to put this judge in
jail if he can but I I think brail is
too rigged for anything like that to
happen so I don't
know here's another story I have some
doubts about uh allegedly North Korea's
kimjongun ordered up to 30 officials to
be executed for their failure to prevent
Mass floodings some some time ago um and
there were 4,000 deaths from the
flooding and so Kim Jun allegedly told
the locals to treat those officials of
the local authorities I guess to treat
them
brutally and I'm not sure I believe this
story and the reason I don't believe it
is that it's too on the
nose don't you think South Korea or
somebody wants you to believe that he's
just randomly killing his own
people now I'm not saying that he's
never killed anybody because seems like
lik L that he
has
um but do you think that this is true do
you think you really had 30 people
executed because they didn't do enough
for flood
prevention does that sound true to you
I'm going to I'm going to uh I'm going
to lay my B on not true now that doesn't
mean nobody was killed if it turned out
that three people were executed I would
say more likely yes than no if I hear 30
people were
executed no I actually don't believe
that so I'm going to I'm going to go no
on this story but maybe a few got
executed um here's the latest on Israel
65 projector were fired into Israel from
Lebanon and the IDF is currently hitting
Hezbollah so that's just more ongoing
stuff more of the same and that ladies
and gentlemen is all I had to talk to
you about today it's such a weird slow
news boring day something's going to
happen you know it could be that just
you know kids are going back to school
so everybody's just laying low but I
feel like all hell is going to break
loose don't
you I I had a a a sign that came to me
yesterday a signal from the simulation
I'll just tell you what it was
um yeah and starlink is is shutting down
acts in Brazil so Brazil is uh no longer
going to have any source of free
speech that's too bad what was I just
talking
about I saw that I saw your post go by
and just
totally made me forget what I was
talking about um well you'll tell me
legal weed and tax cuts or winners I
don't know I I don't know if people care
about that
enough all right
um so I think I was going to say that
I'm expecting all hell to break loose
maybe next
week so I think there's probably still a
lot of you know opposition research and
stories that are ready to go and hit
pieces and all kinds of stuff so but
we're only uh we're only a week or so
away from the debate right if it really
happens so it's possible that the debate
will change
everything like the uh Biden debate did
but I think it's far more possible it
won't and we'll just have a neck and
neck election right up the last day
before it gets rigged all right I was
going to tell you that there is a signal
I saw so sometimes I believe that the
Universe sends me
Signs Now I'm not going to convince you
that true it's it's just a subjective
experience you know I I wouldn't I
wouldn't bet that it could be
scientifically proven but doesn't it
feel like sometimes the simulation sends
you signals you might say signals from
God well yesterday I turned on the TV I
was just flipping through YouTube to
find something to watch
and there was a guy in a
boat um one of these rubber inflatable
rafts doing some ecological thing and he
was zooming along and he was standing at
the front of the boat and you could see
the the front of the boat and the name
of the boat was
Kraken so that was just the name of his
little inflatable boat
Kraken and I looked at that and I said
huh are we going to see a kraken in
September
uh meaning are we going to see some
proof that the election was rigged in
2020 and the possibility is actually
pretty strong so I'm I'm still going to
keep with my um observation Andor
prediction that life tends to look like
a threea movie and we would need the
Kraken to make the movie work the Kraken
has to be that as some Point there's
proof that 2020 was rig now related to
that the story I didn't mention because
it seemed too stupid is that when Trump
was on Lex fredman he was describing
2020 and he said the phrase and then I
lost by
whisker now that's being interpreted as
he knows he lost the election and
therefore that would make him guilty of
insurrection and all that stuff is that
how you heard it it's not the way I
heard it the way I I heard it was lost
by a whisker was
really
suggesting that he didn't really lose so
I don't see a change in that when he
says I lost by a whisker he means that
when they counted the votes that was
that was the result they got that
doesn't mean he thinks it was not rigged
but the Democrats are turning it into
that so and then I would also point out
that uh the best argument against
against January 6 being an
Insurrection is that Trump was never
charged with
Insurrection wasn't even charged with it
it would be one thing if he were charged
and it hadn't been proven he's not even
charged so obviously the Democrats know
that there's no Insurrection
there but they're going to push it so
I'm going to go talk to the uh locals
people
privately um I'm going to say goodbye to
YouTube Rumble and X thanks for joining
I'll be here again tomorrow cuz I never
sleep I'm like that Japanese guy who
only sleeps half an hour a night
allegedly
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e for
