Episode 2858 CWSA 06/03/25

Let's uh take a look at the stock market.

And the U S&P 500 is basically flat.

Tesla is up 1.24.

Rumble up.34.

Flat.

Let's call that flat.

All right, we got a show to do, which is mostly me.

You're uh your responsibility is kind of easy.

You're expected to do nothing except simultaneous.

Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.

It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and you've never had a better time.

But if you'd like to take a chance on making this experience even better, all you need for that is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tanker gel or Stein, a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid.

I like coffee.

And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine, the end of the day, the thing that makes everything better.

It's called the simultaneous sip and it happens.

Now go.

Yep.

Yeah, that was it.

That made everything better.

you to well I wonder if there's any science that would support the idea that coffee makes you healthier.

Oh yeah.

According to uh CNN, there's a new study that says uh you can reach a older age if uh women especially who drank one to three cups of caffeinated coffee per day in their 50s were more likely to reach older age.

So, got that?

You uh if you drink your coffee, ladies, you'll live to an older age.

Now, in a related uh well, I I'll make it related story.

Um according to science mag, repetitive negative thinking is linked to cognitive decline.

So if you have bad thoughts and you just keep having bad thoughts, your brain will corrode.

So put it all together.

Every morning you should get up before anybody's up, have your cup of coffee, and then think positive thoughts, and your brain will be healthy, and you'll live forever.

Yep.

As for the ladies, sip your coffee, have positive thoughts.

And did you know that uh having consistent negative thoughts is uh also implicated in uh other major mental health diseases such as uh what's the other stuff?

I think anxiety and depression.

So, if you ever said to yourself, I think there's there's an upside to having continuous negative thoughts.

Turns out there's no upside.

You should do whatever it takes to have continuous positive thoughts.

Now, can you do that?

Well, I feel like you could.

You know, even though there are some people who have, you know, legitimate mental problems that would cause them to have repetitive negative thoughts, um, doesn't it make sense that you could force yourself even for 10 seconds to think something positive?

And if you could do it for 10 seconds, do you think you could do it for 20 seconds?

like if you just started small, I feel like most people if they really worked at it could uh at least increase the percentage of the day they're having a positive thought.

Seems to me.

Well, uh some of you asked me to solve the the mating problem, the demographic collapse.

And so I thought to myself, that seems impossible.

So I I'm gonna take a swing at it.

Okay.

So it starts with this story.

So Nate Silver in his latest blog post, um, apparently he he was saying that, uh, conservatives are up 31 points among those with self-described excellent mental health.

Now, we've talked about this before.

It turns out that uh the people who are on the left um tend to have terrible mental health compared to the people on the right.

Now, I'm going to tell you why, and you're going to say, "Oh, that actually makes total sense." Here's why.

And this is totally my own hypothesis, but once you hear it, you're going to say to yourself, "Huh, that explains a lot.

It goes like this.

You can only be happy when you're connected to the most important part of life." What is the most important part of life?

Well, if you believe in science and evolution and biology, the most important part of life is making more life.

Now, you might say to yourself, what about, you know, my search for meaning and all that?

Well, that's great, but the single most important thing that a h well, any animal can do is to make more of itself.

Now, the good news is I don't think you have to be literally the one having a baby or even married to the one who's having a baby.

I think you could have step kids.

I think you could be helping somebody who has kids, you know, maybe like a a grandparent who does a lot of babysitting, that sort of thing.

But I think if you're not if you're not directly connected to the essentially the energy source for all of life, which is the reproductive thing, I think it's going to be really hard to be happy.

Now, what if you could convince the people on the left that uh the reason the people on the right have better mental health is because they're sort of naturally connected to the political right kind of a thing.

And then you look at the political left and doesn't it seem to you that they're a little less interested in having kids.

So if you could connect the two ideas and how many of you uh buy my hypothesis hypothesis that uh the thing that makes you happy is being connected to the main thing your biology is requiring of you which is to be part of the reproductive flow of humanity.

Well, try it out because you probably have some depressed family member who doesn't know why they're depressed and they're on drugs.

Can you imagine how they would feel if they were having a baby?

Probably really stressed, but also that they would feel like they were attached to something with meaning.

Anyway, Disney is uh according to Breitbart, uh Disney's laying off hundreds of people and they're going to downsize their entertainment division.

I was watching a uh real the other day on the internet and it was somebody who works in in the LA Hollywood area and they seem pretty pretty bleak because apparently they're just no projects like there nobody's making a movie and if they are they're not doing it there.

So, it looks like the whole movie making industry is kind of dead.

I don't know if it's coming back.

It uh seems to me that everybody's looking at AI and expecting somebody to make a feature length movie, you know, in the next probably one year.

And uh I always thought I would like to do that, but um I'll have to feel a little better to make that happen.

So maybe possibly.

Uh meanwhile um Elon Musk's company Neuralink just raised $650 million which would value the company at about 9 billion.

And the the thing I wondered was, does Elon Musk even care that his net worth went up a few billion dollars?

I don't know what percentage he owns, but can you imagine being so rich that you wake up and one of your companies raises your net worth by I don't I'll just take a guess4 million4 billion and he just made $4 billion and it it wouldn't change his day at all.

he his day would be exactly the same with, you know, $4 billion if that's what it was.

Well, Sam Alman says, "The world must prepare together for AI's massive impact." And then he said something that is the funniest thing a marketer ever said.

He said that open AI releases imperfect models early.

so the world can see and adapt and help shape regulations.

He says there are going to be scary times ahead.

Now, do you believe that open AI intentionally is releasing and has been defective models uh because it helps people get ready for the real thing.

Does that sound to you why they're releasing defective models?

It it's not because that's all they have.

Now, I don't think you would argue with the fact that they don't know how to make them non-deective.

They I don't think they know how to make them stop hallucinating as far as I know.

But uh it seems a little uh little little bit cheeky to say that releasing them with flaws is really helping society because then the flaws don't make them that dangerous but then we can we can imagine what they will be like without flaws and then we can get used to it and and prepare for it alto together.

Okay.

So, uh, I've got some advice coming up from from some people who have some ideas how to survive this age of robots and AI, but we'll get to that.

Meanwhile, Scientific America says that uh there's a Chinese company that found out how to bring your dead car battery back to life.

if you have an electric car.

I'm talking about the the uh lithium ion batteries in your electric car.

So, currently if your electric car has a bad battery or you you know you've it's run its course, um I don't know what they do to recycle it or whatever, but it's sort of just this big problem.

But this Chinese company used AI, which is a big part of the story.

They use AI to look at all the chemical reactions that could revitalize a lithium ion uh yeah lithium ion battery.

And they actually got three suggestions and one of them worked.

So all they did was uh they took a dead battery.

Now dead is not dead.

dead.

Dead is like when it reaches 80% capacity, I think if it goes down from 100 to 80%.

That's uh considered unusable.

And uh they found they could squirt some of this uh chemicals in there and it would revitalize it and suddenly it would be like exactly as good as a new battery.

Now there's some problems.

You know, there's safety testing and you'd have to redesign the batteries.

So there's a way to inject something.

So that's sort of would be kind of a big deal.

And it might result in fewer sales of new cars because if you could keep your battery running forever, well, why would you need to upgrade?

Because the software would be upgrading on its own.

So anyway, so I don't know if that has any place in the market, but that's pretty impressive.

I also didn't know that current batteries are supposed to last 15 years.

Does that sound right?

If you got a Tesla, the uh battery that comes with it would last 15 years.

That would be impressive.

Maybe it does.

Well, I usually don't talk about the uh individual crimes and even if they're mass shootings and stuff, but uh this illegal alien Muslim terrorist guy from Egypt to quote Jim Ha, the gateway pundit.

So, as most of you know if you watch the news, um he uh he used what did he use?

um Molotov cocktails and alcohol, set them on fire and threw them at a group of American Jews who were um who were together.

I don't know if you'd say protesting or rallying and it was in I think they were rallying in favor of the uh in support of the hostages or something.

But this guy shows up.

He's not even a legal citizen.

and uh he firebombs a group of Jewish people who were just trying to support essentially people who were hostages.

That's my understanding of it.

And I was trying to think, are Jews the only group in America who are attacked when they're grouping together?

because I remember the 2018 Tree of Life synagogue attack and I was thinking to myself, is there any other situation where a group of Americans u that are in some demographic, if they group together, they're likely to be victims?

In other words, I've never heard of the Pride parade being attacked, and I hope it isn't.

I've never heard of, I don't know, a woman's group being firebombed.

So, you can certainly see how the uh the question of anti-semitism in the United States is, you know, at the top of the list of uhoh uh we better do something about this.

And one of the things you could do about it would be uh not to let in uh Egyptian terrorists, if that's what he is.

That would help.

That would that would be a good start.

Have you noticed how there was a period when uh Trump first became president where we couldn't stop talking about the price of gas and the price of eggs?

Well, it turns out the price of eggs was doing great.

Uh so it's according to Newsmax, uh dozen eggs is under $3 in most places.

and the average cost is down to $2.52.

Um, so according to the White House rapid response team, that means a the price of eggs has dropped 61% since Trump took office.

Uh, but the best thing about that is it made Democrats just shut up about the one thing they understood.

If you thought about it, the the one thing the Democrats had on their side was that Trump had overpromised stuff like he would do things on day one.

Well, day one doesn't really mean day one.

It just means, you know, as fast as possible, you know, we'll get right on it.

And uh I would say, you know, if you're only halfway into the first year, it looks like you got right on it.

So your your egg prices went down and gas prices are down and uh maybe gas prices will get go down some more because uh Trump just opened with another executive order 23 million acres of Alaskan wilderness to drilling.

So Doug Bergam is, you know, driving that.

And that reverses a Biden era drilling ban.

I wonder if companies feel safe um going into business drilling up there.

If the possibility of a Democrat getting elected could put them out of business, is that a thing?

Or would even a Democrat say, "All right, if you've already drilled, you know, that's allowed, but no new drilling." I don't know.

Is uh would the Democrats use common sense?

Hard to know.

But of course, the uh some people are worried about the habitats for grizzly bears and polar bears and caribou and migratory birds and they don't want to lose the caribou.

I mean, what would you do without caribou?

If there's one thing I need when I want to drive my car to a distant location, more caribou.

I'll be like, "Oh man, I only made it one one mile.

Why?" Well, I only had access to one caribou.

So, ladies and gentlemen, it's sort of a tie.

On one hand, you get a bunch of oil that, you know, drives civilization.

Boring.

On the other hand, you lose some caribou, possibly.

All right.

Now, one of the things I wonder when I read a story like that is how much oil is up there?

Because doesn't it sort of also matter how much?

because yeah, I'm in favor of opening it for drilling, but in the back of my mind, I'm assuming that it has a tremendous amount amount of known reserves because I would kill a few caribou for an enormous reserve, but suppose there's only a little bit there.

Well, that's sort of a I would only kill like one caribou for that.

Meanwhile, over in Poland, there was a presidential election and a what's being called by Reuters a pro.

Trump nationalist has won the presidency in Poland.

uh somebody named Carol Noraki and he won narrowly, but apparently he's got that um that Trump vibe about him.

So, do you think that's actually a Trump or is that some kind of a coincidence?

Are people really going to just start copying Trump because it works?

Maybe.

I don't know if that makes the world a safer place or not.

Um, how many Trumps can you have in the world?

And the funny thing is the uh I think he knocked out somebody named Donald Tusk.

That's pretty weird.

A weird coincidence.

Anyway, we'll see if that's the Trump effect if it affects any other countries.

All right.

So, there's a gentleman named Alex Karp who is the uh the CEO of Palanteer.

So, he's a he would be a multi-billionaire by now.

And he was asked at some event about secrets for success it looks like.

And he said the following.

He said, "I've never met someone successful who had a great social life at 20.

If that's what you want, that's great, but you're not going to be successful and don't blame anyone else." Um, and then he also says that, you know, picking the right partner in life is important.

Now, do you buy that?

Do you buy that?

uh if you had a great social life in your 20s that your odds of being successful are very low, you know, career-wise successful.

I I have to admit that if people are not just totally hopping it in their 20s, it would be hard to imagine that they're going to start humping it in their 30s.

But if I look at my own career uh arc in my 20s, I was just working regular jobs and trying to get my MBA and uh basically I was just building up my talent stack.

But by the time I reached my 30s, that's when I that's when I launched Dilbert and I found myself working full-time doing a Dilbert comic strip, writing a book, working on licensing projects.

It was insane.

The the amount of work I put in was just through the roof.

So, while I do believe that people in their 20s, if they're not working pretty hard at something, you know, that's a bad sign.

But I think there are two things you can work at.

One is working directly on that startup or whatever it is that's going to make you rich.

But the other is uh building your talent stack.

Uh I think either one of those gets you someplace.

So, uh, if you were to look at my life in my 20s, it looks more relaxed, going to a corporate job, you know, taking all the classes that they offered, uh, taking a Dale Carnegie class, um, learning about technology, learning marketing, learning strategy.

So, I was learning all those things and I was very aware that I was just building up my skills so that someday I could do my own thing.

I didn't think it would necessarily be cartooning, but all of those skills, including the technology stuff, uh directly went into Dilbert.

Then there's uh Mark Andre uh who's talking about uh the world of uh robots in the future.

Now, this is not directly uh uh self-help advice, but it's a little bit uh telling you the future.

So Mark Andre, famous investor, if you don't know who he is, uh says general purpose robotics is going to happen at a giant scale in the next decade.

Now that's what most of us think, but when it comes from somebody like Andre, then it just seems more credible.

Um and he says the US should not try to get the old manufacturing jobs back.

which would suggest you should not be waiting to get your manufacturing job back.

He says instead we should uh lean lean hard into designing and building robots.

Now I assume we're doing that.

I don't know exactly what the government is doing to make it easier to build robots, but um as Andre points out, otherwise we will live in a world of Chinese robots.

Can you imagine how dangerous it would be if if you had a full-sized humanoid robot that was built in China and its intelligence could be, you know, updated and controlled just through the cloud through China.

And if China wanted to overthrow the United States, all it would have to do is activate all the robots at the same time, grab a knife off of kitchen counter, stab inhabitants.

So yeah, we'd better start building our own robots like really fast.

Build those robots.

So if you translate this into some kind of uh you know meaningful career path advice, there must be elements of robot building that you could identify as current jobs for human beings.

I don't know exactly what that would be because I don't know enough about the robot building world.

But I'd be looking hard into what is it that you need to build and sell robots that the robots won't do themselves if there is anything because that's going to be a pretty big area.

Anyway, according to the Gateway Pundit, Christine Christina Leila, so you may have heard this story, but this is this one's a really spicy one.

Um, so the FBI and Muller's team, you remember Mueller?

Uh, apparently they hid Russy gate documents using a special coding system that you can use to make things invisible to people who are searching for them.

Now imagine uh so at this point I think uh you know Bino and Cash Patel have identified the code that was used to hide all the good stuff.

Now, why do you think the this is regarding the uh um the Russia gates collusion?

I feel like this is going to be the thing that tells you what all the people did, all the bad people.

So right now we sort of have this general idea that the FBI was presented with this idea, you know, that uh, you know, maybe maybe Trump had some Russia connection, but we all know that it was it was organized via the uh Hillary Clinton campaign, but it feel I feel like the reason nobody's going to jail for it is there's not quite the paper trail you would need to prove who did what and when and what they were thinking and what their intentions were and all that stuff.

And it could be that this new discovery that there's a secret code where all the good stuff was hidden, we might find out just how bad this was.

The my only concern is that there are so many things that happen in the news, especially in the Trump world, that the energy has already been taken out of the topic.

And the uh the people on the left and the the mainstream uh media will just say, "Ah, that was a long time ago." And it would just act they'll just act like it's not a big deal.

And then the uh political right will be screaming and saying, "Are you kidding?

We just proved that you tried to overthrow the government of the United States or influence an election, which would be sort of the same thing." And and we have the names and we've got the exact details and that's not going to be anything.

So that's what I predict.

I predict there will be some really spicy things that come out of this, but that the mainstream news will talk about it once and then it'll act like it doesn't matter.

So unless there's a uh you know some kind of prosecution, it will just sort of disappear.

Well, uh, Steve Bannon on his, uh, War Room show had author of, uh, Putin's playbook, Rebecca Coffler, and she says that we're already in a kinetic war with Russia because Russia would know that that very clever drone attack that Ukraine apparently pulled off to destroy a bunch of Russian bombers, that there's no way that they could have done that without direct US support at the very least our satellite images, but probably more than that.

And I thought to myself, oh, I'm an idiot.

Not once did I think, oh, the United States was obviously involved in that attack.

I didn't think that once.

And it's kind of obvious once somebody who's an expert points it out, you go, "Huh, yeah, actually there's a pretty good chance that America was involved in that." But then related to that, um, apparently Russia is deploying Chinese lasers that would be defensive tools for knocking down any drones and maybe missiles, too.

So, there's a uh video that's been posted on Telegram that shows a team of Russian uh military people uh operating this Chinese drone laser.

Now, you see what's happening, right?

Russia and Ukraine have become a weapons testing area for first the United States and now for China and Russia and and Ukraine are just sort of caught in the middle.

And I also thought to myself, do you know who's preventing Russia from attacking the United States besides perhaps Russia themselves?

probably China.

Do you think China that buys 80% of the energy that Russia sells, do you think they have the power to say no, you're not going to war?

We might, you know, test some weapons and, you know, we might uh keep crawling along the way things are going, but she can't start World War II.

I feel like China would have that power now.

So that we're not even really dealing with Russia.

Exactly.

Um I think that China has probably pulled off a a total control move because they're the biggest customer of Russia and they can bankrupt them anytime they want.

So, I think we're safer than you think because China would not allow Russia to escalate beyond the point where they're just testing some Chinese weapons.

So, I think that so-called war in Ukraine is just going to keep going as a stalemate.

Um a uh another guest on the war room named Boon Cutler, he asked the following question, which is a good idea.

Um what would happen if all those Chineseowned properties, I think most of them are farms that are near military bases in the United States.

What if they also have swarms of drones?

They're right next to military bases.

So they could attack the military base in, you know, a minute.

So, uh, maybe we should look at that.

Now, I haven't seen any evidence that the land that's being bought that's near military bases is, you know, being stocked up with weapons.

But I would definitely worry about it.

I I would look into it a little bit.

So yeah, let's uh find out a little bit more about that.

Meanwhile, according to uh interesting engineering, um in Russia, the uh kids are going to be taught I guess it's a mandatory class.

They're going to be taught how to operate drones.

So they'll all be little uh drone experts.

To which I say, isn't that worthless?

In one year, won't all the drones be self-driving?

Why would you why would you put a human in the drone operating position?

You know, even if the AI is operating the drone, at the very least, the human will be uh relegated to final decisions.

So I think the the drone will take off.

It will decide because AI is you know operating the entire war.

Uh the drone will know where to go for maximum impact and the the weakest defense and it'll pick its targets and maybe but not even necessarily it might show it to the human and then the human says yes or no.

Yes, attack that tank.

But it doesn't seem to me that you're going to need a lot of human operators for drones in one year.

Is that too soon?

I think in one year it if we have full self-driving Teslas that are giving, you know, civilians rides in cities throughout the United States.

You think the drones are going to be operated by humans?

I mean maybe in some specialty way but doesn't seem like a useful skill in the future.

So Jeffrey Sachs um who was on the All-In Summit way back in September of 2024, he had some interesting things to say about Taiwan.

And I'm not going to say I agree with it or disagree with it, but he makes a he makes a good case.

He says uh China first of all is not a threat to the United States security uh big oceans, big nuclear deterrent and so forth.

Second, we don't have to be in China's face.

Uh what do I mean by that?

He says we don't have to provoke World War II over Taiwan.

That's a long complicated issue, but this would be the stupidest thing for my grandchildren to die for.

We have three agreements with China that say we're going to stay out of that and we should.

And I have to say, um, the idea of dying because of something about Taiwan, that does seem like a really bad reason for an American to die.

Now on the other hand, Taiwan is an ally and we must have made some assurances that you know we would be helpful.

But I wonder to what extent just giving them weapons would be enough.

It seems to me that if you know in the long run there's no possible way that Taiwan will remain independent forever.

It was it's not like a thousand years from now if he came back Taiwan would be independent.

One way or the other, the the big uh the big country is going to overwhelm the little country that's right next to him.

So, it doesn't seem to me that dying over something that's going to happen anyway, whether you love it or hate it, it's going to happen anyway.

Um he makes a good point.

So probably we'll have to pretend that we're doing something useful while uh letting China have its way is my guess.

How many of you uh show me in the comments have lost a connection to a family member?

It could be your own child, could be your parents because of politics.

I just I just wonder how universal this is because I was reading a thread on X of people who were talking about losing family members that hadn't talked to them since the election.

How many of you were in that category?

Oh my god, I'm seeing a string of yeses go by in the comments.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yeah.

Incredible.

That is so disturbingly dangerous for this country.

Wow.

Um, so I was thinking to myself, um, how do you deprogram those people?

And the answer is you probably can't because they've chosen to have no contact with you.

But if you could uh I would start with the fine people hoax and I would I would also start I would set it up this way.

I would say have you ever found out something that just totally rocked your world because you thought it was one way but then you you found out you'd been fooled and it was another way.

such as let's say the uh the nutrition pyramid, the food pyramid.

Now, if you can get if you can get your family member to admit that they had ever experienced believing something was completely true and then learning it wasn't, say, can I show you another one?

Just to blow your mind.

It won't change your view on politics, but I want you to I want you to see how easily you could be led to believe something that isn't true.

And then you do the fine people.

But make sure you found the American debunk website because it it'll show you the, you know, the full the full video to prove what's going on.

But then a lot of these people think that the real problem was the January 6 insurrection.

And I'm going to tell you the worst argument you can make if you're trying to talk somebody out of believing it was an insurrection.

All right?

You can't say it wasn't dangerous because people got hurt.

So you have to acknowledge that you that you both agree that the violent part was uncalled for and that those people had to, you know, they had to be dealt with.

Now they they didn't go to jail.

Um even even if they were pardoned, they they did serve some serious time.

But here are the bad arguments.

Don't say the feds were behind it because that's unproven.

As soon as you say, "Oh, the feds, it was a Fed erection." No, Feds erection, not a Fed erection.

As soon as you say it was the feds, even if it was, even if it was, it's not an argument that would work with a Democrat because they would just reject it as ridiculous.

It's like, well, there weren't that many.

Um, so whether or not you're sure the feds were behind it, it's a bad argument, so just drop it.

The second bad argument is, you know, for sure the election was stolen.

You might be right that the election was stolen, but since there's no proof that any Democrat would ever accept, it's a terrible argument.

Now, you just said to yourself, uh, how are we going to argue against January 6 being an insurrection if he just told us that all of our obvious arguments are terrible arguments?

Well, you can use a good one.

Here's a good argument.

Now, it will take a few explainings for the person that you're working on to understand that you're in completely solid territory.

It goes like this.

The only thing you need to know is what the nonviolent protesters were thinking when they entered the capital.

What were they trying to accomplish?

And then point out that nobody's ever done a TV show or even a podcast in which the the protesters are brought in and they ask the following question.

Why were you protesting?

What were you trying to accomplish?

Now, I believe the answer would be in every case we it looked to us like the election was stolen.

So, we were trying to slow things down to see if we could check it so that we can save the republic.

Now, you may have just said to yourself, Scott, you just said don't use the argument that the um election was stolen.

Here's the tough part.

I didn't.

What I said was that the protesters might believe that based on the fact that it broke pattern.

So, it broke pattern in terms of, you know, those last minute votes for Biden and the fact that there were so many of them and it's it's off uh historical pattern.

It broke pattern in the bellweather counties or precincts.

So it broke pattern.

Now that is not proof that anything was stolen.

The only thing you need to know is that the protesters believed it didn't look like a credible election.

You don't have to argue whether it was actually stolen.

If you argue whether it was actually stolen, that's the end of the argument because a Democrat will be like, "All right, go away.

Go away." There's no evidence it was stolen.

I'm not going to listen to the rest of it.

But if you can get them to understand that it's not about what you or they think, it's about what the protesters thought.

So if the protesters thought it was a perfectly fair election and they were trying to delay it or stop it, it was an insurrection.

That's what I'd call it, right?

If they believed that the election was fair and they and they did what they did anyway, trying to delay the certification, well, that's a little bit insurrectiony, you know, not really effective because they didn't have any chance of succeeding.

But if they believed, right or wrong, and this is important, right or wrong, if they believed that the election did not look credible, then having a delay to make sure it was credible would be saving the republic.

It would not be an insurrection at all.

So that might be a little too complicated, but uh that would be the only clean path to convincing somebody who was willing to listen that uh that that was a hoax.

It was no insurrection.

It was uh patriots trying to make sure that we got the right result.

All right.

Uh so uh the other day I wittyly pointed out that Democrats only did two things wrong in the last several years.

The two things they did wrong were all of their candidates and all their policies.

Now of course I was saying that for humorous intent but then other people said but what about their messaging?

Now I think that candidate and policies covers messaging too.

But just to uh put a little light on that um here's the comparison in messaging where uh Bernie and AOC were saying things like we have to stop the oligarchs.

Trump was saying we're going to enter the golden age.

Which one of those is better messaging?

Stop the oligarchs or come with us.

We're going to enter the golden age.

Those are not close.

That that is the worst messaging ever.

How about this one?

Uh equity.

Yeah, we we want to have equity or we want common sense.

Which one's stronger?

We got to fight for equity so everybody gets the same uh payout no matter what they put in or we've got to fight for common sense.

Again, these are not close.

It's not like you're like six one, you know, half a dozen of the other.

you as soon as you hear them, you go, "Oh, I like the golden age and I like common sense, but stop the oligarchs and give me equity." It just doesn't resonate.

But then you've got Tim Walsh who's uh teaching teaching Democrats how to code talk like a real man.

And lately he said that a good strategy would be to bully the out of Trump.

What?

Bully the out of him.

That That's the messaging from the Democrats.

Oh my god, that's bad.

Anyway, um and then the last story that I have for you, which I think is a very important one, is that China now has a uh a negotiator for the trade deals.

And uh believe it or not, President Xi hired somebody named he.

I'm not making that up.

He E.

that's his first name.

So, she hired he to get them a good trade deal.

And I guess he's a a tough negotiator.

So, we'll see how that goes.

All right, that's all I got for today.

And uh I'm going to say hi to the locals people privately after this.

And the rest of you, thanks for joining.

Always appreciate it.

And I'll see you again tomorrow.

Same time, same place.

All right, we'll be private

Let's uh take a look at the stock

market. And the U S&P 500 is basically

flat. Tesla is up

1.24. Rumble

up.34. Flat. Let's call that

flat. All right, we got a show to

do, which is mostly me.

You're uh your responsibility is kind of

easy. You're expected to do

nothing

except

simultaneous. Good morning everybody and

welcome to the highlight of human

civilization. It's called Coffee with

Scott Adams and you've never had a

better time. But if you'd like to take a

chance on making this experience even

better, all you need for that

is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tanker

gel or Stein, a canteen jug or flask, a

vessel of any kind. Fill it with your

favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join

me now for the unparalleled pleasure,

the dopamine, the end of the day, the

thing that makes everything better. It's

called the simultaneous sip and it

happens. Now

go. Yep. Yeah, that was

it. That made everything

better. you to well I wonder if there's

any science that would support the idea

that coffee makes you healthier. Oh

yeah. According to uh CNN, there's a new

study that says uh you can reach a older

age if uh women especially who drank one

to three cups of caffeinated coffee per

day in their 50s were more likely to

reach older age.

So, got that? You uh if you drink your

coffee, ladies, you'll live to an older

age. Now, in a related uh well, I I'll

make it

related story. Um according to science

mag, repetitive negative thinking is

linked to cognitive decline.

So if you have bad thoughts and you just

keep having bad thoughts, your brain

will

corrode. So put it all

together. Every morning you should get

up before anybody's up, have your cup of

coffee, and then think positive

thoughts, and your brain will be

healthy, and you'll live

forever. Yep. As for the ladies, sip

your coffee, have positive thoughts. And

did you know that uh having consistent

negative thoughts is uh also implicated

in uh other major mental health diseases

such as

uh what's the other stuff? I think

anxiety and depression.

So, if you ever said to

yourself, I think there's there's an

upside to having continuous negative

thoughts. Turns out there's no

upside. You should do whatever it takes

to have continuous positive thoughts.

Now, can you do that? Well, I feel like

you could. You know, even though there

are some people who have, you know,

legitimate mental problems that would

cause them to have repetitive negative

thoughts,

um, doesn't it make sense that you could

force yourself even for 10 seconds to

think something positive? And if you

could do it for 10 seconds, do you think

you could do it for 20 seconds? like if

you just started

small, I feel like most people if they

really worked at it could uh at least

increase the percentage of the day

they're having a positive

thought. Seems to

me. Well, uh some of you asked me to

solve the the mating problem, the

demographic collapse. And so I thought

to

myself, that seems

impossible.

So I I'm gonna take a swing at it.

Okay. So it starts with this story. So

Nate Silver in his latest blog post, um,

apparently he he was saying that, uh,

conservatives are up 31 points among

those with self-described excellent

mental health.

Now, we've talked about this before. It

turns out that uh the people who are on

the left um tend to have terrible mental

health compared to the people on the

right. Now, I'm going to tell you

why, and you're going to say, "Oh, that

actually makes total sense." Here's why.

And this is totally my own

hypothesis, but once you hear it, you're

going to say to yourself, "Huh, that

explains a lot. It goes like

this. You can only be happy when you're

connected to the most important part of

life." What is the most important part

of life? Well, if you believe in science

and evolution and biology, the most

important part of life is making more

life. Now, you might say to yourself,

what about, you know, my search for

meaning and all that? Well, that's

great, but the single most important

thing that a h well, any animal can do

is to make more of itself.

Now, the good news is I don't think you

have to be literally the one having a

baby or even married to the one who's

having a baby. I think you could have

step kids. I think you could be helping

somebody who has kids, you know, maybe

like a a grandparent who does a lot of

babysitting, that sort of thing. But I

think if you're not if you're not

directly

connected to the essentially the energy

source for all of life, which is the

reproductive

thing, I think it's going to be really

hard to be happy.

Now, what if you could convince the

people on the left that uh the reason

the people on the right have better

mental health is because they're sort of

naturally connected to

the political right kind of a

thing. And then you look at the

political left and doesn't it seem to

you that they're a little less

interested in having

kids. So if you could connect the two

ideas and how many of you uh buy my

hypothesis

hypothesis that uh the thing that makes

you happy is being connected to the main

thing your biology is requiring of you

which is to be part of the reproductive

flow of

humanity. Well, try it out because you

probably have some depressed family

member who doesn't know why they're

depressed and they're on drugs. Can you

imagine how they would feel if they were

having a

baby? Probably really stressed, but also

that they would feel like they were

attached to something with

meaning. Anyway, Disney is uh according

to Breitbart, uh Disney's laying off

hundreds of people and they're going to

downsize their entertainment

division. I was watching a uh real the

other day on the internet and it was

somebody who works in in the LA

Hollywood area and they seem

pretty pretty bleak because apparently

they're just no projects like there

nobody's making a movie and if they are

they're not doing it there. So, it looks

like the whole movie making industry

is kind of

dead. I don't know if it's coming back.

It uh seems to me that everybody's

looking at AI and expecting somebody to

make a feature length

movie, you know, in the next probably

one

year. And uh I always thought I would

like to do that, but um I'll have to

feel a little better to make that

happen. So maybe

possibly. Uh meanwhile

um Elon Musk's company Neuralink just

raised

$650 million which would value the

company at about 9 billion.

And the the thing I wondered was, does

Elon Musk even care that his net worth

went up a few billion dollars? I don't

know what percentage he

owns, but can you imagine being so rich

that you wake up and one of your

companies raises your net worth by I

don't I'll just take a guess4 million4

billion and he just made $4

billion and it it wouldn't change his

day at all. he his day would be exactly

the same with, you know, $4 billion if

that's what it

was. Well, Sam Alman says, "The world

must prepare together for AI's massive

impact." And then he said something that

is the funniest thing a marketer ever

said. He said that open AI releases

imperfect models early. so the world can

see and adapt and help shape

regulations. He says there are going to

be scary times

ahead. Now, do you

believe that open AI intentionally is

releasing and has been defective models

uh because it helps people get ready for

the real thing.

Does that sound to you why they're

releasing defective models? It it's not

because that's all they

have. Now, I don't think you would argue

with the fact that they don't know how

to make them non-deective. They I don't

think they know how to make them stop

hallucinating as far as I

know. But uh it seems a little uh little

little bit cheeky to say that releasing

them with flaws is really helping

society because then the flaws don't

make them that dangerous but then we can

we can imagine what they will be like

without flaws and then we can get used

to it and and prepare for it alto

together.

Okay. So, uh, I've got some advice

coming up from from some people who have

some ideas how to survive this age of

robots and AI, but we'll get to

that. Meanwhile, Scientific America says

that uh there's a Chinese company that

found out how to bring your dead car

battery back to life. if you have an

electric car. I'm talking about the the

uh lithium ion batteries in your

electric car. So, currently if your

electric car has a bad battery or you

you know you've it's run its course,

um I don't know what they do to recycle

it or whatever, but it's sort of just

this big problem.

But this Chinese company used AI, which

is a big part of the story. They use AI

to look at all the chemical reactions

that could revitalize a lithium ion uh

yeah lithium ion battery. And they

actually got three suggestions and one

of them worked. So all they did was uh

they took a dead battery. Now dead is

not dead. dead. Dead is like when it

reaches 80% capacity, I think if it goes

down from 100 to

80%. That's uh considered

unusable. And uh they found they could

squirt some of this uh chemicals in

there and it would revitalize it and

suddenly it would be like exactly as

good as a new battery. Now there's some

problems. You know, there's safety

testing and you'd have to redesign the

batteries. So there's a way to inject

something. So that's sort of would be

kind of a big deal. And it might result

in fewer sales of new

cars because if you could keep your

battery running forever, well, why would

you need to upgrade? Because the

software would be upgrading on its

own. So anyway, so I don't know if that

has any place in the market, but that's

pretty impressive.

I also didn't know that current

batteries are supposed to last 15

years. Does that sound right? If you got

a Tesla, the uh battery that comes with

it would last 15

years. That would be

impressive. Maybe it does.

Well, I usually don't talk about the uh

individual crimes and even if they're

mass shootings and stuff, but uh this

illegal alien Muslim terrorist guy from

Egypt to quote Jim Ha, the gateway

pundit. So, as most of you know if you

watch the news, um he uh he used what

did he use?

um Molotov cocktails and alcohol, set

them on fire and threw them at a group

of American Jews who were

um who were together. I don't know if

you'd say protesting or

rallying and it was in I think they were

rallying in favor of the uh in support

of the hostages or something. But this

guy shows up. He's not even a legal

citizen.

and uh he firebombs a group of Jewish

people who were just trying to

support essentially people who were

hostages. That's my understanding of it.

And I was trying to think, are Jews the

only group in America who are attacked

when they're grouping

together? because I remember the 2018

Tree of Life synagogue attack and I was

thinking to myself, is there any other

situation where a group of Americans u

that are in some

demographic, if they group

together, they're likely to be

victims? In other words, I've never

heard of the Pride parade being

attacked, and I hope it

isn't. I've never heard

of, I don't know, a woman's group being

firebombed. So, you can certainly see

how the uh the question of anti-semitism

in the United States is, you know, at

the top of the list of uhoh uh we better

do something about this. And one of the

things you could do about it would be uh

not to let in uh Egyptian terrorists, if

that's what he is.

That would

help. That would that would be a good

start. Have you noticed how there was a

period when uh Trump first became

president where we couldn't stop talking

about the price of gas and the price of

eggs? Well, it turns out the price of

eggs was doing great. Uh so it's

according to Newsmax,

uh dozen eggs is under $3 in most

places. and the average cost is down to

$2.52. Um, so according to the White

House rapid response team, that means a

the price of eggs has dropped 61% since

Trump took

office. Uh, but the best thing about

that is it made Democrats just shut up

about the one thing they understood.

If you thought about it, the the one

thing the Democrats had on their side

was that Trump had overpromised stuff

like he would do things on day one.

Well, day one doesn't really mean day

one. It just means, you know, as fast as

possible, you know, we'll get right on

it. And uh I would say, you know, if

you're only halfway into the first year,

it looks like you got right on it. So

your your egg prices went down and gas

prices are down and uh maybe gas prices

will get go down some more because uh

Trump just opened with another executive

order 23 million acres of Alaskan

wilderness to drilling.

So Doug Bergam is, you know, driving

that. And that reverses a Biden era

drilling

ban. I wonder if companies feel safe

um going into business drilling up

there. If the possibility of a Democrat

getting

elected could put them out of

business, is that a thing? Or would even

a Democrat say, "All right, if you've

already drilled, you know, that's

allowed, but no new

drilling." I don't know. Is uh would the

Democrats use common

sense? Hard to know. But of course, the

uh some people are worried about the

habitats for grizzly bears and polar

bears and caribou and migratory birds

and they don't want to lose the caribou.

I mean, what would you do without

caribou? If there's one thing I need

when I want to drive my car to a distant

location, more

caribou. I'll be like, "Oh man, I only

made it one one mile. Why?"

Well, I only had access to one caribou.

So, ladies and gentlemen, it's sort of a

tie. On one hand, you get a bunch of oil

that, you know, drives civilization.

Boring. On the other hand, you lose some

caribou,

possibly. All right.

Now, one of the things I wonder when I

read a story like that is how much oil

is up there? Because doesn't it sort of

also matter how much? because yeah, I'm

in favor of opening it for drilling, but

in the back of my mind, I'm

assuming that it has a tremendous amount

amount of known

reserves because I would kill a few

caribou for an

enormous

reserve, but suppose there's only a

little bit there. Well, that's sort of a

I would only kill like one caribou for

that. Meanwhile, over in Poland, there

was a presidential election and a what's

being called by Reuters a proTrump

nationalist has won the

presidency in Poland.

uh somebody named Carol

Noraki and he won narrowly, but

apparently he's got that um that Trump

vibe about

him. So, do you think that's actually a

Trump or is that some kind of a

coincidence? Are people really going to

just start copying Trump because it

works? Maybe.

I don't know if that makes the world a

safer place or not. Um, how many Trumps

can you have in the world? And the funny

thing is the

uh I think he knocked out somebody named

Donald

Tusk. That's pretty

weird. A weird

coincidence. Anyway, we'll see if that's

the Trump effect if it affects any other

countries. All right. So, there's a

gentleman named Alex Karp who is the uh

the CEO of Palanteer. So, he's a he

would be a multi-billionaire by now. And

he was asked at some event about secrets

for success it looks like. And he said

the following. He said, "I've never met

someone successful who had a great

social life at

20. If that's what you want, that's

great, but you're not going to be

successful and don't blame anyone else."

Um, and then he also says that, you

know, picking the right partner in life

is important. Now, do you buy that? Do

you buy that? uh if you had a great

social life in your

20s that your odds of being successful

are very low, you know, career-wise

successful. I I have to

admit that if people are not just

totally hopping it in their 20s, it

would be hard to imagine that they're

going to start humping it in their 30s.

But if I look at my own career uh arc in

my

20s, I was just working regular jobs and

trying to get my MBA and uh basically I

was just building up my talent stack.

But by the time I reached my 30s, that's

when I that's when I launched Dilbert

and I found myself working full-time

doing a Dilbert comic strip, writing a

book, working on licensing

projects. It was

insane. The the amount of work I put in

was just through the roof.

So, while I do believe that people in

their 20s, if they're not working pretty

hard at something, you know, that's a

bad sign. But I think there are two

things you can work at. One is working

directly on that startup or whatever it

is that's going to make you rich. But

the other is uh building your talent

stack. Uh I think either one of those

gets you someplace. So, uh, if you were

to look at my life in my 20s, it looks

more relaxed, going to a corporate job,

you know, taking all the classes that

they offered, uh, taking a Dale Carnegie

class,

um, learning about technology, learning

marketing, learning

strategy. So, I was learning all those

things and I was very aware that I was

just building up my skills so that

someday I could do my own thing. I

didn't think it would necessarily be

cartooning, but all of those skills,

including the technology stuff, uh

directly went into

Dilbert. Then there's uh Mark Andre

uh who's talking about uh the world of

uh robots in the future. Now, this is

not directly uh uh self-help advice, but

it's a little bit uh telling you the

future. So Mark Andre, famous investor,

if you don't know who he is, uh says

general purpose robotics is going to

happen at a giant scale in the next

decade. Now that's what most of us

think, but when it comes from somebody

like Andre, then it just seems more

credible. Um and he says the US should

not try to get the old manufacturing

jobs back.

which would suggest you should not be

waiting to get your manufacturing job

back. He says instead we should uh lean

lean hard into designing and building

robots. Now I assume we're doing that. I

don't know exactly what the government

is doing to make it easier to build

robots, but um as Andre points out,

otherwise we will live in a world of

Chinese robots.

Can you imagine how dangerous it would

be if if you had a full-sized humanoid

robot that was built in China and its

intelligence could be, you know, updated

and controlled just through the cloud

through China. And if China wanted to

overthrow the United States, all it

would have to do is activate all the

robots at the same time, grab a knife

off of kitchen counter, stab

inhabitants. So yeah, we'd better start

building our own robots like really

fast. Build those robots. So if you

translate this into some kind of uh you

know meaningful career path

advice, there must be elements of robot

building that you could identify as

current

jobs for human beings. I don't know

exactly what that would be because I

don't know enough about the robot

building world. But I'd be looking hard

into what is it that you need to build

and sell

robots that the robots won't do

themselves if there is anything because

that's going to be a pretty big

area. Anyway, according to the Gateway

Pundit, Christine Christina Leila, so

you may have heard this story, but this

is this one's a really spicy one. Um, so

the FBI and Muller's team, you remember

Mueller? Uh, apparently they hid Russy

gate documents using a special coding

system that you can use to make things

invisible to people who are searching

for them.

Now imagine uh so at this point I think

uh you know Bino and Cash Patel have

identified the code that was used to

hide all the good stuff. Now, why do you

think the this is regarding the uh um

the Russia gates

collusion? I feel like this is going to

be the thing that tells you what all the

people did, all the bad people. So right

now we sort of have this general idea

that the FBI was presented with this

idea, you know, that uh, you know, maybe

maybe Trump had some Russia connection,

but we all know that it was it was

organized via the uh Hillary Clinton

campaign, but it feel I feel like the

reason nobody's going to jail for it is

there's not quite the paper trail you

would need to prove who did what and

when and what they were thinking and

what their intentions were and all that

stuff. And it could be that this

new discovery that there's a secret code

where all the good stuff was hidden, we

might find

out just how bad this

was. The my only concern is that there

are so many things that happen in the

news, especially in the Trump world,

that the energy has already been taken

out of the

topic. And the uh the people on the left

and the the mainstream uh media will

just say, "Ah, that was a long time

ago." And it would just act they'll just

act like it's not a big deal. And then

the uh political right will be screaming

and saying, "Are you kidding? We just

proved that you tried to overthrow the

government of the United States or

influence an election, which would be

sort of the same thing." And and we have

the names and we've got the exact

details and that's not going to be

anything.

So that's what I predict. I predict

there will be some really spicy things

that come out of this, but that the

mainstream news will talk about it once

and then it'll act like it doesn't

matter. So unless there's a uh you know

some kind of

prosecution, it will just sort of

disappear.

Well, uh, Steve Bannon on his, uh, War

Room show had author of, uh, Putin's

playbook, Rebecca Coffler, and she says

that we're already in a kinetic war with

Russia because Russia would know that

that very clever drone attack that

Ukraine apparently pulled off to destroy

a bunch of Russian bombers, that there's

no way that they could have done that

without direct US support at the very

least our satellite images, but probably

more than that. And I thought to myself,

oh, I'm an

idiot. Not once did I think, oh, the

United States was obviously involved in

that attack. I didn't think that once.

And it's kind of obvious once somebody

who's an expert points it out, you go,

"Huh, yeah, actually there's a pretty

good chance that America was involved in

that." But then related to that,

um, apparently Russia is deploying

Chinese

lasers that would be defensive tools for

knocking down any drones and maybe

missiles, too. So, there's a uh video

that's been posted on Telegram that

shows a team of Russian uh military

people uh operating this Chinese drone

laser.

Now, you see what's happening, right?

Russia and Ukraine have become a weapons

testing area for first the United

States and now for

China and Russia and and Ukraine are

just sort of caught in the

middle. And I also thought to myself, do

you know who's preventing Russia from

attacking the United States besides

perhaps Russia themselves?

probably

China. Do you think China that buys 80%

of the energy that Russia sells, do you

think they have the power to say no,

you're not going to war? We might, you

know, test some weapons and, you know,

we might uh keep crawling along the way

things are going, but she can't start

World War

II. I feel like China would have that

power now. So that we're not even really

dealing with Russia.

Exactly. Um I think that China has

probably pulled off a a total

control move because they're the biggest

customer of Russia and they can bankrupt

them anytime they want.

So, I think we're safer than you think

because China would not allow Russia to

escalate beyond the point where they're

just testing some Chinese weapons. So, I

think that so-called war in

Ukraine is just going to keep going as a

stalemate.

Um a uh another guest on the war room

named Boon Cutler, he asked the

following question, which is a good

idea. Um what would happen if all those

Chineseowned properties, I think most of

them are farms that are near military

bases in the United States. What if they

also have swarms of

drones? They're right next to military

bases. So they could attack the military

base in, you know, a

minute. So, uh, maybe we should look at

that. Now, I haven't seen any evidence

that the land that's being bought that's

near military bases is, you know, being

stocked up with

weapons. But I would definitely worry

about it. I I would look into it a

little bit.

So yeah, let's uh find out a little bit

more about

that. Meanwhile, according to uh

interesting engineering,

um in Russia, the uh kids are going to

be taught I guess it's a mandatory

class. They're going to be taught how to

operate

drones. So they'll all be little uh

drone experts. To which I say, isn't

that

worthless? In one

year, won't all the drones be

self-driving? Why would you why would

you put a

human in the drone operating

position? You know, even if the AI is

operating the drone, at the very least,

the human will be uh relegated to final

decisions.

So I think the the drone will take off.

It will decide because AI is you know

operating the entire war. Uh the drone

will know where to go for maximum impact

and the the weakest defense and it'll

pick its targets and maybe but not even

necessarily it might show it to the

human and then the human says yes or no.

Yes, attack that tank.

But it doesn't seem to me that you're

going to need a lot of human operators

for drones in one year. Is that too

soon? I think in one year it if we have

full self-driving Teslas that are

giving, you know, civilians rides in

cities throughout the United States. You

think the drones are going to be

operated by

humans? I mean maybe in some specialty

way but doesn't seem like a useful skill

in the

future. So Jeffrey Sachs

um who was on the All-In Summit way back

in September of 2024, he had some

interesting things to say about

Taiwan. And I'm not going to say I agree

with it or disagree with it, but he

makes a he makes a good case.

He says uh China first of all is not a

threat to the United States security uh

big oceans, big nuclear deterrent and so

forth. Second, we don't have to be in

China's

face. Uh what do I mean by that? He says

we don't have to provoke World War II

over

Taiwan. That's a long complicated issue,

but this would be the stupidest thing

for my grandchildren to die for.

We have three agreements with China that

say we're going to stay out of that and

we

should. And I have to say, um, the idea

of dying because of something about

Taiwan, that does seem like a really bad

reason for an American to die.

Now on the other hand, Taiwan is an ally

and we must have made some assurances

that you know we would be helpful. But I

wonder to what extent just giving them

weapons would be

enough. It seems to me that if you know

in the long run there's no possible way

that Taiwan will remain independent

forever.

It was it's not like a thousand years

from now if he came back Taiwan would be

independent. One way or the

other, the the big uh the big country is

going to overwhelm the little country

that's right next to him. So, it doesn't

seem to me that dying over something

that's going to happen anyway, whether

you love it or hate it, it's going to

happen anyway. Um he makes a good

point. So probably we'll have to pretend

that we're doing something

useful while uh letting China have its

way is my

guess. How many of you uh show me in the

comments have lost a connection to a

family member? It could be your own

child, could be your parents because of

politics.

I just I just wonder how universal this

is because I was reading a thread on

X of people who were talking about

losing family members that hadn't talked

to them since the

election. How many of you were in that

category? Oh my god, I'm seeing a string

of yeses go by in the

comments. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yeah.

Incredible. That is so disturbingly

dangerous for this

country.

Wow.

Um, so I was thinking to myself,

um, how do you deprogram those people?

And the answer is you probably can't

because they've chosen to have no

contact with you. But if you could

uh I would start with the fine people

hoax and I would I would also start I

would set it up this way. I would say

have you ever found out something that

just totally rocked your world because

you thought it was one way but then you

you found out you'd been fooled and it

was another way. such as let's say the

uh the nutrition pyramid, the food

pyramid. Now, if you can get if you can

get your family member to admit that

they had ever

experienced believing something was

completely true and then learning it

wasn't, say, can I show you another one?

Just to blow your mind.

It won't change your view on politics,

but I want you to I want you to see how

easily you could be led to believe

something that isn't true. And then you

do the fine people. But make sure you

found the American debunk website

because it it'll show you the, you know,

the full the full video to prove what's

going on. But

then a lot of these people think that

the real problem was the January 6

insurrection. And I'm going to tell you

the worst argument you can make if

you're trying to talk somebody out of

believing it was an insurrection. All

right? You can't say it wasn't dangerous

because people got hurt. So you have to

acknowledge that you that you both agree

that the violent part was uncalled for

and that those people had to, you know,

they had to be dealt with. Now they they

didn't go to

jail. Um even even if they were

pardoned, they they did serve some

serious time. But here are the bad

arguments.

Don't say the feds were behind it

because that's

unproven. As soon as you say, "Oh, the

feds, it was a Fed erection." No, Feds

erection, not a Fed

erection. As soon as you say it was the

feds, even if it

was, even if it was, it's not an

argument that would work with a Democrat

because they would just reject it as

ridiculous. It's like, well, there

weren't that many. Um, so whether or not

you're sure the feds were behind it,

it's a bad argument, so just drop it.

The second bad argument is, you know,

for sure the election was

stolen. You might be right that the

election was stolen, but since there's

no proof that any Democrat would ever

accept, it's a terrible argument.

Now, you just said to yourself, uh, how

are we going to argue against January 6

being an insurrection if he just told us

that all of our obvious arguments are

terrible arguments? Well, you can use a

good one. Here's a good argument. Now,

it will take a few

explainings for the person that you're

working on to understand that you're in

completely solid territory. It goes like

this. The only thing you need to know is

what the nonviolent protesters were

thinking when they entered the capital.

What were they trying to

accomplish? And then point

out that nobody's ever done a TV show or

even a podcast in which the the

protesters are brought in and they ask

the following

question. Why were you protesting? What

were you trying to

accomplish? Now, I believe the answer

would be in every case we it looked to

us like the election was

stolen. So, we were trying to slow

things down to see if we could check it

so that we can save the

republic. Now, you may have just said to

yourself, Scott, you just said don't use

the argument that the um election was

stolen. Here's the tough part. I didn't.

What I said was that the protesters

might believe that based on the fact

that it broke pattern. So, it broke

pattern in terms of, you know, those

last minute votes for Biden and the fact

that there were so many of them and it's

it's off uh historical pattern. It broke

pattern in the bellweather counties or

precincts.

So it broke pattern. Now that is not

proof that anything was

stolen. The only thing you need to know

is that the protesters

believed it didn't look like a credible

election. You don't have to argue

whether it was actually stolen. If you

argue whether it was actually stolen,

that's the end of the argument because a

Democrat will be like, "All right, go

away. Go away." There's no evidence it

was stolen. I'm not going to listen to

the rest of it. But if you can get them

to understand that it's not about what

you or they think, it's about what the

protesters thought. So if the protesters

thought it was a perfectly fair election

and they were trying to delay it or stop

it, it was an

insurrection. That's what I'd call it,

right? If they believed that the

election was fair and they and they did

what they did anyway, trying to delay

the

certification, well, that's a little bit

insurrectiony, you know, not really

effective because they didn't have any

chance of succeeding.

But if they

believed, right or wrong, and this is

important, right or wrong, if they

believed that the election did not look

credible, then having a delay to make

sure it was credible would be saving the

republic. It would not be an

insurrection at all.

So that might be a little too

complicated, but uh that would be the

only clean path to convincing somebody

who was willing to

listen that uh that that was a hoax. It

was no insurrection. It was uh patriots

trying to make sure that we got the

right

result. All right.

Uh so uh the other day

I wittyly pointed out that Democrats

only did two things wrong in the last

several years. The two things they did

wrong were all of their candidates and

all their policies. Now of course I was

saying that for humorous intent but then

other people said but what about their

messaging?

Now I think that candidate and

policies covers messaging too. But just

to uh put a little light on that

um here's the comparison in

messaging where uh Bernie and AOC were

saying things like we have to stop the

oligarchs. Trump was saying we're going

to enter the golden age.

Which one of those is better

messaging? Stop the

oligarchs or come with us. We're going

to enter the golden

age. Those are not

close. That that is the worst messaging

ever. How about this one? Uh equity.

Yeah, we we want to have

equity or we want common sense.

Which one's

stronger? We got to fight for equity so

everybody gets the same uh payout no

matter what they put in

or we've got to fight for common

sense. Again, these are not

close. It's not like you're

like six one, you know, half a dozen of

the other. you as soon as you hear them,

you go, "Oh, I like the golden age and I

like common sense, but stop the

oligarchs and give me

equity." It just doesn't

resonate. But then you've got Tim

Walsh who's uh teaching teaching

Democrats how to code talk like a real

man.

And lately he said that a good strategy

would be to bully the out of

Trump.

What? Bully the out of

him. That That's the messaging from the

Democrats. Oh my

god, that's bad. Anyway,

um and then the last story that I have

for

[Music]

you, which I think is a very important

one, is that China now has a uh a

negotiator for the trade deals. And uh

believe it or not, President

Xi hired somebody named

he. I'm not making that up. He E. that's

his first name. So, she hired

he to get them a good trade deal. And I

guess he's a a tough negotiator. So,

we'll see how that goes. All right,

that's all I got for

today. And uh I'm going to say hi to the

locals people privately after this. And

the rest of you, thanks for

joining. Always appreciate it. And I'll

see you again tomorrow.

Same time, same place. All right, we'll

be private