Episode 3014 CWSA 11/10/25

But people will be be coming in because they need to hear what I have to say because it's better than what other people have to say as far as I know.

All right, let's see how your stocks are doing.

Wait, today's Monday, right?

It's funny that the company named Snap is probably moving on the news about Snap.

There's nothing to do with the company.

Whoa, stocks are up.

Hello.

What?

Rumble's up 14%.

But it's still from low.

Uh and then the test was up to not bad.

Last week was a devastating.

So not that good either.

All right everybody.

Did you find a seat?

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 elevating your experience here to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains, all you need for that is a copper mug or a glass of tankered shell cine, a canteen jugger flask, a vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid.

I like coffee.

And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of dopamine of the day.

Thing that makes everything better.

If only I could lift my arm.

It's called the simultaneous step.

And it happens now.

I'll give you a second one.

See, you weren't ready.

You weren't ready.

But now you are.

All right.

Let me check my uh situation here.

Do we have any any kind of news about coffee being healthy for you?

Oh, it turns out that uh coffee is really good for you according to Dr.

Marcus that uh your odds of surviving a heart problem if you've got a cup of coffee in you is way better.

Not not because of that one cup of coffee, but people have coffee.

Coffee.

Coffee.

Yeah, I said coffee.

I grew up in upstate New York.

I can say coffee.

Can we agree on that?

All right.

So, despite my maximum coffee influence, I had a really good really good nap this morning.

I didn't think I was going to be awake for the show, but I made it.

Pain level is currently manageable.

It's been pretty bad lately, but maybe it's a little bit less today.

That would be good.

Well, apparently Microsoft, according to Tech Explorer, Microsoft's going to look into what they call super intelligence after the open AI deal.

So, their current deal, I guess, allows them to explore with chat GPT.

So, this would be Microsoft plus chat GPT allows them to explore sort of ordinary AI as if there's anything ordinary about it.

But if they want to go all the way to all the way to super intelligence, super intelligence, then it looks like they would make another deal and that super intelligence would look different.

That would be the good stuff.

Do you know what that means?

It means they don't know how to do super intelligence and that whatever they're doing now is the best they know how to do at the moment.

Does that mean they'll ever be able to do super intelligence?

Probably they will eventually, but I don't know if it's going to happen on Tuesday or anything.

All right.

So, that would be when uh robots can do everything we can do.

Super intelligence.

Well, Trump is pardoned or is it called a pardon?

I always get the pardons and the clemencies and all that mixed up, but basically he pardoned a whole bunch of uh his cronies before they've been charged with anything.

So, they haven't been charged.

This would be a situation where it's just getting ahead of it just in case, but includes Rudy Giuliani, Sydney Powell, Ken Chzbro, whole bunch of people, some of the names you've heard, but they seem to have all been involved in one way or another with the quote fake electors plot.

Now, that's what Democrats call it.

They call it fake electors.

Why?

Because they're word thinkers.

If they can get you to accept that a good label for what happened was uh that it was that there was a bunch of people who did some illegal stuff and they need a pardon.

Well, then they win.

So, I did wonder if this is actually a good play because it does even though they're not even charged with anything relevant relevant to these uh actions.

They're not charged with anything.

It kind of makes them look a little guilty, doesn't it?

That they accepted it.

Trump himself did not pardon himself, but does that matter if you can pardon yourself anytime you want?

He can kind of, you know, if he got in trouble, he could bang that out in a few minutes.

So, I wouldn't make too much of the fact that he excluded himself from that.

He could do it anytime.

Anyway, that was a good that was good uh programming.

So, it's one of those stories that reminds you that the Trump people may have been mistreated.

So, it's kind of good that way, but it also makes it look like maybe they needed a pardon.

What' they do?

So, this one works both ways.

But, um, if Trump thought this was a really good timing for it because we're too distracted with other things, he'd be right.

The the distractions are all over the place.

So, this one just isn't going to move any, you know, move anything.

So if if some people he liked got some pardons, well, he wins.

I don't know if the juice is worth the squeeze, as the boring people say.

But uh the the Democrats will get to sell this as authoritarian, right?

Because they sell everything as authoritarian.

What?

What?

He's giving pardons to his friends, not to his friends.

That would look like he's some kind of authoritarian.

Authoritarian.

So that's coming.

Well, here's another story I don't believe at all, but Dylan Buts over at CNBC is talking about China allegedly suspended some critical mineral export curves.

How many times have we heard that China or the US made some kind of change to their tariffs and their, you know, their minerals?

I feel like none of it is believable.

Are you having the same reaction?

It's like, yeah, maybe somebody did something, but more likely they're all just going to go ahead and do what they were going to do anyway before any of this was announced.

I just don't believe anything that comes out of, oh, China decided to do a totally reasonable trade deal with us.

Did they?

Did they really?

Well, we'll find out.

Allegedly, we're easing somebody's easing some restrictions and blah blah blah.

I don't believe so.

I don't believe any of it.

Would it be great if it were true?

All right, here is the the big payoff.

So, how many of you were with me in 2015 when I changed the world by introducing the reframe that it's not about the policies, it's about the persuasion.

And if you didn't see that Trump was coming, oh, he was coming in 2015.

If you didn't if you didn't recognize how much power he was bringing to the domain, you were probably really surprised when he won.

But famously, I was not surprised.

So, I had a worldview that predicted, would you say?

Would it be fair to say my worldview that he's persuasive?

Predicted that he'd win even outside of his domain.

And then he did.

So, I often say that the closest you can get to reality is prediction.

So, if if I was able to predict that Trump would do well based on his persuasion skills, and I think most people agree that that's exactly why he's doing well, his persuasion skills.

That uh that's now a done deal, wouldn't you say?

Even the AI acknowledges that I changed the argument from from policy to persuasion.

But there's one more coming.

You ready?

I've got another reframe that you haven't heard yet.

This will blow your mind.

I'm going to I'm going to have to tiptoe into it a little bit because once it settles in, you're going to be like, whoa.

Whoa.

Why' I never think of that?

You ready?

All right.

Um, so here's what here's what he does.

Do you know who uh Thomas Soul is?

Thomas Soul, famous economist.

He's a conservative and uh he does a really good job of explaining stuff, doesn't he?

like a really good explainer.

And uh I always wonder who do the Democrats have on their side who's a a good explainer and and how how important would it be if in 2015 you started training half of the country but not the other half uh in how to think better.

How to think better which is not really persuasion per se.

You know, persuasion would be part of thinking better, but it's much bigger.

All right, let me give you some some names here.

And then you're gonna see this come together pretty fast.

Why did I put the thing I wanted to do first?

Last because that's how I am.

All right, here it is.

So, the other day I was remember I was naming some uh well-known conservative podcasters and I started realizing how many there are and how skilled they are.

But let let me just go down the list and I want you to see if you can find the pattern.

The pattern is that conservatives have been teaching each other how to think better and more productively for about 10 years.

And I don't think that the Democrats have even tried.

So when I look at uh the conservatives, Republicans trying to figure out a new thing, you know, let's say there's a new new policy thing pops out, you can see them thinking better than they used to.

You can see it, right?

But let me give you some names of people who are identified with the right and then you can see why you can see this but the left can't.

Why are they blind to it?

I'll give you some names.

Nuke Gindred, Nuke Gingrich can explain, you know, any kind of history thing and he's got the whole context of everything from the Clintons from the Congress and everything else.

So when Nuke Gingrich is explaining something to you, you know, whether it's in a blog or a or he's doing an appearance, he's making you smarter, right?

How about uh Ben Shapiro?

Now, you can you can hate on Ben Shapiro.

So, I put him near first so you can get over it faster.

Just get over it.

I'm only talking about um smartness.

Wouldn't you rather have Ben Shapiro on your team if you're trying to be the smart team?

Now, you could disagree with them on all kinds of policies because people are different, but don't you want the smart team on your side?

You know, like the whole Daily Wire cast like they're all smarter than way smarter than average.

Don't you want them on your team?

Of course you do.

What about Jordan Peterson?

Now, Jordan Peterson, I don't think he tries too hard to be a Republican or a Democrat, but he seems to get along better with the conservatives.

Who in the world is as productive in terms of telling you how to live your life and understand reality and be effective and Jordan Peterson?

What do they have on the left?

I mean, just think of some of these names.

It's it's incredible the difference in uh skill and you go right down the line.

You know, you're Megan Kelly, she knows the law, she knows the news, she knows the the the news business.

Um Tim Pool, you you can do a deep dive on anything with the right set of guests.

PBD, amazing.

He has great guests.

Um Sean Ryan, bunch of people.

So, I would add myself to the list of people who help you think.

If you look at all of my books in the shelf behind me, they're all in that domain.

They're they're what is loser think, what is persuasion, uh you know, systems versus goals, talent stack.

Now, let me just put it in the simplest form.

So, those of you who have consumed my content for the last 10 years, most of you have read maybe at least one of my books.

Can you validate that if every Republican read my books that Republicans would have like a superpower?

It would just be crazy.

Well, they don't all read my books, but they read other books from other people who are also very good at explaining things.

Thomas Hole be good example.

And it seems to me that we've got 10 years of conservatives teaching people how to think and operate better.

And no years of the Democrats doing that.

Like none.

The Democrats are more like arguing if you're a racist or not.

How much how many legs does that have?

If your whole strategy is arguing the other side is bunch of racist sexists, does that last?

I mean, is that a long-term strategy?

I don't know.

I also think that one of the reasons that we note that uh conservatives seem to tolerate more consenting voice dissenting voices is because they're trained.

Let let me give you a uh specific example.

If someone who had never been introduced to Nick Fuentes's content, let's say a Democrat, were exposed to it with no no preparation, just exposed to it.

Would you be happy with that?

It's free speech, but beyond the free speech, would you be happy with that influence?

Maybe yes, maybe no.

Right?

But suppose suppose you heard that I went on and I'm not going to do this, by the way, but suppose you heard that I went on a show to talk to Nick Fuentes and you know who I am, so you know everything about me.

Would you be worried that his opinion would change my opinion?

Would you do you think that might happen?

No, there's not a chance.

But might my opinion change his opinion?

Totally.

I'm not saying it would, but if you're going to guess who is likely to change the other person's opinion, it would be the one who was trained to do it.

Although he's very good at he's very good at it as well.

So, I think the reason I can watch Candace and Nick and Tucker Carlson and Ben Shapiro and they're all arguing and it sounds like somebody's anti-Semitic and somebody's not.

You know, it sounds like terrible stuff.

But I'm just trained to not treat it that way.

It's just training.

And I think a lot of a lot of conservatives are just trained the same way.

It's like, you know, I'm not saying it's a nothing.

I'm just saying that the conservatives can handle it better.

They can handle the friction better.

All right.

Uh let me go way back to where I started because then I'm going to maybe have some more examples of this.

So, as you know, the government's going to reopen maybe on Monday.

Not sure yet.

So, eight Democrats crossed over and voted to reopen, which if that holds, they'll reopen today sometime.

Might take a day or so.

I don't know.

There's only eight of them.

And of course, you should see, have you seen how angry the Democrats are at the ones who voted for this?

Oh my goodness.

They're very angry.

They're calling their own team traitors and everything.

And uh All right.

if that's how you want to play it, that your own team is traders if they do something that's first of all perfectly predictable.

Perfectly predictable.

Um, and then it happens.

All right.

Uh, even on MSNBC, one of the hosts said, "It seems like the president was kind of getting what he wanted." Yeah, that's what that looks like.

That's the president kind of getting what he wanted.

And he still he still hasn't given up on uh getting rid of the filibuster.

I thought he wanted to get rid of the filibuster.

Just it was just sort of opportunistic.

He might want to do it anyway.

But uh even though he guesses government reopened, he's still like, "Well, while we're at it, maybe we'll kill that filibuster while we're at it." Anyway, um Fedman is one of the ones who famously cross-sized to vote for opening the government.

Good for Fedaman.

As long as he doesn't want any future in the Democrat party, it's good for him.

He basically eliminated himself from higher office as a Democrat.

I think because the Democrats believe that fighting is just doing annoying things while people are watching.

I guess I guess that's what they think fighting Donald Trump is.

All right.

So, did it work that Trump threatened the filibuster or threatened to end it?

Did that work?

There's no way to know if anybody changed a vote just because of the filibuster, but it might have.

It might have worked a little bit.

People might have thought, well, if we give him this, maybe he won't also try to get the filibuster.

To which I said, have you met Trump?

Have you heard about him?

No, he's not going to give up on the filibuster just because he got something else.

He'll try to get everything he can get, whatever is the most aggressive stance, of course.

Anyway, the other thing that's funny, uh, going back to my theme is that Democrats will have no idea what's happening today because they don't have a a worldview that incorporates what they're witnessing.

They just don't have any worldview that explains this.

Like why did why did all my heroes say there's no way no way we're going to cave and then they caved?

Was it ever important?

Don't you think it leaves the Democrats with some big questions about their own side?

Yeah, some big questions.

So, the Democrats are going to look at their side as a bunch of wimpy losers.

Um there's going to be more pressure on Schumer to get the heck out of that job because he's an embarrassment.

Bernie Sanders uh pointed out that uh the Republicans uh ruined healthc care.

He ruined healthcare.

Um correct me if I'm wrong, but one of the things I'm watching is that every time the Democrats ruin something, don't they blame Republicans?

Every time the Democrats ruin something, cuz who ruined climate change?

That wasn't that wasn't uh Republicans.

How about the border?

Not Republicans.

How about inflation?

Wasn't Republicans.

So, there seems to be a clear pattern here, which is that Democrats do these things which have gigantic downsides and then they sell as hard as they can that the problem was from the Republicans.

That's their whole game is doing dumb and trying to blame it on the other side.

That's it.

That's all they have.

And they use it a lot.

Anyway, and apparently there's somebody who admitted that the real play for Schumer and the Democrats was to uh get crime out of the news because I guess the Democrats thought they were losing if they were talking about crime because nobody liked crime.

Um, so if they said it's really about healthcare, that would be the strongest emotional pull to pull the headlines away from uh from anything except what they wanted to focus on.

In this case, it was healthcare.

So, if that's what they were doing, it was kind of a good play, you know, politically if that's what they were doing.

Um, but boy did boy did they get savaged.

Schumer is going to get savaged.

They're they're all just going to get totally thrown under the bus.

Now, on top of that, and again, I'll go back to my main theme.

How do Democrats understand what they're saying?

And is it something that the the Republican model of the world can completely explain?

I think it can.

Can it?

The Republican model is that Trump is very persuasive and if you wait long enough, he's going to win the negotiation.

and the government will open and we will look back and say, "Oh, why did we ever think he was going to lose this negotiation?

He's better at that than we are." And then that's what happened.

So the Trump sort of version of the world where Trump is persuasive and it matters and he actually wins because of it.

Here we are.

So isn't it true that my worldview predicted?

Yeah, my worldview predicted again.

So that doesn't mean it's true, but it's the closest thing to being true.

All right, so the BBC, this is hilarious.

The BBC actually, and the fact that this is a government-f funed news entity in Great Britain, the BBC um edited some text from uh Trump's speech on January 6 to make it look like he was encouraging people to go there and be violent when nothing like that happened.

Meaning that there was there was no language like that.

They just spliced together some existing stuff and made it look like he was calling on violence.

Now, weirdly, but it's good.

Um, who's the guy they call Tater?

Um, who who who is the guy on CNN that Greg Guffel always mocks?

Tater.

All right.

So, Tater is one of the ones who bought into the fine people hoax completely.

Uh, then he went away, but then he came back.

And now, believe it or not, Tater uh is completely supporting the point of view that this was a fake spliced together thing, and it was never true and it was exactly the same as the Find People hoax.

Exactly the same.

They they just took some words that he did say and crafted them together in a way that he didn't say them and then claimed they did.

Now, do you know why this didn't work?

Why didn't it work?

The only reason that didn't work the way it did work with the fine people hoax for about four years.

It did work for about four years.

The reason it didn't work is that conservatives, you're waiting for it.

I'm tying it all together now.

The reason it didn't work is that we had trained conservatives what it looks like when they do this kind of hoax.

This specific kind of hoax.

You've all seen it.

Once you've seen how they can do it, you first of all can you you can see all the parts and then you're like, "Oh, okay.

I I see how this works." But you can see all the parts.

There's nothing you have to guess at.

It's all right there.

So, even CNN who is trying to find the middle ground and I would say is succeeding.

I think CNN is succeeding in finding a middle ground news place.

And uh I give them credit for that because they did talk about this as sort of a scandal.

I mean it's a it's a competitor of theirs so that's easier but they did talk about a scandal.

And if that had never existed to find people hoax you wouldn't have even known that the BBC did that.

You just wouldn't have even known.

All right.

Surprisingly, Turning Point USA has an event today at UC Berkeley of all liberal places.

Now, UC Berkeley is where I went to go get my MBA, but I have parted ways with them.

I am not happy with UC Berkeley, but it is good to see that they would have welcomed a conservative group, which I'm not sure they would have done that before.

So, that looks like progress.

Looks like progress.

Um, but still this is what I talk about when I say that Republicans would be hunted.

I would not feel safe if somebody knew me by sight and I went to a conservative event in Berkeley.

Do you think I should feel safe if I did that?

We're not there yet.

We're heading there.

I feel like we're heading there.

It's definitely safer than it used to be, but it's definitely not safe.

So, is there anybody on the left who ever experiences that which is they've never haven't broken any laws?

They're not planning to.

They just have a different opinion, but they can't go in public in a way that they could express that opinion because they get hunted.

Yeah.

You just can't do it.

the the fact that Democrats are not aware that I couldn't walk outside and go to Berkeley with a MAGA hat, you know, they would think, oh, you know, you're whining about too much.

That's a that's a pretty legitimate whine, isn't it?

If you can't go outside in your own relative neighborhood because you might get beat up for your political opinion, that's completely legitimate.

Yeah, that's getting hunted.

Uh, but getting better, maybe.

Who knows?

So this is funny.

Kathy Hokll, governor of New York is saying that Zoron Mand's idea of free buses.

Well, well, maybe you won't see any free buses.

Well, I'm not sure you'll ever see any free buses.

She says, and I quote, "I cannot set forth a plan right now that takes money out of a system that relies on the fairs of the buses and the subways." So, all it takes is some bureaucratic reason and it all goes away.

So, do you think that M dami will find a way to do these things that are not funded, but if you did fund them, you'd have to take away something substantial from people who are already funded.

Do you think he can pull that off?

I doubt it.

I doubt it.

But reality has come to visit the socialists.

I hope they enjoy it.

Speaking of reality, Trump is uh I I saw that he's promising this.

I don't know if that's yet the right word, but he is teased at least that uh consumers or taxpayers might get a 2,000 check $2,000 check back from taxes as part of their tariff payoff.

And what do you think of that?

Just everybody gets a $2,000 check.

Now, it would not include high income people.

So, I don't know if I'm in that or not in that.

I I think my current income is zero once you once you actually look at the expenses like actually zero.

Not not cheating on my taxes.

I think it's actually zero.

Um because I have a staff and you know and the the income went down when I got cancelled blah blah blah.

So it's it's somewhere around break even basically which is fine because I'm not looking to build assets.

I'm just looking to not lose them.

All right.

Uh, what do you think of that idea?

Somebody mocked me and said, "Scott, do you think it's really a good idea to give all these people $2,000?

What will happen?" To which I said, "I don't know what will happen.

I have no idea what would happen if you gave everybody $2,000." Inflation.

I I think the right answer is inflation, maybe.

But sometimes the inflation is worth it.

So Trump's smart about reading the room.

If he can find any way at all to give somebody a few bucks, they're going to be happier than if they didn't get a few bucks.

And that's all it is.

All right.

So I' I've been trying to figure out if our economy is good or bad.

Have any of you figured that out yet?

The US economy, is it good or bad?

Because when the Republicans talk, they say it's good.

And they give some examples.

When the Democrats talk about it, they say it's bad and they give some examples.

Who's right?

Don't you think we should at least know the the most basic thing about our reality?

The most basic thing about a reality is that either the economy is good or it's bad and we can't we can't decide if it's good or bad.

Was it uh Mark Twain who said that we can't tell the difference between good news and bad news?

the humans can't tell the difference.

Well, it feels like that.

But I did see a post that says that uh I think this might have been from a screen grab on Fox News that coffee is up 19%, utilities up 12, electricity five, vehicle repair 12%.

So although our growth in the economy seems okay, um it's not making a lot of jobs.

People are holding off to see if AI is going to make any difference.

I think so.

They call it a jobless economy.

It's not really.

Anyway, what do you think?

If I just asked you, is the economy is the economy better under Trump or worse?

And you were, let's say you were not doing just team play.

So, you're not just arguing to, you know, win your side.

If you're really really being honest, is the economy better or worse since Trump took over?

I don't know.

I have no idea.

I really don't.

And and the fact that we don't know that the most basic thing you should know about your country is it going up or is it going down?

I can't tell.

Well, I think we need a little more information.

That's what I say.

Um anyway, there's a big climate change convention.

I guess you call it that, the COP30 climate thing in Brazil.

And uh, of course, everybody's going to be talking about all the carbon that they burn, doing it for rich people, and then that will be a story that entertains us for about two days.

Um, oh, here's my list.

Jeez, I had a whole different list of the conservatives that are teaching us how to think better.

And I I left out the best ones.

So, did I mention Mike Benz?

Democrats don't have a Mike Benz.

That's like It's like having a super a hero on your side.

How about uh Charlie Kirk when he was doing the debates?

Charlie Kirk doing debates.

They didn't have that, did they?

You know, now I know that uh Steven Crowder did some debates, too, but he was more he was more team play.

That was kind of a different different vibe.

Joe Rogan, Glenn Beck, they all bring people on who can explain all kinds of things.

That's good.

Uh, I would also like that say that Gutfeld's a good explainer.

Maggie Hemingway, Victor Davis Hansen.

Do you see the pattern yet?

I was trying to make the point without having the right list in front of me.

But, uh, yeah, the these are all the smartest people in the game and they're teaching you how to think, not just what to agree with.

Pretty strong stuff.

Anyway, uh, Newsome is going after Trump.

Trump's having a good day, but they're going to have to find something bad to say about him.

So Nome said, "Donald Trump said he would make us wealthier and healthier, but we're poorer and sicker, and I don't want to see this sickness extend to ending our republic and our democracy." Okay.

All right.

Whatever.

Meanwhile, the Gateway Pundit is reporting that there's a uh a gang called the Latin Kings operating in the US, I guess, who uh they must be in Chicago, and they put out a hit on some of the uh ICE people.

So, that better not happen.

Do do you think that's going to turn into a thing that the criminals are going to start putting hits on the ICE people?

I wouldn't be totally surprised if it happens.

But boy is it going to get a savage if they do.

If they kill one ICE agent in something that looks like a hit, Trump's just going to go full Viking on them.

And they have to know that.

I mean, they have to know that's the end of their operation if they do that.

at least they can, you know, struggle along a little bit if they don't do that.

But we're still going to take them out one way or another.

So, in China, apparently they have some version of the LSATs, the test you take to become a lawyer or to test you take to see if you qualify for law school.

And uh apparently some Chinese prep company stole the test.

They stole the test.

They were selling the results.

So, do you trust your lawyer now?

Now that you know, your lawyer could have bought the test results in China.

I'm not sure if he could, but there's some allegation there.

Anyway, um the chipmunk industry is mad because apparently somebody in the administration is is raising the idea just as a proposal uh that the that the US taxpayers would take some equity in some of the chipm business.

So the semiconductor business would sort of say, okay, you you have a little ownership of that.

Do you think that's going to work?

I don't I think there'll be too much push back on that.

That will not happen.

All right.

Um then Mayor Brandon Johnson, he he wants to tell us how bad things are in Chicago because of Trump.

He says whether it's the uncon unconstitutional acts that are being carried out by the Trump administration or the fact that food and medicine has been cut off.

has it.

Has anybody died yet?

I'm pretty sure nobody has starved.

When was the last time somebody starved to death in the United States?

Sort of never.

I mean, it's not true.

Not never, but I don't think they're going to starve to death this year, but uh hope the uh postmillennials writing about that.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, let me go back.

Let me circle back to my main point today and see if it stuck.

Okay?

And then we're going to do some reframes because I know you like them.

So the reframe is that conservatives have spent 10 years training their training their base how to think better.

And that if you were to extend that that uh let's say that variable over time, it would perfectly predict who's going to be in charge.

Let me say that again.

In the same way that persuasion skill predicted that Trump would be in charge, the fact that we've been training other conservatives and most of us are the right people to do the training.

The fact that we've been training other conservatives Oh, and I would I would throw Michael Shelonburger in there, too.

Um, conservatives are way way smarter about how to just look at a topic and and pull it apart.

Would you agree?

Even if you disagree with them, they have been training for 10 years with the right people to tell them how to how to enter this argument, how to deal with climate change.

For example, have you noticed that the climate change arguments tend to at least now cluster around a few people's opinions that you've seen before because they're the ones who are good at teaching you how to think about it.

Yeah.

So, I don't think that the Democrats see this coming.

If if you were not looking for the pattern, you wouldn't know there was a pattern.

you would just say, "Oh, a lot of people are talking about climate change now.

A lot of people are talking about this." It wouldn't look like a pattern.

But if you understand that only half of the country is treating the topics as a as a class, yeah, that that's what it is.

It's the conservatives.

They treat the topic as a class where you can learn about the topic and how to respond to it if somebody is on the other side of it.

It's just not happening on the other side.

I don't believe they're learning how to do that.

But almost every day, almost every day, I teach somebody on the right how to do that or give them some maybe some, you know, context they didn't have before, which is the same thing.

All right.

Don't mess with the lawyers.

Good idea.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to do a reframe.

I usually do these at the front.

By the way, if you didn't know, the Dilbert 2026 calendar is available only on Amazon.

Only on Amazon.

Nowhere else.

Only on Amazon.

Um, and I wouldn't wait because we're going to run out.

We really are.

We're going to run out.

If I'm wrong, I'll let you know, but I think we will run out.

All right.

Um, oh, here's one.

This one is so simple and yet so sublime.

So, the usual frame is that history is important, wouldn't you say?

If you're looking at the Middle East, history is pretty important.

If you're looking at World War II, history is important.

So in most cases you're looking at anything with history in it, it's going to be pretty important.

But the reframe is this.

History doesn't exist.

History doesn't exist.

Try getting a handful of history.

Where is it?

Where's this history you're talking about?

Can you fill up a bucket with history?

No.

History isn't even real.

>> >> So there are people who go through their life tortured by things that have gone before.

The things that they experience, the things they worry about will happen.

But none of those things are real.

If it's something that did happen in the past, it's not real now.

It might have actually happened, but it's not happening now.

It just doesn't exist.

Once you realize that history is completely artificial and also I don't know if you knew this but there is scientific evidence that we uh make up our minds after after the decision that we decide first and then we come up with weird explanations of why we decided.

That's actually how decisions are made.

We just think it's the other way around.

It's an illusion.

So that's your reframe of the day.

Has anybody heard that one before?

It It's really It's so effective.

I use it all the time and I just go, "No, it doesn't even exist.

Does not exist.

Don't have to worry about it." All right, people.

I'm going to go think about getting some breakfast because I deserve it.

Yeah, the rest of you.

I guess I should talk to the locals people privately.

I've I've been cheating them a little bit.

So, locals people.

Well, I can't lift my arm, though.

Oh, I'm going to try to turn this off.

Let's see if I can do this and keep the locals people.

Uh, I literally can't lift my arm above my above my nipples.

How many of you have seen me drawing on >> here?

Don't like looking at us.

>> So, in case you missed it, >> oh, you can't see it at all.

I I would put my hand up to the camera so you could see it, but it just hurts too much.

I can't reach over there.

>> So, I've been doing some drawing on camera.

People seem to like it.

>> Uh, the good news is I can still draw despite the limitations in my hand.

Didn't didn't know if I would, but yesterday I could.

All right.

So, did locals not work?

Did locals not work today?

I heard somebody say that locals didn't work.

Is that true?

Guess I don't see it here.

That's weird.

All right, I guess we're not talking, huh?

All right, so I'm going to have to figure out what's wrong with all of my devices.

All right, people.

I can't hang around today.

I wish I could, but I can't.

I'll talk to you tomorrow.

I should have your calendar uploaded by then.

Bye for now.

Oh, come on.

Hand work, work, work.

But people will be be coming in because

they need to hear what I have to say

because it's better than what other

people have to say as far as I know. All

right, let's see how your stocks are

doing.

Wait, today's Monday, right? It's funny

that the company named Snap is probably

moving on the news about Snap. There's

nothing to do with the company. Whoa,

stocks are up. Hello.

What? Rumble's up 14%.

But it's still from low. Uh and then the

test was up to not bad.

Last week was a devastating. So not that

good either. All right everybody. Did

you find a seat?

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 elevating

your experience here to levels that

nobody can even understand with their

tiny shiny human brains, all you need

for that is a copper mug or a glass of

tankered shell cine, a canteen jugger

flask, a vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid. I

like coffee. And join me now for the

unparalleled pleasure of dopamine of the

day. Thing that makes everything better.

If only I could lift my arm. It's called

the simultaneous step.

And it happens now. I'll give you a

second one.

See, you weren't ready. You weren't

ready. But now you are.

All right. Let me check my uh situation

here. Do we have any any kind of news

about coffee being healthy for you? Oh,

it turns out that uh coffee is really

good for you according to Dr. Marcus

that uh your odds of surviving a heart

problem if you've got a cup of coffee in

you is way better. Not not because of

that one cup of coffee, but people have

coffee. Coffee. Coffee. Yeah, I said

coffee. I grew up in upstate New York. I

can say coffee. Can we agree on that?

All right. So, despite my maximum coffee

influence, I had a really good really

good nap this morning. I didn't think I

was going to be awake for the show, but

I made it.

Pain level is currently

manageable.

It's been pretty bad lately, but maybe

it's a little bit less today. That would

be good.

Well, apparently Microsoft, according to

Tech Explorer, Microsoft's going to look

into what they call super intelligence

after the open AI deal. So, their

current deal, I guess, allows them to

explore with chat GPT. So, this would be

Microsoft plus chat GPT allows them to

explore sort of ordinary AI as if

there's anything ordinary about it. But

if they want to go all the way to all

the way to super intelligence, super

intelligence, then it looks like they

would make another deal and that super

intelligence would look different. That

would be the good stuff. Do you know

what that means? It means they don't

know how to do super intelligence and

that whatever they're doing now is the

best they know how to do at the moment.

Does that mean they'll ever be able to

do super intelligence?

Probably they will eventually, but I

don't know if it's going to happen on

Tuesday or anything.

All right. So,

that would be when uh robots can do

everything we can do. Super

intelligence. Well, Trump is pardoned

or is it called a pardon? I always get

the pardons and the clemencies and all

that mixed up, but basically he pardoned

a whole bunch of uh his cronies before

they've been charged with anything. So,

they haven't been charged. This would be

a situation where it's just getting

ahead of it just in case, but includes

Rudy Giuliani, Sydney Powell, Ken

Chzbro,

whole bunch of people, some of the names

you've heard, but they seem to have all

been involved in one way or another with

the quote fake electors plot. Now,

that's what Democrats call it. They call

it fake electors. Why? Because they're

word thinkers. If they can get you to

accept that a good label for what

happened was uh that it was that there

was a bunch of people who did some

illegal stuff and they need a pardon.

Well, then they win. So, I did wonder if

this is actually a good play because it

does even though they're not even

charged with anything relevant relevant

to these uh actions. They're not charged

with anything. It kind of makes them

look a little guilty, doesn't it? That

they accepted it. Trump himself did not

pardon himself, but does that matter if

you can pardon yourself anytime you

want? He can kind of, you know, if he

got in trouble, he could bang that out

in a few minutes. So, I wouldn't make

too much of the fact that he excluded

himself from that. He could do it

anytime. Anyway, that was a good that

was good uh programming.

So, it's one of those stories that

reminds you that the Trump people may

have been mistreated. So, it's kind of

good that way, but it also makes it look

like maybe they needed a pardon. What'

they do? So, this one works both ways.

But, um, if Trump thought this was a

really good timing for it because we're

too distracted with other things, he'd

be right. [laughter]

The the distractions are all over the

place. So, this one just isn't going to

move any, you know, move anything. So if

if some people he liked got some

pardons, well, he wins.

I don't know if the juice is worth the

squeeze, as the boring people say.

But uh the the Democrats will get to

sell this as authoritarian, right?

Because they sell everything as

authoritarian. What? What? He's giving

pardons to his friends, not to his

friends. That would look like he's some

kind of authoritarian. Authoritarian.

So that's coming.

Well, here's another story I don't

believe at all, but Dylan Buts over at

CNBC is talking about China allegedly

suspended some critical mineral export

curves. How many times have we heard

that China or the US made some kind of

change to their tariffs and their, you

know, their minerals? I feel like none

of it is believable. Are you having the

same reaction? It's like, yeah, maybe

somebody did something, but more likely

they're all just going to go ahead and

do what they were going to do anyway

before any of this was announced. I just

don't believe anything that comes out

of, oh, China decided to do a totally

reasonable trade deal with us. Did they?

Did they really?

Well, we'll find out. Allegedly, we're

easing somebody's easing some

restrictions and blah blah blah. I don't

believe so. I don't believe any of it.

Would it be great if it were true?

All right, here is the the big payoff.

So, how many of you were with me in 2015

when I changed the world by introducing

the reframe that it's not about the

policies, it's about the persuasion. And

if you didn't see that Trump was coming,

oh, he was coming in 2015. If you didn't

if you didn't recognize how much power

he was bringing to the domain, you were

probably really surprised when he won.

But famously, I was not surprised. So, I

had a worldview that predicted, would

you say? Would it be fair to say my

worldview that he's persuasive?

Predicted that he'd win even outside of

his domain.

And then he did. So, I often say that

the closest you can get to reality is

prediction.

So, if if I was able to predict that

Trump would do well based on his

persuasion skills, and I think most

people agree that that's exactly why

he's doing well, his persuasion skills.

That uh that's now a done deal, wouldn't

you say?

Even the AI acknowledges that I changed

the argument from from policy to

persuasion.

But there's one more coming. You ready?

[laughter]

I've got another reframe that you

haven't heard yet.

This will blow your mind.

I'm going to I'm going to have to tiptoe

into it a little bit because once it

settles in, you're going to be like,

whoa.

Whoa. Why' I never think of that? You

ready? All right. Um,

so here's what here's what he does.

Do you know who uh Thomas Soul is?

Thomas Soul, famous economist.

He's a conservative and uh he does a

really good job of explaining stuff,

doesn't he? like a really good

explainer. And uh I always wonder who do

the Democrats have on their side who's a

a good explainer

and and how how important would it be if

in 2015 you started training half of the

country but not the other half

uh in how to think better.

How to think better which is not really

persuasion per se. You know, persuasion

would be part of thinking better, but

it's much bigger. All right, let me give

you some some names here. And then

you're gonna see this come together

pretty fast.

Why did I put the thing I wanted to do

first? Last

because that's how I am. All right, here

it is. So, the other day I was remember

I was naming some uh well-known

conservative podcasters

and I started realizing how many there

are and how skilled they are. But let

let me just go down the list and I want

you to see if you can find the pattern.

The pattern is that conservatives have

been teaching each other how to think

better and more productively for about

10 years. And I don't think that the

Democrats have even tried. So when I

look at uh the conservatives,

Republicans trying to figure out a new

thing, you know, let's say there's a new

new policy thing pops out, you can see

them thinking better than they used to.

You can see it, right? But let me give

you some names of people who are

identified with the right and then you

can see why you can see this but the

left can't. Why are they blind to it?

I'll give you some names. Nuke Gindred,

Nuke Gingrich

can explain, you know, any kind of

history thing and he's got the whole

context of everything from the Clintons

from the Congress and everything else.

So when Nuke Gingrich

is explaining something to you, you

know, whether it's in a blog or a or

he's doing an appearance, he's making

you smarter,

right? How about uh Ben Shapiro? Now,

you can you can hate on Ben Shapiro. So,

I put him near first so you can get over

it faster. Just get over it. I'm only

talking about um smartness.

Wouldn't you rather have Ben Shapiro on

your team if you're trying to be the

smart team? Now, you could disagree with

them on all kinds of policies because

people are different, but don't you want

the smart team on your side? You know,

like the whole Daily Wire cast like

they're all smarter than way smarter

than average. Don't you want them on

your team? Of course you do. What about

Jordan Peterson? Now, Jordan Peterson, I

don't think he tries too hard to be a

Republican or a Democrat, but he seems

to get along better with the

conservatives. Who in the world is as

productive in terms of telling you how

to live your life and understand reality

and be effective and Jordan Peterson?

What do they have on the left? I mean,

just think of some of these names. It's

it's incredible the difference in uh

skill and you go right down the line.

You know, you're Megan Kelly, she knows

the law, she knows the news, she knows

the the the news business. Um Tim Pool,

you you can do a deep dive on anything

with the right set of guests. PBD,

amazing. He has great guests. Um Sean

Ryan, bunch of people. So, I would add

myself to the list of people who help

you think. If you look at all of my

books in the shelf behind me, they're

all in that domain. They're they're what

is loser think, what is persuasion,

uh you know, systems versus goals,

talent stack.

Now, let me just put it in the simplest

form. So, those of you who have consumed

my content for the last 10 years, most

of you have read maybe at least one of

my books. Can you validate that if every

Republican read my books

that Republicans would have like a

superpower? It would just be crazy.

Well, they don't all read my books, but

they read other books from other people

who are also very good at explaining

things. Thomas Hole be good example. And

it seems to me that we've got 10 years

of

conservatives teaching people how to

think and operate better. And no years

of the Democrats doing that. Like none.

The Democrats are more like arguing if

you're a racist or not.

How much how many legs does that have?

If your whole strategy is arguing the

other side is bunch of racist sexists,

does that last? I mean, is that a

long-term strategy?

I don't know. I also think that one of

the reasons that we note that uh

conservatives seem to tolerate more

consenting voice dissenting voices is

because they're trained.

Let let me give you a uh specific

example.

If someone who had never been introduced

to Nick Fuentes's content, let's say a

Democrat, were exposed to it with no no

preparation, just exposed to it. Would

you be happy with that? It's free

speech, but beyond the free speech,

would you be happy with that influence?

Maybe yes, maybe no. Right? But suppose

suppose you heard that I went on and I'm

not going to do this, by the way, but

suppose you heard that I went on a show

to talk to Nick Fuentes and you know who

I am, so you know everything about me.

Would you be worried that his opinion

would change my opinion? Would you do

you think that might happen? No, there's

not a chance. But might my opinion

change his opinion? Totally. I'm not

saying it would, but if you're going to

guess who is likely to change the other

person's opinion, it would be the one

who was trained to do it. Although he's

very good at he's very good at it as

well.

So,

I think the reason I can watch Candace

and Nick and Tucker Carlson and Ben

Shapiro and they're all arguing and it

sounds like somebody's anti-Semitic and

somebody's not. You know, it sounds like

terrible stuff.

But I'm just trained to not treat it

that way. It's just training. And I

think a lot of a lot of conservatives

are just trained the same way. It's

like,

you know, I'm not saying it's a nothing.

I'm just saying that the conservatives

can handle it better. They can handle

the friction better. All right. Uh

let me go way back to where I started

because then I'm going to maybe have

some more examples of this. So, as you

know, the government's going to reopen

maybe on Monday. Not sure yet.

So, eight Democrats

crossed over and voted to reopen, which

if that holds, they'll reopen today

sometime. Might take a day or so. I

don't know.

There's only eight of them. And of

course, you should see, have you seen

how angry the Democrats are at the ones

who voted for this? Oh my goodness.

They're very angry.

They're [laughter and clears throat]

calling their own team traitors and

everything. And uh All right.

if that's how you want to play it, that

your own team is traders if they do

something that's first of all perfectly

predictable. Perfectly predictable.

Um,

and then it happens. All right. Uh, even

on MSNBC, one of the hosts said, "It

seems like the president was kind of

getting what he wanted."

Yeah,

that's what that looks like. That's the

president kind of getting what he

wanted. And he still he still hasn't

given up on uh getting rid of the

filibuster. I thought he wanted to get

rid of the filibuster.

Just it was just sort of opportunistic.

He might want to do it anyway. But uh

even though he guesses government

reopened, he's still like, "Well, while

we're at it, maybe we'll kill that

filibuster while we're at it."

Anyway, um Fedman is one of the ones who

famously cross-sized to vote for opening

the government. Good for Fedaman.

[laughter]

As long as he doesn't want any future in

the Democrat party, it's good for him.

He basically eliminated himself from

higher office as a Democrat. I think

because the Democrats believe that

fighting

is just doing annoying things while

people are watching. I guess I guess

that's what they think fighting Donald

Trump is. All right. So, did it work

that Trump threatened the filibuster or

threatened to end it? Did that work?

There's no way to know if anybody

changed a vote just because of the

filibuster, but it might have. It might

have worked a little bit. People might

have thought, well, if we give him this,

maybe he won't also try to get the

filibuster. To which I said, have you

met Trump? Have you heard about him? No,

he's not going to give up on the

filibuster just because he got something

else.

He'll try to get everything he can get,

whatever is the most aggressive stance,

of course.

Anyway, the other thing that's funny,

uh, going back to my theme is that

Democrats will have no idea what's

happening today because they don't have

a a worldview that incorporates what

they're witnessing.

They just don't have any worldview that

explains this. Like why did why did all

my heroes say there's no way no way

we're going to cave and then they caved?

Was it ever important?

Don't you think it leaves the Democrats

with some big questions about their own

side? Yeah, some big questions. So, the

Democrats are going to look at their

side as a bunch of wimpy losers. Um

there's going to be more pressure on

Schumer to get the heck out of that job

because he's an embarrassment. Bernie

Sanders uh pointed out that uh the

Republicans uh ruined healthc care.

He ruined healthcare. Um correct me if

I'm wrong, but one of the things I'm

watching is that every time the

Democrats ruin something, don't they

blame Republicans? Every time the

Democrats ruin something, cuz who ruined

climate change? That wasn't that wasn't

uh Republicans. How about the border?

Not Republicans. How about inflation?

Wasn't Republicans. So, there seems to

be a clear pattern here, which is that

Democrats do these things which have

gigantic downsides and then they sell as

hard as they can that the problem was

from the Republicans.

That's their whole game is doing dumb

and trying to blame it on the other

side. That's it. That's all they have.

And they use it a lot. Anyway, and

apparently there's somebody who admitted

that the real play for Schumer and the

Democrats was to uh get crime out of the

news because I guess the Democrats

thought they were losing if they were

talking about crime because nobody liked

crime. Um, so if they said it's really

about healthcare, that would be the

strongest emotional pull to pull the

headlines away from uh from anything

except what they wanted to focus on. In

this case, it was healthcare. So, if

that's what they were doing, it was kind

of a good play, you know, politically if

that's what they were doing. Um, but boy

did boy did they get savaged. Schumer is

going to get savaged. They're they're

all just going to get totally thrown

under the bus.

Now, on top of that, and again, I'll go

back to my main theme. How do Democrats

understand what they're saying?

And is it something that the the

Republican model of the world can

completely explain?

I think it can. Can it? The Republican

model is that Trump is very persuasive

and if you wait long enough, he's going

to win the negotiation. and the

government will open and we will look

back and say, "Oh, why did we ever think

he was going to lose this negotiation?

He's better at that than we are." And

then that's what happened. So the Trump

sort of version of the world where Trump

is persuasive and it matters and he

actually wins because of it. Here we

are. So

isn't it true that my worldview

predicted? Yeah, my worldview predicted

again. So that doesn't mean it's true,

but it's the closest thing to being

true.

All right, so the BBC, this is

hilarious. The BBC actually,

and the fact that this is a government-f

funed news entity in Great Britain, the

BBC

um edited some text from uh Trump's

speech on January 6 to make it look like

he was encouraging people to go there

and be violent when nothing like that

happened. Meaning that there was there

was no language like that. They just

spliced together some existing stuff and

made it look like he was calling on

violence.

Now, weirdly,

but it's good. Um, who's the guy they

call Tater?

Um, who who who is the guy on CNN that

Greg Guffel always mocks? Tater. All

right. So, Tater is one of the ones who

bought into the fine people hoax

completely.

Uh, then he went away, but then he came

back. And now, believe it or not, Tater

uh is completely supporting the point of

view that this was a fake spliced

together thing, and it was never true

and it was exactly the same as the Find

People hoax. Exactly the same. They they

just took some words that he did say and

crafted them together in a way that he

didn't say them and then claimed they

did. Now, do you know why this didn't

work? Why didn't it work?

The only reason that didn't work

the way it did work with the fine people

hoax for about four years. It did work

for about four years. The reason it

didn't work

is that conservatives,

you're waiting for it. I'm tying it all

together now. The reason it didn't work

is that we had trained conservatives

what it looks like when they do this

kind of hoax.

This specific kind of hoax. You've all

seen it. Once you've seen how they can

do it, you first of all can you you can

see all the parts and then you're like,

"Oh, okay. I I see how this works." But

you can see all the parts. There's

nothing you have to guess at. It's all

right there. So, even CNN who is trying

to find the middle ground and I would

say is succeeding. I think CNN is

succeeding in finding a middle ground

news place. And uh I give them credit

for that because they did talk about

this as sort of a scandal. I mean it's a

it's a competitor of theirs so that's

easier but they did talk about a

scandal.

And if that had never existed to find

people hoax you wouldn't have even known

that the BBC did that. You just wouldn't

have even known.

All right. Surprisingly, Turning Point

USA has an event today at UC Berkeley of

all liberal places. Now, UC Berkeley is

where I went to go get my MBA,

but I have parted ways with them. I am

not happy with UC Berkeley, but it is

good to see that they would have

welcomed a conservative group, which I'm

not sure they would have done that

before. So, that looks like progress.

Looks like progress. Um, but still this

is what I talk about when I say that

Republicans would be hunted.

I would not feel safe if somebody knew

me by sight and I went to a conservative

event in Berkeley. Do you think I should

feel safe if I did that? We're not there

yet. We're heading there. I feel like

we're heading there. It's definitely

safer than it used to be, but it's

definitely not safe.

So, is there anybody on the left who

ever experiences that which is they've

never haven't broken any laws? They're

not planning to. They just have a

different opinion, but they can't go in

public in a way that they could express

that opinion because they get hunted.

Yeah. You just can't do it. the the fact

that Democrats are not aware that I

couldn't walk outside and go to Berkeley

with a MAGA hat, you know, they would

think, oh, you know, you're whining

about too much. That's a that's a pretty

legitimate whine, isn't it? If you can't

go outside in your own relative

neighborhood because you might get beat

up for your political opinion, that's

completely legitimate. Yeah, that's

getting hunted.

Uh, but getting better, maybe. Who

knows? So this is funny. Kathy Hokll,

governor of New York is saying that

Zoron Mand's idea of free buses. Well,

well, maybe you won't see any free

buses. Well,

I'm not sure you'll ever see any free

buses. She says, and I quote, "I cannot

set forth a plan right now that takes

money out of a system that relies on the

fairs of the buses and the subways." So,

all it takes is some bureaucratic reason

and it all goes away.

So, do you think that M dami will find a

way to do these things that are not

funded, but if you did fund them, you'd

have to take away something substantial

from people who are already funded. Do

you think he can pull that off?

I doubt it. I doubt it. But reality has

come to visit the socialists.

I hope they enjoy it. Speaking of

reality, Trump is uh I I saw that he's

promising this. I don't know if that's

yet the right word, but he is teased at

least that uh consumers or taxpayers

might get a 2,000 check $2,000 check

back from taxes as part of their tariff

payoff.

And [clears throat] what do you think of

that? Just everybody gets a $2,000

check. Now, it would not include high

income people. So, I don't know if I'm

in that or not in that. I I think my

current income is zero

once you once you actually look at the

expenses like actually zero. Not not

cheating on my taxes. I think it's

actually zero.

Um because I have a staff and you know

and the the income went down when I got

cancelled blah blah blah. So it's it's

somewhere around break even basically

which is fine because I'm not looking to

build assets. I'm just looking to not

lose them.

All right. Uh,

what do you think of that idea? Somebody

mocked me and said, "Scott, do you think

it's really a good idea to give all

these people $2,000? What will happen?"

To which I said, "I don't know what will

happen. I have no idea what would happen

if you gave everybody $2,000."

Inflation.

I I think the right answer is inflation,

maybe.

But sometimes the inflation is worth it.

So Trump's smart about reading the room.

If he can find any way at all to give

somebody a few bucks, they're going to

be happier than if they didn't get a few

bucks. And that's all it is.

All right. So I' I've been trying to

figure out if our economy is good or

bad. Have any of you figured that out

yet?

The US economy, is it good or bad?

Because when the Republicans talk, they

say it's good. And they give some

examples. When the Democrats talk about

it, they say it's bad and they give some

examples. Who's right? [laughter]

Don't you think we should at least know

the the most basic thing about our

reality? The most basic thing about a

reality is that either the economy is

good or it's bad and we can't we can't

decide if it's good or bad. Was it uh

Mark Twain who said that we can't tell

the difference between good news and bad

news? the humans can't tell the

difference. Well, it feels like that.

But I did see a post that says that uh I

think this might have been from a screen

grab on Fox News that coffee is up 19%,

utilities up 12, electricity five,

vehicle repair 12%. So although our

growth in the economy seems okay,

um it's not making a lot of jobs. People

are holding off to see if AI is going to

make any difference. I think so. They

call it a jobless economy. It's not

really.

Anyway, what do you think? If I just

asked you, is the economy is the economy

better under Trump or worse? And you

were, let's say you were not doing just

team play. So, you're not just arguing

to, you know, win your side. If you're

really really being honest,

is the economy better or worse since

Trump took over?

I don't know. I have no idea. I really

don't.

And and the fact that we don't know that

the most basic thing you should know

about your country is it going up or is

it going down? I can't tell. Well, I

think we need a little more information.

That's what I say. Um

anyway, there's a big climate change

convention. I guess you call it that,

the COP30

climate thing in Brazil.

And uh, of course, everybody's going to

be talking about all the carbon that

they burn, doing it for rich people, and

then that will be a story that

entertains us for about two days. Um,

oh, here's my list. Jeez, I had a whole

different list of the conservatives that

are teaching us how to think better. And

I I left out the best ones. So, did I

mention Mike Benz?

Democrats don't have a Mike Benz. That's

like It's like having a super a hero on

your side. How about uh Charlie Kirk

when he was doing the debates?

Charlie Kirk doing debates.

They didn't have that, did they? You

know, now I know that uh Steven Crowder

did some debates, too, but he was more

he was more team play. That was kind of

a different different vibe. Joe Rogan,

Glenn Beck, they all bring people on who

can explain all kinds of things. That's

good. Uh, I would also like that say

that Gutfeld's a good explainer. Maggie

Hemingway, Victor Davis Hansen. Do you

see the pattern yet? I was trying to

make the point without having the right

list in front of me. But, uh, yeah,

the these are all the smartest people in

the game and they're teaching you how to

think, not just what to agree with.

Pretty strong stuff.

Anyway, uh, Newsome

is going after Trump. Trump's having a

good day, but they're going to have to

find something bad to say about him. So

Nome said, "Donald Trump said he would

make us wealthier and healthier, but

we're poorer and sicker, and I don't

want to see this sickness extend to

ending our republic and our democracy."

Okay. All right. Whatever.

Meanwhile, the Gateway Pundit is

reporting that there's a uh a gang

called the Latin Kings

operating in the US, I guess, who uh

they must be in Chicago, and they put

out a hit on some of the uh ICE people.

So, that better not happen.

Do do you think that's going to turn

into a thing that the criminals are

going to start putting hits on the ICE

people?

I wouldn't be totally surprised if it

happens. But boy is it going to get a

savage if they do. If they kill one ICE

agent in something that looks like a

hit,

Trump's just going to go full Viking on

them. And they have to know that. I

mean, they have to know that's the end

of their operation if they do that. at

least they can, you know, struggle along

a little bit if they don't do that. But

we're still going to take them out one

way or another.

So, in China, apparently they have some

version of the LSATs, the test you take

to become a lawyer or to test you take

to see if you qualify for law school.

And uh apparently some Chinese prep

company stole the test.

They stole the test. They were selling

the results.

So, do you trust your lawyer now? Now

that you know, your lawyer could have

bought the test results in China. I'm

not sure if he could, but there's some

allegation there.

Anyway,

um the chipmunk industry is mad because

apparently somebody in the

administration is is raising the idea

just as a proposal

uh that the that the US taxpayers would

take some equity in some of the chipm

business.

So the semiconductor business would sort

of say, okay, you you have a little

ownership of that. Do you think that's

going to work? I don't I think there'll

be too much push back on that. That will

not happen.

All right. Um

then Mayor Brandon Johnson,

he he wants to tell us how bad things

are in Chicago because of Trump. He says

whether it's the uncon unconstitutional

acts that are being carried out by the

Trump administration or the fact that

food and medicine has been cut off. has

it.

Has anybody died yet?

I'm pretty sure nobody has starved. When

was the last time somebody starved to

death in the United States?

Sort of never. I mean, it's not true.

Not never, but I don't think they're

going to starve to death this year,

but uh hope the uh postmillennials

writing about that. All right, ladies

and gentlemen,

let me go back. Let me circle back to my

main point today and see if it stuck.

Okay? And then we're going to do some

reframes because I know you like them.

So the reframe

is that conservatives have spent 10

years training their training their base

how to think better.

And that if you were to extend that that

uh let's say that variable over time, it

would perfectly predict who's going to

be in charge.

Let me say that again. In the same way

that persuasion skill predicted that

Trump would be in charge,

the fact that we've been training other

conservatives and most of us are the

right people to do the training. The

fact that we've been training other

conservatives Oh, and I would I would

throw Michael Shelonburger in there,

too. Um,

conservatives are way way smarter

about how to just look at a topic and

and pull it apart. Would you agree? Even

if you disagree with them, they have

been training for 10 years with the

right people to tell them how to how to

enter this argument, how to deal with

climate change. For example, have you

noticed that the climate change

arguments

tend to at least now cluster around a

few people's opinions that you've seen

before because they're the ones who are

good at teaching you how to think about

it. Yeah.

So, I don't think that the Democrats see

this coming.

If if you were not looking for the

pattern, you wouldn't know there was a

pattern. you would just say, "Oh, a lot

of people are talking about climate

change now. A lot of people are talking

about this." It wouldn't look like a

pattern. But if you understand that only

half of the country is treating the

topics as a as a class,

yeah, that that's what it is. It's the

conservatives. They treat the topic as a

class where you can learn about the

topic and how to respond to it if

somebody is on the other side of it.

It's just not happening on the other

side. I don't believe they're learning

how to do that. But almost every day,

almost every day, I teach somebody on

the right how to do that or give them

some maybe some, you know, context they

didn't have before, which is the same

thing.

All right.

Don't mess with the lawyers.

Good idea.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, we're

going to do a reframe.

I usually do these at the front. By the

way, if you didn't know, the Dilbert

2026 calendar is available

only on Amazon. Only on Amazon. Nowhere

else. Only on Amazon. Um, and I wouldn't

wait because we're going to run out. We

really are. We're going to run out. If

I'm wrong, I'll let you know, but I

think we will run out.

All right.

Um,

oh, here's one. This one is so simple

and yet so sublime.

So, the usual frame is that history is

important, wouldn't you say? If you're

looking at the Middle East, history is

pretty important. If you're looking at

World War II, history is important. So

in most cases you're looking at anything

with history in it, it's going to be

pretty important.

But the reframe is this. History doesn't

exist.

History doesn't exist. Try getting a

handful of history.

Where is it? Where's this history you're

talking about? Can you fill up a bucket

with history? No. History isn't even

real.

>> [laughter]

>> So there are people who go through their

life tortured by things that have gone

before. The things that they experience,

the things they worry about will happen.

But none of those things are real.

If it's something that did happen in the

past, it's not real now. It might have

actually happened, but it's not

happening now. It just doesn't exist.

Once you realize that history is

completely artificial

and also I don't know if you knew this

but there is scientific evidence that we

uh make up our minds after after the

decision

that we decide first and then we come up

with weird explanations of why we

decided. That's actually how decisions

are made. We just think it's the other

way around. It's an illusion.

So that's your reframe of the day. Has

anybody heard that one before?

It It's really It's so effective. I use

it all the time and I just go, "No, it

doesn't even exist. Does not exist.

Don't have to worry about it."

All right, people.

I'm going to go think about getting some

breakfast because I deserve it. Yeah,

the rest of you. I guess I should talk

to the locals people privately. I've

I've been cheating them a little bit.

So, locals people. Well, I can't lift my

arm, though. Oh, I'm going to try to

turn this off.

Let's see if I can do this and keep the

locals people.

Uh, I literally can't lift my arm above

my

above my nipples.

How many of you have seen me drawing on

>> here?

Don't like looking at us.

>> So, in case you missed it,

>> oh,

you can't see it at all. I I would put

my hand up to the camera so you could

see it, but it just hurts too much. I

can't reach over there.

>> So, I've been doing some drawing on

camera. People seem to like it.

>> Uh, the good news is I can still draw

despite the limitations in my hand.

Didn't didn't know if I would, but

yesterday I could. All right. So,

did locals not work?

Did locals not work today? I heard

somebody say that locals didn't work. Is

that true?

Guess I don't see it here.

That's weird.

All right, I guess we're not talking,

huh?

All right, so I'm going to have to

figure out what's wrong with all of my

devices. All right, people. I can't hang

around today. I wish I could, but I

can't. I'll talk to you tomorrow. I

should have your calendar uploaded by

then. Bye for now.

Oh, come on. Hand work,

work,

work.