Back to episode — Episode 2028 Scott Adams - Trump Witch Hunt Grand Jury, Ramaswamy vs Cartels, Eric & UFOs, More Fun
Context —
So you still think they have enough ammo? Do you? You think they have enough ammo if this guy did that play? No, you don't do that play if you have enough ammo or you expect to. You do that play when you know you're not getting any ammo. Now the other possibility is Putin doesn't want the Wagner group to win. Have you ever thought of that? Putin might need this Prigozhin guy to lose. You know why…
← Previous segment →here's something about the way he presents himself as raising flags with me. That's all. I don't have any specific accusations. By the way he criticized me on Twitter recently. Did you know that? So he came, so Dr. Shiva came after me on Twitter for something. I believe it was probably, I think he probably fell for the 4chan hoax or something. I forget.
The Viva interview with Shiva was hard to watch. Yeah. I'm a Venus flytrap on Twitter. Scott is petty and that's a shame. I don't know. I'm not going to defend myself for that because I like to focus on small things and big things. So sometimes the small things interest me and I focus on them. I'm not going to apologize for that.
Will Ramaswamy do better than Yang? Oh yeah, much better. The trouble with Yang is he didn't fit into any party. What Vivek Ramaswamy is doing well is he's reading the room correctly for the Republican side of the world. So I think his reading of the room is really good. So yeah he should do way better. I think it's good there's going to be, here's the problem. If Vivek Ramaswamy ends up saying things that are sort of indistinguishable from Trump, at least policy-wise, not in style but policy-wise, what are you going to do? What if you had two people that look like they had very similar strong Republican approaches, both capable, both smart. One is Ramaswamy and one is Trump. What do you do? Pick him as a VP? That would be a bold move. Might be wasted as a VP.
Well here's, I'll just throw this into the mix. Republicans need to run a brown candidate. Do you agree? Republicans need to run a brown candidate. And I don't mean for equity. I don't mean for diversity. I don't mean for signaling. I mean just to get it over with. Just to get it over with. It'd just be a branding thing. Like I like that we had one black president already. It sort of gets that reputation off you that you can't do that. Now there are also some things that you can do if you're brown and Republican that others can't do. So Tim Scott would have the same benefit. If Ramaswamy decided to press a war in Mexico would anybody call him a racist? Now what if Trump does it? If Trump starts a war in Mexico against the cartels day one. Oh he always attacks the brown people, doesn't he? Right? So they could have identical policies but one can do it without political blowback of that type and one can do it with all that blowback of exactly that type. So if Trump is your president and you're a Republican he will give you one more reason to be called a
Context —
racist even though you didn't do anything and it's not his fault. Because in this scenario Trump would be doing what Republicans want which is getting tough on the cartels. But the Democrats would still say well that's racist. But you could take that away from them by having a brown president who just does what makes sense and then people go oh well let's just talk about whether it makes sense bec…
Next segment → →