Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive July 10, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas
Episodes Episode #2376 Segments
NewsReaction Politics as Persuasion

Back to episode — Episode 2376 CWSA 02/06/24

Context —

sident to make any difference. It feels like that would be just the Larry Elder is a certain age. He's over 70. I don't think you want your vice president to be over 70. That would be a bad choice. Then you get to Vivek. Here's what I think. To me it seems obvious that Kellyanne Conway is testing Vivek. What do you think? I don't think she's even really testing the other names. I think this is li…

← Previous segment →

had a new leader who may also be corrupt but it couldn't be any worse than it is who doesn't start a war because it's Russia. I mean he wouldn't start a war with Ukraine because they would already own it in that place.

Believe the original January 6 hoax. That's true. He's already talked about that. Yeah what people saw and believed during the fog of war has no use for analysis. Yes people had wrong opinions when we didn't know anything. Same with the pandemic. Yeah you don't complain in Russia. Oh we would know. We would know. Yeah you don't complain in the newspaper in Russia but we would know you know. So it's going to be fascinating.

So what I would recommend is that Tucker actually negotiate a peace deal with Putin and Ukraine. Does that sound crazy? Well let me ask you this. Who's going to do it? Everybody knows it has to be done. Am I right? 100% of the public knows that Russia and Ukraine has to talk and they have to negotiate. Who else is going to do it? Biden? Biden's not going to do it. Zelensky? No no I'm completely serious. I realize it would be illegal but we don't have a real government so something's got to be done. Now it would be very illegal for a private citizen to negotiate on behalf of America but would it be wrong to suggest what a solution would look like? Would it be wrong for Tucker to invite Zelensky and Putin to be in the same room and work it out? It'd probably be illegal probably but if it was all transparent I wouldn't care. Yeah now I'm being a little bit you know just provocative. I don't think that Tucker should negotiate a peace deal but honestly no one else is going to do it until and if you know a Trump or Republican gets office no one's going to do it. So if you want this thing to end you should be rooting for Tucker to end it. And by the way I think he could because it's not that hard to do. Just somebody has to be working on it. Just somebody has to be working on it. That's it. That's all. That's the entire thing. Somebody has to be doing it because we already know what it looks like. Russia's going to keep the stuff that they already got because they're never going to give it back. So why would there even be much question about it? You know there might be something about NATO blah blah blah but yeah I think Tucker could literally negotiate peace because nobody else is doing it and everybody wants it. Like if everybody didn't want it then it would be crazy to say you know some news pundit guy could negotiate world peace. That would be the dumbest thing in the world. But in this very unique case where not only do both sides want it they want it desperately and they also know exactly what it would look like right? Ukraine knows they're not going to get those territories back.

But now imagine this. Imagine Tucker goes in he goes how about this. You know I can't negotiate a peace deal but let me just ask you why you wouldn't do this. Why wouldn't you offer Putin why wouldn't you offer to do a referendum for the disputed areas and then decide everything based on the referendum? You know make sure it's run by some third party like Switzerland or something so it's real. But if the citizens want to be Russian how about they go where you know by majority how about they get that? And if there are areas that are still disputed where the population does not want to be Russian by a majority we just go with that. And then you don't make the rest of Ukraine NATO because it's too provocative. Now did I just solve the war? Yes yes I just solved it. Now all it would take is for somebody like Tucker to just put that idea in Putin's head. How about this? Why don't you offer that an independent let's say the UN runs a referendum for who should be in charge where and no matter what you don't do any more NATO stuff because that's just going to cause the fight. Now you say Victoria Nuland would not allow that and you're right but don't you want it on the table? Don't you want it on the table? Because if you start polling America you're going to get a 90% yes on that. American voter do you think that Russia and Ukraine should end the war by polling the citizens in the disputed territories and going with what the will of the people requires? We might have the world's simplest war to end except for the money launderers and the criminals who have some other motivation but you would probably need something like an 85% public preference before you could overcome whatever corruption is keeping things the way they are now. It would just be too embarrassing to go against 85% of the public as well as the publics of the disputed territory. I mea

Context —

n that'd be hard to go against. Scott, Mearsheimer to understand your history please. This has been tried. That's a terrible comment. Terrible comment. Yeah the history does not tell you what's going to happen in the future. History does not repeat itself. That is a myth. And as soon as you believe that you can't do anything that eliminates your ability to think. Oh history repeats itself so ther…

Next segment → →