Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive May 24, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas
Episodes Episode #2494 Segments
NewsReaction Media & Fake News

Back to episode — Episode 2494 CWSA 06/03/24

Context —

people to be less inclined to vote for Trump to make it safe for other people to say, oh, lots of people are changing their mind because of the felony. I guess I could do that too. So the point of the polling is to tell you what normal people are thinking even if they're not, so that you, thinking you're a normal person too, can maybe be a little more likely to be persuaded to be on the same side…

← Previous segment →

what I think. I think it might be entirely true that half of Americans think he should end his campaign. But do you know what half of Americans also think? Probably half of Americans believe that this should not be a contest between Biden and Trump, wouldn't you agree? Probably half of the country, if you gave them the choice, they'd say, you know, we do love Trump versus Biden, but all things considered, like if we could just start with a blank slate, we'd go in with a 40-something DeSantis, 40-year-old, whatever age he is, and we'd get more years of young people and we wouldn't have the provocations and all the worry and everything. So it seems to me this is clearly a poll that's designed to drive opinions as opposed to tell you what opinions are.

Maureen Dowd, who's a famous Trump non-lover for the New York Times, reports that her sister, who interestingly is a Republican, decided that she would vote for Trump because of the felony conviction. It's her own sister. So one of the famous anti-Trumpers is, to her credit, she's reporting it. So you have to give her credit for transparency. But the sister's reason is the interesting thing. It wasn't just that it was unfair and people are saying, yeah, the system's unfair, we're going to have to correct it by electing Trump. It went deeper. And here's what I warned you about. She was worried that there's nobody that would protect her. So Maureen Dowd's sister is a Republican, and when she watched the top Republican get lawfared, she said, who would protect me? You know, my father, my dad, who would protect me if I got lawfared? And so she realized that she's living in an environment that's too unsafe as a Republican, and that she had to vote for the one person who might be able to protect her, and that's Trump.

Now that is important. It's one person, so we don't know if that's a generalized feeling. But it is what I predicted. And what I predicted was empathy, that people would see Trump as themselves for the first time. When Trump is in the golden towers, I don't say to myself, oh, he's just like me. When he's doing trumpy things like rallies and things, it doesn't feel just like me. But when he gets accused of something that's sketchy and then the system closes in on him, that is me. Because I live in the same system. That system is surrounding me, touches me every moment I walk and live and breathe. Same system. If it got him, I feel it personally. Now I'm a public figure, so maybe I'm at more risk than the average person. But if somebody who's just a voter, an ordinary Republican, is going to say that I feel threatened because Trump got lawfared, that's what I predicted. I predicted empathy. You see, remember, empathy is not just your empathy for the other person. There's always a little bit of it which is I'm glad it's not me. That's connected to empathy. I'm glad it's not me. So I think people feel this one personally. I did. Yeah, the conviction of Trump didn't feel like a political outcome to me. It wasn't just because I'm supporting him for president. It felt personal. Like I felt I was being handcuffed. I mean, I can't explain it, but did anybody have the same experience? That you just put yourself in the scene and you saw yourself unfairly convicted and lawfared. Because we've all been, I think most of us have had the experience where the system was against them unfairly. It could have been anything. Could have been your school administrators, your job. But everybody's felt the system being against them. And then we watched it happen to Trump.

Anyway, here's the other way they use the fake polls. I think this was maybe in some publication. They said that Trump has a 1.8% lead based on 173 polls. So he's up 1.8% based on the average of 173 polls. How many of those polls are credible? Well, during fake polling season, you don't want Trump to look like he's up five because that would be too big to rig. So you put a bunch of fake ones in the mix. And then all the people who are trying to be reasonable, but of course they're making a mistake, they say, well, the reasonable thing would be to take the average. No, no. The reasonable thing would be to take the average if you knew that they all did a similarly credible job of doing their work. But you don't. You don't average the fake polls with the real ones. That's what they did. Because I'm sure that some percentage of these are legitimately faked. Right? In other words, the people who did them knew what they were doing when they did them. You don't average fake polls and real ones. That's nothing. That's trying to hide the ball. That's what that is.

Meanwhile, Trump is on TikTok, as you know. But here's a surprise. Somebody named Tara Palmieri, I don't know what her role is, but she seems to know some stuff. She said that the pro-Trump content is 10 to 12 times more popular than pro-Biden stuff on TikTok. And she says two TikTok officials told her that since November there's been two times more pro-Tr

Context —

ump content than Biden. I don't know how that matches with the 10 times more, but okay. And according to an internal TikTok analysis, Trump content beat Biden content by 10 to 1 in likes and 12 to 1 in views. Does that sound real? Do you believe that TikTok is pushing hard for Trump? Here's one way to explain it, and I don't know if this is enough. Biden is not memeable, but Trump is super memeab…

Next segment → →