Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive May 24, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas
Episodes Episode #116 Segments
MainContent Politics as Persuasion

Back to episode — Episode 116 - Facts are not Influencing the Immigration Debate

Context —

Now here's a thought that I've been having that's growing stronger in me. Most of you who have been following me for a while know that I'm not a Republican and that I don't vote. And I don't vote because I don't like to be influenced into team politics even though at this point I am. But because I've been labeled as a Trump supporter and I've already told you that I stopped — I've got one exceptio…

← Previous segment →

All right, let's talk about immigration. So I think many of you heard me as recently as yesterday say that immigrants have a lower crime rate than citizens and that that fact is influencing part of the discussion. And when you look into it, it turns out that there had not been any studies about illegal immigrants, which are really the point. Illegal immigrants had not been studied until just recently.

So only yesterday I saw Tucker Carlson talking about the first statistics about just the illegal immigrants and their crime. And according to this one source — which by the way I would expect to be debunked by lunchtime today — but according to that one source, illegal immigrants actually do have a much higher crime rate. Whereas the legal immigrants, you would not be surprised to know that someone who had gone through the process of becoming a legal resident are people who like following rules. They are the people who followed the rules. That's how they became legal immigrants. They're rule-followers. So don't be surprised that they also follow the law. That should surprise no one.

But the illegal ones had not been studied and the pro-immigration group had cleverly conflated the legal and the illegal so you couldn't tell what was going on. Now that this statistic is out there very unambiguously — it says that say the murder rate is way higher for the illegal immigrants, only illegal immigrants we're talking about — wouldn't you expect, because you're all logical and rational people and you love your facts, wouldn't you suspect that that would just change everything? That would change the debate, right? Now that it's objectively shown that President Trump was totally right, that there's a higher crime rate coming in illegally than is already here, so immigration is a crime thing, should change everything, right?

No, no it will change nothing. And you're going to watch this right in front of you. And if you didn't see Tucker interview a pro-immigration — I don't know if that's the right way to characterize them — but look in my Twitter retweets today and you'll see Tucker Carlson's interview from last night I guess in which he talked to somebody about this new fact that now we know according to this one source that again will probably be debunked on Snopes by lunchtime because they need to debunk it. So there will be enough debunking whether it's true or not. Whether the debunking is true or not doesn't have anything to do with the fact that it's going to happen. So expect some debunking, valid or not, until this day that becomes a little murkier in our minds.

But anyway, so Tucker is interviewing this guy and Tucker has the goods on him. I mean he just has the goods on him because of this new data. This is the illegal immigrants, just the illegal ones, have a much higher crime rate. And so how does this person respond to a new set of facts that completely blows his old argument out of the water? He pretends that he's answering a different question over and over again. So no matter how many times Tucker asked him to deal with the fact that it's now a fact that illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants only, have a higher crime rate, you know how does he address that? And he kept saying well that's why you need sanctuary cities. And he just refused to deal with the new fact.

So we saw the facts did not matter. So there was a guy who went on television, it was his job to defend against this kind of argument, and he wouldn't even talk on the topic. And it's the only topic that matters in this whole debate, that fact that Tucker gave him. That there's a high crime rate of illegal immigrants. Illegal. And by the way that's the way you should always say it if you're talking about this. Always go illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants. Because then when you're taking it out of context later you could say don't you remember me saying illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants? Because you keep talking about the legal ones and I'm not talking about that.

Everybody loves — we all love our legal immigrants. Legal immigrants are the best, right? Maybe some of you disagree but in my experience the immigrant population tends to be pretty awesome frankly. You may disagree but I don't care.

So watch how much the new facts don't change a thing. And you should not be surprised that it doesn't change a thing because it didn't change your minds when you thought it was the other way. All right, you're not going to like this next part.

So yesterday I had an argument with — not an argument but some text exchanges with somebody who was saying — so remember this is way back yesterday before we had this new information. Yesterday seems like so long ago now. So way back yesterday morning when I was debating somebody on Twitter I said incorrectly that there was a lower crime rate with immigrants. But I also, when I first said it, didn't realize that I had also conflated legal and illegal immigrants. And it was really the legal immigrants who have a lower crime rate than the average, which should be no surprise.

And I said hey, you know, you're not going to win on crime. You can't win the crime argument because they're not really bringing an extra crime on average. And just saying that somebody got killed by somebody who's illegal, well that you know that's not a strong persuasion, I was saying. And people would say no, no, the person is dead who didn't need to be dead. So it doesn't matter that they would bring in less crime on average when I believed that was true. It doesn't matter because a dead person is a dead person. And I don't care that the average illegal immigrant isn't bringing in any crime, which turns out not to be true. Or the average one actually is not criminal but they bring in a higher average of criminality.

Let me stop and say that again. The average illegal immigrant is law-abiding, right? It's just that they bring a higher ratio of crime. But still the vast majority of them, just to be perfectly clear, completely law-abiding except for coming into the country illegally.

So anyway, point is facts won't change anything. I've been saying that the crime argument is sort of a loser even though the facts might be on the president's side and it appears that they are. It's a losing argument because you're branding one type of person as a criminal in the eyes of the opposition. So the opposition can so easily conflate the illegal immigrants with the legal and we'll do it. We'll do it forever now because now they have to do it even harder. Then it will be like talking to a wall.

So you'll be saying well you know the legal immigrants are awesome, we love them, but the illegal ones are bringing in more crime. What will the opposition say? Why are you calling all immigrants racists? Or why are you calling all immigrants rapists and criminals, right? So there won't even be the same conversation. You know the Republicans will say a specific measured problem, let's try to close it. And the other side will say well that's what racists say. So that's the beginning and the end of the conversation.

See my Twitter feed for the Tucker Carlson retweet and the source will be in there.

Context —

So why did they do it, Scott? What's their endgame? Well for most of them it's just team play. I would say that the vast majority of people on the left are just simply opposed to the president. They're just joining their team. There's not anything like thinking or reason. There's not a long-term purpose to it. So you may remember that I challenged someone to explain to me why open borders was a g…

Next segment → →