Episode 508 Scott Adams Sleepy Joe, Female Running Mates, Soul of the Nation

Date: 2019-04-26 | Duration: 55:58

Topics

The Hoax Funnel - Whiteboard discussion Helping people that are duped by the “fine people” hoax 20 Year Rule: You aren’t the same person you were 20 years ago …so people should get a pass for their actions 20 years ago Encourage people to become better than they are or were Don’t demonize them for who they were 20+ years ago “The nation’s soul” is degrading and in peril? What exactly does that mean? Vague, empty, political BS? Joe Biden is making Bernie look better by comparison Gaffes are Joe Biden’s brand President Trump has tuned us to see low energy, unintelligent When you look for something…you tend to find it CNN article about 70’s TV show, Archie Bunker They associated President Trump with Archie Bunker Weak smear, but that’s all they have left President Trump says the attempted coup was “worse than Watergate” Did Mueller look at President Trump’s tax returns? Swalwell and Booker both declare their VP will be a woman Worldwide poll, people are sadder, angrier than they used to be What’s driving that? Business model of the press + social media WaPo called me “far right” Called Jordan Peterson, Mike Cernovich, Steve Cortes also called “far right” Ben Shapiro’s belief about Charlottesville is cognitive dissonance

Please donate to support my YouTube channel:
https://interface.my/ScottAdamsSays
I also fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a "boss" somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I'm trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.
See all of my Periscope videos here…
https://www.pscp.tv/ScottAdamsSays/1nAKERDOwylGL
Find my WhenHub Interface app here…
https://interface.whenhub.com

> [!note] Rough Transcript
> 
> This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

## Transcript

[0:06]

mm-hmm pom pom pom pom hello Nicholas hello everybody come on in here it's time for another delightful delightful simultaneous hip and if you're here early grab your copy your mug your chalice your flask your tankard your chalice your thermos fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee enjoyed me now for the simultaneous up Oh best one of the day so as I often tell you one of the weird things about being me is that sometimes when I talk about the news I accidentally become the news app and again yesterday so the Washington Post wrote a hit piece about me talking about the fine people hoax now the interesting

[1:06]

the fine people hoax now the interesting thing by far the most interesting thing about this whole Charlottesville fine people hoax is that when people are D hoaxed in other words when you show them the actual transcript and you find out that he did not call the race's find people that he actually condemned them and called them out by name when you show that to people they go down to what I call the hoax funnel now the hoax funnel is when you start with this you this false claim somebody proves is wrong and then they come to a smaller claim and you show that that's wrong and then you come to a smaller claim and a smaller claim that's what makes it a funnel so you're talking people out of the big claim but they go down to smaller and smaller points until there's nothing left and I want to show you the the order that almost every person who's suffering from Trump derangement syndrome goes down because it's so

[2:06]

syndrome goes down because it's so similar it's hilarious and it gives you this is going to be a perfect lesson on cognitive test all right so most of you know the background if you don't check my pinned tweet the basic idea here is that most of the country has been told illegitimately that the president once called the racist marching in charlottesville fine people in fact he did not will not talk about the details of that too much I'll just take you through the interesting argument here's what happens so this is the fine people hoax funnel so people start with this belief this false belief they think the president referred to neo-nazis as fine people so when somebody says that on social media I said them the transcript and sometimes a copy of the video so that they can see that the president's words said when he talked about finding people on both sides it's obvious he was

[3:07]

people on both sides it's obvious he was talking about both sides of the statue controversy and when he specified I'm not talking about the neo-nazis and the white nationalists they should be condemned totally so I shall I show them the transcript that they are absolutely completely wrong objectively confirmed no question about it their original belief that the president called neo-nazis and white nationalists fine people is false he said literally the opposite of that okay then what do people do do they say Scott my goodness I sure was wrong thank you for correcting that no nobody ever does that instead then retreat to a smaller claim and it looks like this there were no non racists in attendance so therefore you're wrong Scott there were no non racist they're on the side of keeping the statues so that I say well here's a

[4:08]

the statues so that I say well here's a link to the New York Times article in which they interviewed a woman who was part of a group that were not racist did not identify with racist don't like racist they were there for their own purposes they were there to protest the removal of a historical monument and they were Pro free speech now once you've showed them the sources were it's the New York Times it's an actual interview with somebody who clearly was not with the races and said they were there for their own purposes at that point does the person you're talking to say oh whoo thanks for clearing that up I had my information wrong but I trust the New York Times here's a detailed interview not detailed but nothing enough detail with the person I changed my mind they do not say that they continue going down the hoax funk but this is the interesting breakpoint at the for the first two claims generally speaking I think people are actually have been bamboozled by the

[5:10]

actually have been bamboozled by the media and simply have incorrect information all right so the first two are just people dealing with the fact that they don't have the right facts as soon as you point out the real facts this is the interesting point and it happens right here this is where they add a hallucination and I mean this literally it's an actual hallucination and this is the TEL for cognitive dissonance cognitive dissonance is when the facts don't fit your worldview and you're very committed to the worldview so you have to reinterpret your reality literally hallucinate literally add a delusion or an imaginary fact to explain something that has just evaporated in the light of facts and here's how they do it they add the imaginary fact that the the fine people who are not with the racist had somehow decided to march with

[6:11]

racist had somehow decided to march with them there is no evidence that any of the people interviewed by the New York Times or anybody else who was there for their own purposes got in line picked up a tiki torch or even without a tiki torch and marched with the racist that's completely not in evidence so this is the point of cognitive dissonance is very it's very easy to spot they're adding information it's not in evidence so this is who I usually say well that's not in evidence what is it evidence is that there were various groups who were in the same zip code for their own reasons ante file was there for their own reasons and if I didn't go to the go to the event because they they were in favor of the neo-nazis they were there against them it was their own reason likewise the press was there for their own reasons the police were there for their own reasons and then we imagine that there probably were

[7:14]

then we imagine that there probably were people such as the well we don't have to imagine it because there's an interview with them but there were people there for free speech and promoting a historical monuments etcetera so once you point out that they were in the same zip code and that this is imagination and that they've added an imaginary fact do they say to themselves good point there is no evidence that that the people from these other groups weren't marching with anybody so at that point do they say now I changed my opinion I guess I was wrong never never they narrow their claim again and they usually go to this well Scott don't you know this was an event that was that was led by and they'll use words like led by or organized by Spencer who's an alleged Nazi neo-nazi whatever he is white nationalist I'm not sure and it's true the Spencer organized people to come now

[8:18]

the Spencer organized people to come now if you hear in the news that there's an event pro and con Confederate statues don't you think that's going to attract people who live locally and want to keep statues who are not Nazis we're just here wait so a bunch of people including Nazis are going to this event there must be people on both sides there must be people there representing all kinds of different views why don't I guide well I don't know I go to if even Nazis can go why can't I go so here's the thing don't you believe that most people heard there was a pro and con Confederate statue event figured that there would be all kinds of people there even if they knew that there would be a bunch of neo-nazis there now if I heard personally if I heard there were gonna be neo-nazis at a rally for Confederate statues what would I assume about that I would assume it would be

[9:20]

about that I would assume it would be like every other neo-nazi event there would be twelve guys with signs and everybody else would be ignoring them or laughing at them wouldn't you assume that it would be you know just twelve losers just like other do not see events I wouldn't even assume it would be an important part of the larger event I mean I might be wrong about that as I would have been but that would have been my assumption so when you say to people reasonable people would have thought that more people were there than that because it was really a typical Confederate statue Pro work on event there have been others of them they draw diverse crowds wouldn't you expect it to be just like that and once you once you point that out people will say well okay it's possible that some people could have come not associated with the the races but and then they narrow their

[10:20]

races but and then they narrow their claim a little bit they say if you show up an event at an event with a bunch of Nazis with tiki torches and there's there's shouting anti-semitic things and you don't leave if you don't leave doesn't that make you sort of one of them notice how the claim gets smaller and smaller to which I point out that Anti Fog did leave the press didn't leave and I would imagine that anybody who came there who did not associate with the Nazis why would they leave they came to they came to promote their point of view they came to see what it was all about maybe some were just curious personally would you leave if you came you saw some Nazis over in the other field and you saw some people ready to fight them and the press was over there the police were over there and there were tons of people who didn't seem to be in either group people who were there for they were local they're finding out what's going on they were there for historical reasons if you

[11:20]

were there for historical reasons if you were in that group would you leave right away I'm not sure I would I stay and watch what was happening and I would certainly not think that my freedom of speech had been curtailed because I can see other people doing other stuff it wouldn't occur to me that I would become a neo-nazi because I saw neo-nazis I'm pretty sure that looking at neo-nazis doesn't make me a member so when you point that out that it's actually pretty reasonable they given there were a lot of people doing a lot of things in one place and they were all there for their own purposes that nobody's going to leave because some other group they don't like is also there it's not really a reasonable assumption about all people sure some people might have left that makes sense but certainly not all of them and then people generally narrow their claim they narrow it again to yeah but anybody who is there to support those Confederate

[12:21]

is there to support those Confederate statues it must be Nazis or they must be a least racist now that is moving the goalposts because that's not the original claim there's a big difference between saying that the president called actual marching neo-nazis find people which didn't happen and when they've narrowed it all the way down to yeah but you know I think anybody who advocates for statues no matter what group they belong to no matter what they say about racism they must be actual racists and this is not the original claim so do people say oK you've completely convinced me that my original belief was totally wrong but the President does say in public that people who support the Confederate statues for free speech or any historical reasons

[13:21]

free speech or any historical reasons are good people so that's the part he does say he says that publicly he said it a number of times that was never the conversation nobody was calling the president a big ol racist just because he was on the set well probably something big but it's not the original claim so people will say they're still right even though they've gone to an entirely different claim that the president says often in public as do other people personally I don't agree with the Confederate statues but it's true that people are on both sides of it were not racist but here's the here's the interesting thing having gone through this you know fact and logical path both you and the person you're talking to hypothetically here have completely missed the main point of it all can anybody tell me what was the main point of it all and how does this completely miss it none of this is on point because the only thing that mattered to the point of the president

[14:24]

mattered to the point of the president is what the president's understanding was of who was at this event if you believe that the president understood that only neo-nazis were there or sympathizers well then that would be pretty bad they he called them fine people but in what world do people like you and I were the president normal people in what world do you hear that there's a pro and con event about statues even if there are neo-nazis there who would think that there are no pro statue people who are just ordinary people who want to maintain some historical perspective who would assume would the president assume that there were no people there like every other Confederate statue think that there there's no people there at all who are just good Patriots who'd like to keep their history that would not be a reasonable assumption the worst-case

[15:25]

reasonable assumption the worst-case scenario is that the president didn't have good detailed information about who was there do well do you know who else did not have good detailed information about who attended all of us then the press didn't know you didn't know I don't know the president's critics they don't know nobody really knows who was in attendance so to address that I just send a message just before I got on here and and just to wrap up that point if the president believed that there were people there who were not racists that's all the story requires it doesn't matter who was actually there if it was a reasonable assumption you had it I had it most people had it there was a reasonable assumption that it was a diverse group that probably had all kinds of people there now that claim of

[16:26]

kinds of people there now that claim of course is challenged and just before I got on periscope here I sent a message to someone who had contacted me who was at the Charlottesville events and purports do not be a racist and purports to have attended the event for historic preservation free speech reasons now I've asked him if he wants to go on my app interface by went up and make himself available for anybody who wants to ask are you a fine person so if he says yes I don't know if he will yet actually I'll let us see it let's see if he's answering as they answered yet I just said a minute ago but he has agreed to go public and he's agreed to take interviews so it's a real person who was really there who is not a racist who you can talk to and you have to wait to see

[17:29]

can talk to and you have to wait to see if he signs up for the Apple tell you but if he signs up for the app this this is my startups app that lets you talk to an expert on any topic and the expert can set their price now he can set his price as zero if he just wants to get us or I can sign it out a few bucks and people have to pay to find out who was really there personally I'd probably put it I probably charge for it but any reporter would be able to contact it and say what do you believe were there other people like you there what did you see were you were you marching with than the O Nazis or what are you just sort of in the same zip code for your own reasons so we won't have to wonder he's already agreed to to be interviewed so he's you know he's given to me his name he's going public to me anyway I won't give you his name until we decide what's the best way to do it or if we ever do and yogi you'll be able to talk to him and

[18:31]

yogi you'll be able to talk to him and I've also invited him to be a guest on my periscope but there might be a reason that he doesn't want to do that so so there you go now let me ask you this let me ask you this why why am I the one who has to find an actual eyewitness and interview them does that make you think there's something wrong with the news business ask yourself given given the prominence of this issue ask yourself what other news organization looked for people who were there and interviewed them now the New York Times did but they buried it in a much longer article about the badness of the president and it was only one person do you think there was nobody else now on Twitter or somebody said their niece

[19:33]

on Twitter or somebody said their niece was there and she's a fine person and I I sent a message to say you know does she have any pictures so there and I know at least I know at least one other person who I believe to be a fine person who was there but I haven't contacted that person as well somebody actually knew I didn't realize that they were there and so will will say we'll find out all right another here's another changing topics a little bit I would like to recommend what I call the twenty year rule to apply to all politicians and to all of us so should apply to the people but it matters more for politicians and the twenty twenty year rule goes like this if you did something bad 20 years ago or more let's just let it go because you're not the same person and it's very important when you've got candidates and a president who are in their 70s because I'm seeing lots of stories floated to try to embarrass Joe Biden for things he

[20:36]

try to embarrass Joe Biden for things he said in the 70s or 80s or whatever a long long time ago and I get why people do it and you know politics is a bloodsport and people aren't on the teams and you know and and the quotes do seem relevant they do seem relevant to whether or not he's a progressive or not but it was 20 years ago plus I I discount everything that anybody accuses President Trump of more than twenty years ago I discount anything that Bernie Sanders did more than twenty years ago when Clinton was running for president I said publicly and often I discount anything bad she did twenty years ago and I applied to Biden as well so if he want to see consistency you should come to my periscope it's the only place you might say it both sides get a pass for more than twenty years ago now I was amused by Joe Biden's announcement in which he

[21:36]

by Joe Biden's announcement in which he he laid stake to the claim that he would be the savior of the the nation's soul the nation's soul because the soul of the nation you know who we are the national character he says is being assaulted by the Trump administration Trump in particular and then he he's in the best position to save us from the degradation of our character and our soul now let me ask you this if the best approach you can come up with against your opponent is literally something that's magic like a sole imaginary I guess I should say not magic the nation soul is kind of imaginary that's the worst problem if I were to go to my garage get in my car

[22:38]

were to go to my garage get in my car drive to the grocery store buy some groceries drive home cook up those groceries and eat them how much did I worry about the soul of the nation not really at all if I get my paycheck and I put it in the bank and then I write some checks and I buy some stuff how much was I bothered by the degradation of the character of the United States not at all how about right now you're listening to this periscope I'm giving you this periscope I'm sipping my coffee let's see if I can sip this coffee and manage to enjoy it given that the soul of the nation and the character of this great country is degrading let's test it tastes suspiciously the same as before the

[23:38]

suspiciously the same as before the country's soul was diminished tried again yeah that's that's the same as the pre 2016 coffee taste I don't think it changed I don't think it and my cat has decided to try mirror
I'm trying to figure out where does the the degradation of the soul of the country how does that play out in the real world I thought well obviously it must be destroying the economy oh well the news today is that the GDP is surprisingly higher at three point two percent and it's screaming okay so maybe maybe the soul of the nature the soul of the nation doesn't really hurt the economy so much because that's screaming but obviously our military red ok our

[24:40]

but obviously our military red ok our military readiness as better than has ever been okay so it doesn't directly influence that but certainly our negotiations which I well know our bad soul problem doesn't seem to be having any impact on our negotiations for trade with China but I'll tell you what climate you know climate change no and we'll really see the impact you kind of go down the line it's a little bit difficult to find out what part of sorry kept interrupting what part of that bad soul is actually affecting us or could affect us I honestly haven't noticed I've noticed that the people who are politically very active are quite worked up but I'm pretty sure that's the media's problem not media's problem but the media's fault alright I'm gonna have to this this cat

[25:40]

alright I'm gonna have to this this cat seems to want to get in on the picture
all right see if she couldn't stay here for a while I guess not all right so how how weak and I would say poorly advised is Biden's campaign if he picked the only thing that's imaginary and has no impact on human beings yeah if Biden had said I'm gonna go in there and get you a health care I'm gonna lower your student loans those are real things I'll tell you the the main thing that Biden did is make birdie look like a better candidate have you noticed that compared Bernie Sanders says yeah I want to give you a free free he'll universal national health care and free college now you say to yourself well I don't know how to get there I just don't know how to you know how we can have enough taxes how you'd ever get

[26:42]

can have enough taxes how you'd ever get that approved I don't how to get there but I don't hate those things and they're very specific I mean if you could get there wouldn't you like to have good education and good health care for everybody just don't know how to get there then Biden comes on and he can't even give you a rational end point how would we even know if our soul was better is you know when do I know that my national character is moving in the right direction how much richer am I gonna be when when my soul is repaired so pretty weak the president has referred to Joe as sleepy Joe I like it because it sounds like sloppy joe but the president's going after the energy element he also calls Abidin unintelligent I'm trying to remember if the president has called any other any of the other candidates unintelligent did can anybody tell me of all the many Democrats who were running is Biden the

[27:44]

Democrats who were running is Biden the only one that the president has identified as actually not very bright I think it's only him right which matters because if he called everybody dumb I think waters is the only other person what's her first name maxine waters is the only other person that he's called unintelligent recently I'm probably wrong I'll bet he's called some other people unintelligent anyway so he says that Joe doesn't have sleepy Joe doesn't have enough energy and intelligence to deal with China and it's funny because these things are going to become what you what you look for in vitamin so because the the president is tuning everybody's brain to look for energy and intelligence coming out of Joe Biden what do you think we're gonna see he has

[28:46]

what do you think we're gonna see he has tuned our brains to look for any any situations where Biden does something that isn't smart now what are the odds that we will see things that at least in our opinion looks not smart Biden is the human gaffe machine the you know gaffes are almost his is brand so whether or not you call a gaffe a question of intelligence I would argue usually it's not it's just a slip of the tongue you know bad bad wording it's gonna look like a lack of intelligence so as as a branding it's pretty powerful you're gonna start attaching everything that the Biden does that isn't quite perfect you're gonna attach it to that label because the president has tuned your mind to it he's also tuned your mind to the low energy thing now I said it first the low energy thing didn't feel strong my first impression was because I don't see that in Biden Biden actually looks

[29:48]

see that in Biden Biden actually looks to me like high energy like he seems like a an unusually fit energetic strong speaker especially for his age so I don't really get that vibe but but here's the brilliant part about it and I don't know if the president is thinking about it in these terms but it works to his advantage by by making that something that everybody's looking at it turns it into something that Biden has to address because when your opponent brands you whatever that brand is if it starts to stick or even if it makes people start to think of you in that frame he has to counter it now what do you do to counter a claim that you have low energy think about it what would you do
do to counter the criticism that your energy is low well one thing you might do is accuse your accuser you'd say no my Energy's not low your energy is low

[30:51]

my Energy's not low your energy is low but that wouldn't work because Trump is famous for high energy so you couldn't you couldn't turn the install back so that's the first good thing the second thing is you either have to somebody say get in the comments you either have to run yourself ragged like Hillary Clinton did to the point where she couldn't even you know she was probably physically and health-wise exhausted by the end of the campaign so it might be the Trump is actually goading him into working at a pace there won't be good for Biden's health he is act after all 76 years old in great shape as far as I can tell and and I again I I like to be the guy whose things that are true and good and bad about both sides Biden is in really good shape that's he's got some good role model stuff going on there for a man of his age you just have to compliment that

[31:51]

his age you just have to compliment that he's in good shape
so we might see Biden to try too hard so here's the thing imagine Biden's personality the way it is now it's it's sort of he has this firm energetic kind of approach and he squints too much when he's trying to be when he's trying to be serious this is Biden I'm squinting to show you houses Here I am look at me squint I love people who are not white oh he's squinting it must be true so he's got that squint thing but now imagine that the president has branded you low-energy if he goes even a little bit out of his comfort zone I'm talking about Biden and tries to add energy to the personality that he's presented to the public for a hundred years

[32:52]

hundred years he's gonna look artificial he's gonna look fake and he's gonna look inauthentic so if the president can brand him as low-energy and cause him to try to increase his energy outside of his own comfort zone this is very much like a Sports trash talk where you just get in the head of the other person and you get them to act in a way that's not their sweet spot so the president has very cleverly gotten Biden's head and create and planted a seed with sleepy Joe that Joe is gonna need to show he's got a little more energy than people thought and that's gonna make him look a little bit inauthentic so it could be one of the best persuasion plays you've ever seen but we won't really know unless we see if Biden takes the bait all right CNN's ran a story today about how Archie Bunker the old a racist

[33:54]

how Archie Bunker the old a racist character from was it the 70s on television and what does CNN need to do when there's not enough bad news about the president they actually make up they they associate the president with fictional characters literally from a television show because that's just one of the ways that they couldn't brand him badly he has the TV show was all of the family and one of the characters the main character Archie Bunker was his character was a racist and so they're trying to run stories about Archie Bunker a 70s television show that could not be less important today because it's sort of all they have they're kind of running out of stuff to say about the president so that's a good sign the president is calling the the Russian

[34:57]

president is calling the the Russian hoax Russian collusion hoax he's calling it a coup which I agree with that word I think that word is actually accurate give given the facts that are in evidence now it may not been a massive plot in which they were all conspiring with a leader and you know they had meetings and stuff like that but it is pretty clear that there were a whole lot of people who wanted this president him and took steps to make it happen in in a way that was outside the electoral process so that that part seems pretty cool like he's also said it's worse than Watergate
there are very few things that I can enjoy as much as watching the President of the United States after the Muller report comes out go on television and say that the coup attempt against him was worse than Watergate it's just delicious it's just it's the perfect

[35:58]

delicious it's just it's the perfect it's the perfect package yeah it's just the if this were a movie that would be one of the movie scenes you know you can even end the movie on that it imagine making a movie because there will be a movie about this someday excuse me there will be a movie about this someday probably several movies about different parts of the president's journey I think there will be a movie just about the election process but there might be another movie might be movie two about you know the first term and you can imagine that the movie for the first term would end with the president going on TV and looking at the camera and saying it's worse than the Watergate and just end the movie go to go to credits because at that point the movie would have developed that in fact what was done to the president was in fact worse than Watergate I think that's a fair accurate statement and after two years

[37:00]

accurate statement and after two years of pundits saying that the president's actions were worse than Watergate it would just be a perfect moving ending where you just see him look at the camera and go it was worse than the Watergate cut to credits and then before the final credits you know how sometimes if it's a real based on a real thing you want to have the closing credits before the credits say the actual real-life events that happened you know they do this with crime movies where they say and then somebody pled guilty and served seven years or whatever but at the end you'd say in 2019 the president negotiated with China and got a good trade deal the economy hit you know whatever percent North Korea decided to work with the United States it would be this list of insane accomplishments like the kind of accomplishments no president has probably the I would argue I'm no historian but I think there's a case to be made that two and a half years into

[38:02]

be made that two and a half years into this presidency it's the best first term anybody's ever had if you look at results wise I think there's a strong case for that you know a very strong case for that so it'd make a great movie all right I hear Democrats are threatening some administration White House officials with jail if they do not agree to investigations I would like to go on record as saying that I fully support this president and anybody in his administration who resists further investigations on the same topic that Muller has investigated yeah if it's other stuff that's a different issue but as the president said and this was very provocative I don't know if it's true or not so the president suggested that Muller must have looked at the president's tax returns and I thought first of all it's fascinating that we

[39:02]

first of all it's fascinating that we don't know the answer to that and it's even more fascinating that the president doesn't know the answer to that how in the world do we not know if Muller looked at Trump's tax returns isn't that weird how do we not know that it feels like we would know if he did look whereas if he didn't look maybe we wouldn't know so it does seem like you couldn't really do a collusion investigation without following the money so whether or not it's true that Muller looked into Trump's taxes and whether or not you know how how deeply he looked we don't know not a not a damn will Hollywood touch Dilbert okay all caps guy in comments anyway so we don't know whether Mulder looked at stacks returns but wouldn't you assume

[40:05]

stacks returns but wouldn't you assume he did because I can't imagine that the that the investigation was complete unless he looked at least maybe the last year of taxes I mean it might not have been every tax return forever but wouldn't he have to at least look in a few few years find out if there are any entanglements over there so I love I love that the president has put that out there that maybe his tax returns have already been looked at by the best people in the world to look at tax returns whoever Muller hired we don't know all right Trump also was I guess he was on Hannity talking about the Democrat candidates for president and he was going through the list and saying which ones were were you know irrelevant which ones were strong and then when he got to Buddha judge the president said he was basically he was rooting for a Buddha judge he doesn't know if he'll

[41:06]

Buddha judge he doesn't know if he'll make it all the way doesn't think he'll make it but he's rooting for him so in other words there was only one candidate that the president unambiguously said positive things about Buddha judge now isn't that clever think about it isn't that clever because Buddha judge is first of all the the first openly gay candidate at this level running for president I think so so the president just says good things about him because he doesn't have to worry about him and he can you can get for free it's like free money laying on a table he probably doesn't think Budaj edge could be a serious contender for the job they think he's right I don't think any of the candidates could be serious contenders but by by being nice to Buddha judge especially when Buddha judge is fighting at least in public he's acting like he's got a

[42:07]

in public he's acting like he's got a problem with tents it kind of was perfect one of the things I love about Trump's approach is that if somebody leaves free money sitting on a table Trump will pick it up this was free money saying something nice about Buddha judge being the only one he doesn't criticize was free money he probably isn't making been a judge any stronger places by by saying something positive it's been it's probably the opposite and and he gets he gets credit for being nice to the first openly gay candidate so he wins he wins on that it was just a clever reply I noted that Booker and SWA well to two candidates running for president two guys have both said that they will pick a woman as a vice president running mates what do you think of that I think that that's a that's a mistake it's not a mistake to

[43:09]

that's a mistake it's not a mistake to pick a woman it's a mistake to for them politically to claim that and here's why we're coming off an election the last election in which Hillary Clinton was running for president and and you know got more votes I mean she was as close as you can get the president she actually got more votes and still wasn't president SWA well and Booker I think are accidentally they're trying to be positive they're trying to say that they're inclusive and stuff so that that part seems good but the thought that they would assign the woman in the second place position doesn't really work as well as it would have if Hillary Clinton had not won the popular vote because you don't really think of in 2019 you don't think of why wouldn't it be great if a woman became vice president doesn't that feel like too little and too late if you're a woman

[44:11]

little and too late if you're a woman and you hear that from the man yeah we'll put a woman in second place that'll make you happy would that make you happy if you're a woman who thinks you should have a woman president would what having two guys tell you that they'll put a woman in an unimportant role of vice president how in the world does that make you happy it feels like a step backwards because Hillary was sort of top-shelf why are these these white guys well white guy sois well and and then Cory Booker why are they saying the woman's in the second position does that feel right I know it feels like there was no right answer because they can't say we won't but saying that you will kind of doesn't feel right either I I feel like the Democrats lose either way there's no winning position on the woman as vice president question all right I

[45:15]

noted that there's a poll out saying that the world is sadder and angrier than it's ever been so I think it was a Gallup poll saying that people worldwide so we're not talking about the United States but worldwide people are sadder and angrier than they have ever been now first of all who knows if these kinds of polls are accurate or really saying what we think they're trying to say but nowhere in the reports does the news business blame itself does it yeah we're social media doesn't it seem to you it's not really about the world being a sad or worse place because the world unambiguously is a better place the world just keeps improving and it's improving quickly and it's improving on just about every measure of goodness almost everything is moving in the direction but people are getting sadder and angrier isn't it obvious what's causing that now

[46:18]

isn't it obvious what's causing that now it might be different if you're talking about some of the African nations who don't necessarily have the same kind of news we have don't necessarily have social media in in as much penetration but I think if you're looking worldwide it's pretty much an impact of the business model of the press plus social media which is ruining all of our attitudes and making us sad and angry how could it be anything else because everything else is going well on average not for every person but on average alright those are the big stories of the day as I said before there were there were two articles yesterday and the day before in which I became part of the news I talked about the news and then I became part of it because the Washington Post if he didn't hear the first part of this periscope the Washington Post a writer it was accusing me of trying to promote the false idea that the president was

[47:20]

the false idea that the president was being mischaracterized with his fine people quote and they referred to me in the article as far-right that's right the Washington Post just wrote I just read a major opinion piece in which I was called far right do you know who else they put it in that category in the far right mic Tsarevich and Jordan Peterson now do you think any of the three of us are far-right I don't think so
so that isn't even close to a good label for any of the three of us I think there's somebody else in the list Oh Steve Cortes and you would not in my opinion would not even close to qualify as far-right conservative yes
yeah they referred to me as being reinvented as a trump booster that part's right but they earlier in the same piece called me far right now

[48:23]

same piece called me far right now that is as wrong as you could possibly be I most of my periscope audience is literally angry happy for for for talking about transgenders and sports which I'm not going to talk about today we're talking about you know abortion things in the way they don't like basically all kinds of stuff from universal health care to universal education although I don't know how to pay for it so so anyway so watching the fake news come after me it's a good sign now a lot of you are prompting me in the comments to talk about ben shapiro now ben shapiro has a nuanced i as i understand it i hope i don't have the facts wrong but i saw a little clip of him talking about it and it looks like here's his understanding of the Charlottesville fine people's situation is a little bit down the hoax funnel so Ben Shapiro does

[49:25]

down the hoax funnel so Ben Shapiro does not believe that the president referred to the actual neo-nazis as fine people so he so he's compatible with the facts that are very clear he does believe that that whoever was there was also marching with and I believe he used the actual phrase of marching with right this is the cognitive dissonance point so anybody you see who says well yeah they can't be fine people if they were marching with or if they are talked out of the marching with which is pretty easy to do they say yeah but they attended a rally were it was organized by races so I think Ben Shapiro is somewhere down there in the funnel and
you know I talked about the the hoax funneled where where the claim gets narrowed and narrowed people ask me you should go talk to Ben Shapiro about that I believe that if Ben Shapiro talked

[50:29]

I believe that if Ben Shapiro talked about this in something like four minutes we would be on exactly the same I say this because Ben Shapiro is smart and he seems to be you know influenced by logic and data and that if I framed it the way I framed it here on this board he would probably be on the same page but be uncomfortable without the president handled it which I agree with if your bottom line is that the president blew his public communications and created a you know a negative thing out of it we agree you can't say the president handled this right even if he said all the right words because the outcome was bad and he you know he's he's responsible for his own communications even if they're taken out of context so I agree with Ben Shapiro that the president it was I think Ben Shapiro said me charlottesville thing was the lowest point of his presidency

[51:30]

was the lowest point of his presidency and we totally agree on that from the perspective of you know history that was absolutely the lowest point of his presidency which is different from saying he was supporting races now to bet I would say it doesn't really matter who was there and it doesn't really not matter why they were there as soon as you start debating who was actually there and where they find people you're actually not on the right conversation it feels like you are but you've left the conversation without noticing it the conversation that started this is what was the president's state of mind and what was he thinking and who was he referring to when he said there were some fine people on the keep the statue side all that matters for whether or not a bad thing happened is what was the president's understanding of who was there and one and the

[52:31]

of who was there and one and the reasonable assumption is that the that the president assumed the same thing I did the same thing most people did when they're the story there probably were very few people in the country who heard that there was an event about Confederate statues probably all of us thought it was a first group and probably there was a few people and every imaginable point of view that is the reasonable assumption so if you say the president is a reasonable person who made a reasonable assumption and even the media doesn't know exactly who was there it doesn't matter who was there this is this is the point that nobody could really hear it doesn't actually matter who was literally on the ground there or what they were thinking or if they're a racist all that matters to understand the situation not not all the matters in terms of the impact but all that matters in order to understand the situation is that the president in everybody who saw

[53:32]

that the president in everybody who saw the situation in the first few days should have reasonable bully believed that there were all kinds of diverse people there for diverse reasons that's the most reasonable assumption and has never been disproven there has been no detailed reporting of exactly who was there we don't know now that's why I've offered that one of the people was there and I'll see if he has answered me yet and I offered that I would talk to him either on periscope okay I don't have an answer yet all right but what will happen to the world if I do a public interview with somebody who was there is not a racist and just likes historical statues would that interview be you know be presented everywhere when it would

[54:32]

be presented everywhere when it would everybody be talking about it so yeah thanks god I'm glad we cleared that up not there's no chance that actually even interviewing somebody who was there who by the way sent me a picture of himself posing by the statute so the person I'm talking about showed me a picture of him on the site so I'm pretty sure it's a real person who's really there the media would destroy that person you say I don't think so I don't really don't think so but it's certainly a risk all right I see people prompting me to talk about the president's tweet in which he reversed the I and II and chief I'm on the I'm on the team this has there are probably just real typos but once he makes them he probably doesn't care and they work in his advantage because it draws attention to his tweet whatever I don't think he does that

[55:33]

whatever I don't think he does that intentionally I think that's exactly what you see I if you looked at my tweets you know my whole body of tweets there are spelling errors there you know words words missing I put instead of a I did that yesterday just totally normal stuff so I wouldn't make too much of that all right I will talk to you all tomorrow