Episode 692 Scott Adams: The Power of Simplicity, Comparing Things Without Loserthink, Normality

Date: 2019-10-13 | Duration: 58:30

Topics

My new book LOSERTHINK goes on sale 11/5. Pre-order: https://bit.ly/2NRammu Our ally Turkey versus our ally the Kurds Some say the deep state is just protecting the constitution “Mitt Happens” tee shirts for sale A PSA comparing youth football and cigarettes A fair and rational comparison? Potential for success and the ability to avoid addiction Liberals and conservatives have had a thought inversion Liberals say “not normal” is bad, unacceptable Conservatives are embracing a President that’s different
The impeachment “show” What if the Democrats succeed? How would our current issues be handled by either side?

If you would like my channel to have a wider audience and higher production quality, please donate via my startup (Whenhub.com) at this link: https://interface.my/ScottAdamsSays

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

## Transcript

[0:11]

hello everybody it's good to see you as always come on in gather round grab your you-know-what you know what's coming because this is coffee with Scott Adams and you came to the right place you clever people have your alerts set you're ready you're prepared I would say probably the future and leaders of the world I think that's obvious but if you'd like to get your morning off to the right start I know you would hello from Connecticut all you need to play along with the simultaneous appears the cover of our classes tying the chalice to tankard a thermos of plastic canteen the Grail a goblet a vessel of any kind filling with your favorite liquid I like coffee and now for the dopamine hit that gets your day off to the right start the best part of the day the thing that makes everything better at the simultaneous sip join me now go

[1:20]

ha ha ha ha whoo that was an extra good one well let's talk about all the fun news yes the fun news so have you noticed that the simpler the message the more effective it is that's one of those ways you can predict the future now not with any sense of certainty of course because the future is a is a pretty squishy thing but one of the tricks that I often use to get an advantage in guessing what's going to happen next or to guess what messages are more persuasive is that the simpler the message the more easy it is to spread and become viral and to repeat in it and it sticks in your head better more people can understand it so if you have a contest between a simple message and a complicated one usually you want to bet on the simple one all other things being roughly equals let me give you some examples build the wall now of course there's

[2:23]

build the wall now of course there's tons of pushback against build the wall but everybody would agree that was a super effective organizing slogan how about this one no collusion complete compare build the wall to all of the arguments about open borders and bubble is a complicated argument against build a wall look at Russia collusion this big complicated story of who met who who talked to who gave a dossier versus Trump's message no collusion no collusion now it helps to be on the right side of the facts as apparently the president was but I'm just making the point about the simpler messages are more powerful now here's where it gets more relevant if you're talking about the Ukraine phone call President Trump says it was a perfect call simple but a little general the

[3:26]

call simple but a little general the perfect allow is a little bit of disagreement here's what the other side is saying that the phone call was quote and you've noticed they all use the same term digging up dirt and Biden now I've said that a better way to a better way to explain that call there's that the president was pursuing one of the highest priorities of the presidency which is to make sure that the Republic is not corrupted by a foreign power and certainly if the highest polling the person running for president Biden had some kind of financial connection to Ukraine it would be the highest priority of a sitting president to get to the bottom of that find out if there's anything there to be worried about so my explanation of what the president was doing is complicated it's got you gets the Constitution what's the job of the president you have to consider our history with Russia

[4:26]

history with Russia you have to look at the priorities you have to see that our other priorities are under control the economy is going well so that makes other priorities higher it's this big complicated story which has the advantage of being completely true but complicated compared what I just said and I believe every part of what I just said is true highest priority it matters if the guy polling number one has got as in the pockets of Ukraine and the information we already have shows that you certainly got a conflict of interest because you're not going to sell out your kid so that much is sort of obvious so if you look at the complicated story it's all true top priority president's job clear evidence and the public domain that nobody is arguing about that 100 Biden is making a lot of money from the foreign country and but it's complicated it's it can't really compare with daytime dirt on your opponents so in

[5:29]

daytime dirt on your opponents so in terms of messaging in terms of persuasion the Democrats have a clear advantage because they can express their their view of the world their movie with a simple phrase digging up dirt on an opponent you've noticed that almost all of the Democrats and the anti-trump errs use the same phrase right they always say digging up dirt now what's the difference between digging up dirt on your opponent and doing your job as a president to further a legal and totally appropriate investigation of something that's the highest priority in the United States well you know let's say those messages are hardly competitive digging up dirt is a strong message all right I've got this woman with the curves what do the people who agree with President Trump say in terms of moving our troops out versus what to his critics say the people who think it

[6:30]

critics say the people who think it might be a good decision and I don't know I would have to say I'm still in the fog of war if you're asking me to order big you asleep back the Prez this I would say anybody who has a firm opinion about this curd turkey situation I don't trust is the the only reasonable opinion is we don't really know how this is going to turn out we just don't know we know people are that will die but maybe they would have under every other conditions we don't know what the alternative is we don't know and I'll talk more about that but to support the president you would have to come up with some kind of a story that recognized the 400 years of history of the Kurds you would have to know that there occurred inside Turkey and Kurds outside Turkey you would have to know that they're Kurds that fought with us and we considered allies still do I guess but also Kurds that they are the good ones are associated with were

[7:31]

good ones are associated with were clearly even we consider the United States plus Turkey consider terrace see how complicated against there's a safe zone involved there's turkey you also use the safe zone to repatriate Syrians who moved into Turkey when the Syrian war started that's a legitimate goal so it gets this big complicated thing and then Turkey is a NATO ally and there's defense contracts and there's Russia so in order to back the President on this decision you've got a pretty complicated story what is the other side have what are the anti-trump people have here's what they have abandoning our allies ouch compare this big complicated four hundred year of Kurds and Turks and allies and Russians and all that there's so complicated you can barely hold the dinner in your head at the same time versus abandoning our allies how much

[8:35]

versus abandoning our allies how much that's really powerful and you can see it in the news what is it that Americans want to do less than abandon allies not much you know the United States has a long history of allies being really the main thing that keeps us alive you know starting from the revolution you know the Revolutionary War we had to go get allies in that case in France when World Wars 1 and 2 happened thank goodness we had allies and thank goodness our allies had us as allies and right down the line whenever whenever there's you know the the trouble goes down but there's 9/11 or anything else you look to your allies the United States consciousness and no brand I hate to use that word for this but just our self-image you know who we

[9:37]

but just our self-image you know who we are as a country our patriotism all of that is really tightly wound around the idea that you that you respect and play well with your allies just as we expect them to play well with us so the message abandoning your allies is super strong persuasion but let's talk a little bit more about the other side oh and then and then another simple one is that president Trump's tried to do this trade deal with China right the pro Trump side is all complicated because you've got IP theft I think several different ways you've got some fencing a little production there you've got a whole bunch of different tariffs situations what are they doing what are we doing what's there what's their long-term you know strategic military goal I mean I can just go on and on about the complexity of why pushing back on trade makes sense here's the other side trade

[10:40]

makes sense here's the other side trade deals never work that's it trade deals never work that's the anti-trump side look how simple lettuce everybody can understand that even though it's not true first of all who said trade deals never works well if you never do them right they don't work I would argue that almost every international deal we make is a trade war it's just as somebody one quickly it doesn't look like a war because somebody's surrendered right away during their first negotiation dammit I'm gonna sign your contract it's the best I can yeah we're in a continuous state of trade war it's just some are bigger some are smaller some are faster somewhere some are not and you know baby maybe Trump's on the verge of winning of this one with China although I'm still skeptical I think we're better off decoupling them all right so simplicity goes to the Democrats for I'll say the

[11:42]

goes to the Democrats for I'll say the the childlike arguments in the cases of the Kurds and the cases of the cranes situation there is sort of an adult way to look at it and a child the way to look at it and I noticed that the Democrats keep picking the child view the simplify it until you've lost all the nuanced view here are some questions I have not heard answered in the news on the whole Kurdish turkey situation so maybe you can help me in the comments these are big questions number one what is Turkey's goal with the safe zone what exactly does their end state look like does it look like Turkey is managing it but there's some local control does it look like they don't care who's in charge as long as there are military's there so they can do what they want with that area are they looking to kill all the Kurds are they looking to move the

[12:43]

the Kurds are they looking to move the Kurds in or out of the safe zone are they looking to find an agreement with the Kurds what exactly is turkey trying to do we don't know so it's hard to hard to be you know strongly for or against anything that's happening there because I don't know what they're trying to do exactly I mean you know in general that they're moving in and controlling that territory you know you they want to move some of the refugees in there and we know that they're not happy with the Kurds but what exactly do they think is the end state that turkey wants to have there what's that look like I don't know do you here's one here's the biggest question why are the Kurds who are in that area that turkey is moving into not asking the United States to moderate peace talks is that not conspicuously missing right isn't that a gigantic gap in the whole narrative on both sides I guess one of

[13:47]

narrative on both sides I guess one of the most natural things to happen if he had a big partner like the United States and your big partner was moving out but obviously has good relations you know long-term relations with turkey and turkey is attacking you and you don't think you have a chance against them because the Turkish army has just been overwhelmed the smaller Kurdish forces were you know probably less armed what would be your natural inclination wouldn't you ask the United States to try to work out a deal where you could keep some Kurdish autonomy or maybe part of the safe zone would be still Kurdish but maybe the rest of it they could use to repatriate the immigrants would any of that work so the question is this can you support an ally who's not asking you

[14:48]

you support an ally who's not asking you to at least help as the first-stage to negotiate a peace deal why is that missing why is it that only war is the option that's being talked about have you ever seen a situation where only war was talked about the Kurds just immediately grabbed their weapons and went to go fight they never said as far as I know unless I missed it they never said please United States can you get us in the meeting with the Turks and we're trying to work this out so we we understand they have more power than we do but we want to work out whatever is our best deal that doesn't involve us all getting slaughtered where is that now it could be that they have such a bad history for years of animus between Turks and Kurds it could be that they just both know I can't happen now what do you do in a situation where neither side wants to not fight it looks like the Kurds prefer

[15:49]

not fight it looks like the Kurds prefer fighting based on the fact that I don't see them asking for anything else it looks like the Turks prefer fighting based on the fact that I'm not aware of them asking the United States to work something out with the Kurds maybe it's happened but the news is not reporting that so it leaves us in this this unknown situation so let me let me ask you this let's say you're in public somewhere and you come upon a fight and it's two adult males they seem about evenly matched just for this example this is not a perfect analogy to Turks and Kurds but just for this example let's say they look about evenly matched and it's obvious that they both want to fight and they're starting to fight it's clear that neither of them wants to back down they want to fight what do you do do you break them up I don't never I would never break up a fight between two people who want to be fighting I just wouldn't do it because I wouldn't take a chance of getting hurt that's two people

[16:49]

chance of getting hurt that's two people doing what they want to do roughly evenly matched let them fight it out yeah there might be there's a pretty high risk of grievous injury but they're both making that choice so I tend to look at that differently than if you come upon a fight where one obviously doesn't want to be there if one is trying to get away or one is obviously uh you know mismatched but maybe doesn't know how to back down in those cases that would be tempted to step in but I'm looking at Turkey and the Kurds and all I see is two groups that want to fight do the Kurds who are in northern Turkey want a deal or do they want to carve out a homeland which would require fighting
so this kind of gets us to where do we have the greater connection in other words is our obligation to Turkey as a NATO ally greater than our obligation to

[17:52]

NATO ally greater than our obligation to the Kurds who we fought with and have a a military sort of you know a bond forged in in war which is pretty strong a bond so I looked up the the mission of NATO because I wanted to remind myself what that was about because I wasn't sure since NATO was sort of formed as a Soviet Union defence thing I wasn't sure if it was still oriented specifically toward Russia but here's at least from Wikipedia here's Wikipedia's description of NATO it constitutes a system of collective defence meaning all the dozens of countries that are part of NATO or a collective defence whereby it's independent member states agree to mutual defence in response to an attack by an external party so if an external party were to attack any member of NATO then all of NATO would be activated so

[18:54]

then all of NATO would be activated so if there were an external enemy fighting Turkey we would be bye-bye agreement our NATO agreement we will be bound to defend turkey against external attack assuming that the external attack was not also a NATO member I suppose that can happen but under the normal situation where a NATO member gets attacked by an external force we have an obligation to join the NATO side so now you but you ask yourself wait a minute who's doing the attacking this looks more like Turkey attacking the Kurds well here's where it gets kind of a gray area because the Kurds have a long history of doing terrorist attacks against Turkey and I don't think Turkey makes much of a distinction between the ones that are living in Turkey although they would call it

[19:55]

they would call it the Kurds might versus the ones that are right on the border and associated with a with the with the terrorists I think you saw the way the United States treated the Taliban for harboring al Qaeda and the Taliban is not who attacked the United States but we sort of treated them all the same didn't we we kind of said Taliban al Qaeda you're a little too friendly we're just going to treat you all the same Turkey is treating all of the Kurds the same as some of the Kurds is that fair that's what we did we went after all of the Taliban not some of them right it seems to me that given that Turkey has a legitimate claim that Kurds in general attacked Turkey on a regular basis and that the only way they can stop what

[20:56]

that the only way they can stop what they think will be future attacks for more Kurds would be to have more get more control over the Kurdish lands that are adjacent to them it's looking a lot like Turkey has a NATO argument even if it's not the cleanest one that because the Kurds are associated with or represent or are a little too close to Kurdish terrorists that they can move to control Kurds it's not a bad argument and I would say that if if there were any such thing as a court they had to decide which of our two allies to back when they start fighting by the way I can't think of another example of this can you can you think of a case recently where two allies military allies of the United States fought each other there probably are plenty of examples I can't think of one but I'd love to know how that went anyway if there were some kind of a court where the United States had to pick a side because they're both our

[21:57]

pick a side because they're both our allies but they're fighting each other I think the NATO treaty would be the winning document you know I think if there were any kind of objective court they would say oh this was it this is an ugly one because we're siding with it the Kurds in Syria but we also sided with Turkey and NATO which is the which is the ruling relationship I think a court would side with backing turkey even if he ate it I mean I think that the NATO agreement would just be a stronger commitment and that the the Turks have demonstrated that the Kurds are a danger to Turkey now you could argue that the Kurds should be a danger to Turkey you could argue that the Kurds deserve a homeland and those are those those is all being fair fair enough things you know they may they may fear Turkish domination and

[22:57]

may they may fear Turkish domination and that could be bad in a lot of a lot of ways but but you still have to back your NATO ally or what is NATO what does NATO mean if you're not gonna back your ally against someone who's not in NATO alright so those are my questions and without knowing the answer to those questions it's hard to have an opinion about whether what Trump is doing is good or bad now that won't stop people from having opinions but I would as I argue in my new book loser think which is available for pre-order and thank you to all the people who are sending me on and on Twitter a lot of people are sending photos of showing the receipt that they bought the book so thank you Adam for Adam Townsend for suggesting that and for recommending that people look at the book but anyway

[24:00]

that people look at the book but anyway in loser think one of my main themes is that people are not going to comparing things and if you're looking at what Trump is doing pulling out you would have with the pulling out from the Kurdish area there you would have to compare it to the alternatives to have any kind of a rational opinion have you seen anybody do that have you seen anybody who opposes Trump's decision to pull out our fifty or so troops have you seen anybody who opposed it described what it would look like if they stay how long would they stay it would turkey then say oh no we can't attack the Kurds because there are fifty people somewhere in the general vicinity that we don't want to hurt I think the Turks would do what they're gonna do anyway wouldn't you let me ask you this if the United States had a terrorist threat that was assembling on his border right on the border you know let's say it was Mexico and we

[25:03]

you know let's say it was Mexico and we knew who they were and we knew that some of them were associated with terrorists etc would we not act against them because somewhere within those hundreds and hundreds of miles somewhere in a well-defined area we'd probably know exactly where they were there were some British troops you know and we wouldn't want to accidentally kill any British people but we also know where they are and we also know where the bad guys are and this scenario would we stop acting militarily against the bad guys were in hundreds of miles of well identified area where the 50 British troops were not would we really hold back because there were 50 troops somewhere where we could easily avoid them I don't think we would now when I say easily avoid remember it's war so nothing's easy and maybe something would get her so it makes perfect sense that we would get out of

[26:03]

perfect sense that we would get out of the way just in case but I don't think turkey was gonna hold back their national interest is pretty extreme in this case and it's it's greater than ours unfortunately you know they have more immediate life-and-death national integrity reasons to control their border than we have in unfortunately in treating the Kurds that we fought with the way would like to treat them which is better tough choices and so it seems once again the Trump is making the adult decision doing the hard thing because the easy thing wasn't available you know nobody had the option of the easy thing there were just hard choices Trump looked at hard choices and he picked one is he right don't know don't know

[27:07]

so Smerconish on CNN had a law professor on and he asked this question this is about the Ukrainian phone call so bouncing back and forth from topics here yes good president Trump used as a defense that it was a legitimate legitimate issue to hold back funds until we had a better idea about Ukrainian corruption because it wouldn't make sense to release funds into a corrupt system so Smerconish yes would that be a legitimate defense against the Pietschmann s-- and i don't know what the professor said yes or no it doesn't matter because my point is that Smerconish didn't ask quite the right question because the more right question is is there a national interest of the United States to understand if the the person leading in the polls to be President has a foreign entanglement that feels like a perfect defense to impeachment because that's exactly what

[28:08]

impeachment because that's exactly what the president was asking and it's our highest priority and it's his job why didn't spring on the SHAC questions isn't that the better question why am i the only one who ever says it I feel like I'm the only person who's ever who's ever phrased it the way I just did top priority we have evidence in public domain 100 Biden has a financial connection presidents top priority and for the people who say oh you should have had the FBI look into it it's not the president's job if you've ever worked with any large organization you know that until the bosses agree the underlings just don't do the work at least not effectively so I'm sure if the president could have just assigned it to somebody he would have done that if he thought it would actually happen there's an article I tweeted around so I'm a Good Morning America there's an author who's a sort of an anti-trump or type

[29:10]

who's a sort of an anti-trump or type but he admits that the tapes deep state is real except here's his twist so he says of course the deep state is real but they're they're defending the Constitution they're not bad guys they're not trying to reverse an election they're just trying to protect the Constitution here's what I say about this everybody who says they're just trying to protect the Constitution check them for a long black robe if they're wearing some kind of a long black robe and they happen to be on the Supreme Court they might be involved in protecting the Constitution if you see somebody in the military entrance perhaps carrying a weapon that person might be involved in protecting the Constitution if you see an idiot on

[30:11]

Constitution if you see an idiot on Twitter or somebody writing a book or in an interview who is none of those things I just mentioned not in the Supreme Court and not in the military one thing you can be sure of is they're not they're protecting the Constitution they have their own interests and the use of the Constitution as their little fig leaf to say well protecting the constitution one of your tells for illegitimate opinion meaning it's not what the person actually believes it's just a political opinion is if you say it's to protect the Constitution and by the way I'll say this no matter which side is saying it doesn't matter if yes the conservatives are saying it about their topic doesn't matter it's the Liberals as soon as you hear somebody say yes these normal people in the government these deep Staters are protecting the Constitution that is just almost certainly because we can all

[31:14]

certainly because we can all interpret the Constitution any way we want right you interpret it as you can have guns and any kind of gun you want under any condition it's in the Constitution the person sitting right next to you says no that's not what it means I read the Constitution it's all about a militia should have a militia you're not a militia so give me your guns so anybody who is protecting the Constitution but they're not on the Supreme Court is not your friend the last thing you want to hear is that somebody's doing something to protect the Constitution if they don't have a robe on I don't want to hear all right so that's enough of that Mitt Romney I don't know if he's behind it or not but somebody who seems to be supporting Mitt Romney printed up some shirts the same it happens now here's my advice to you

[32:16]

it happens now here's my advice to you if you if you're making a shirt for yourself don't associate yourself with you should associate yourself with something good happiness puppies money power there are a lot of things that are good that you could associate yourself with but do not associate yourself via a shirt with a witty saying that makes you think of somebody's last name and translated immediately to so MIT happens I will put that in the Hall of Fame of bad ideas Hall of Fame all right
did you - here's some more stuff there's a PSA that was running and guess I got a little news that was comparing youth football to smoking cigarettes and the idea was that kids playing football are

[33:17]

idea was that kids playing football are getting concussions and if you were concerned about the health of children you would treat youth football the same way the same way you would treat youth smoking cigarettes you should treat them both as something that's bad for your health now a lot of people's push back and said my god football is amazing we can't have people saying football is bad let me give you my opinion I'm pretty sure someday we will be amazed that we let kids play sports that were almost guaranteed to give them concussions because we know now that concussion is just a fancy word for brain damage and in many cases too many cases it's permanent permanent brain damage now it might have small effect it may have a large effect it might not affect you until later in life but it is brain damage so I'm going to say that whoever came up with a PSA comparing youth football to smoking cigarettes a plus because you've made

[34:20]

cigarettes a plus because you've made people talk about it and you made people think about it and you made people try to argue about it but in the in the presence in the the process of arguing about it you probably got people to talk themselves into the fact that Spur do dangerous stuff here here's my tip for you are you ready if something typically requires a helmet to do it don't do that let me say it again so you're some of the best advice you'll ever have in life if there's an activity that typically requires a helmet don't do that you just ask them for trouble so and in the comments I've seen what about bicycling bicycling yeah bicycling is among the most dangerous things you could do now I know that people ride bicycles because they like it and they understand the risks and they take them so you know you're an

[35:20]

they take them so you know you're an adult and you're in the country or where you have that freedom so I'm not going to tell you that as an adult you should not ride a bike because it requires a helmet scheme similar yeah baseball if you're batting soccer if you're if you're heading the ball in soccer consistently like you know you're playing competitive soccer and you're heading the ball all the time don't do that just don't do that though we're a little bit smarter about had damage or brain damage now now I have unfortunately personal experience with this my stepson had a bicycle accident with a helmet with a helmet and had permanent brain damage so much so that it probably contributed to his death later and drug overdose because he lost he lost all of his ability to judge risk he couldn't tell how dangerous things were after that after the injury and I know so I agree

[36:24]

after the injury and I know so I agree with I agree with youth football being compared to smoking I think that's a fair comparison persuasion wise and rationally it's a it's pretty good now I also have a big problem with with schools pushing sports in general somebody says life is risk sure it is don't don't we prevent children from risks we prevent children from risks all the time there's a million ways we prevent children from risks there's something that of all ravva consid that I had him on my periscope awhile ago and he said that you know in the past maybe your physical strength is what determines your success more recently it's more like your intelligence would be your determinants of success he's predicting that in the fairly near

[37:26]

he's predicting that in the fairly near future the biggest predictor of success would be your ability to avoid addiction it is one of those thoughts that just hits you like like a pile of bricks because you realize it's probably true because you know once we get to the point where I don't know maybe there's a ubi and robots helping us out and we've solved most of our big problems your biggest problem as a human will be avoiding addiction and if you look around at your adult friends how many friends do you know adults who don't have some kind of an addiction some of them might be medically prescribed some of them might be legal a lot of them are legal but addictions nonetheless they're you know I don't know too many people who aren't on some kind of drug so it's unusual in my world maybe that's a California thing I don't know I don't know the where I was going with this I

[38:31]

know the where I was going with this I forgot my point is that now that we know how prevalent concussions are and that they are permanent brain damage in many cases it's not most and and we know exactly which activities are likely to give them to you I'm wondering if you could you know have a corollary to Duvall's thought that of avoiding addiction is going to be your main determinant of success here's another one avoiding brain damage might be your primary indicator of success here I'm going to throw addiction into head injury and make them the same category those people who protect their brains and it sort of nurture them have far more likelihood of success than those people who put their brain at risk one way you could put your brain at risk is by drinking too much smoking cigarettes doing drugs lost you know lots of

[39:33]

doing drugs lost you know lots of addiction ways to put your brain at risk but playing sports are they require you to wear a helmet there's a reason you wear the helmet and obviously it doesn't help enough so I think that protecting the integrity of your physical brain addiction plus avoiding things that would give you concussions probably are going to be some of the strongest indicators of future success all right a Twitter follower today tweeted out something very interesting I'm balancing all back-and-forth on topics here but I know you can keep up andrius Backhouse he's got a PhD in economics does research stuff he created a map of all the violent incidents between Turks and Kurds the PKK or the you know and the YPG that I guess the two groups occurred

[40:34]

YPG that I guess the two groups occurred between the beginning of 2017 and sold recently so just two years ish more than 6500 fatalities so there were 6,500 incidents of Turks and Kurds getting into violence enough so that they were researchable so forget about things that were so small that they didn't get the news or anything these are just the researchable moments of violence 6500 of them in about two years now how does that change your opinion of whether the curves and the Turks can work things out like they could work things out but getting back to the point of would it be fair to say that the Turks feel that they've been attacked by an outside force they got a pretty good argument that they've been attacked by an outside force and so that certainly has a NATO implications

[41:42]

if you were bad at grasses never mind that you change my topic have you noticed that the the anti-trump errs let's say CNN MSNBC and people on Twitter they're starting to say that the president is not normal well as if that's bad it's pretty much the reason he got elected because he's not normal that's exactly what his supporters wanted they wanted him to be non normal in a specific way that he delivered but what does it mean when you see people say that something is weird non-standard non-presidential not normal what do all of those things have in common he's not presidential he's not normal it's unusual it's non-standard it's not the way it's done well all of those have one thing in common they don't mean anything they actually don't mean anything isn't you know the the calling something not normal

[42:43]

something not normal is let me put it this way I spend a lot of time in my life driving teenagers from one place to another so if you're an adult and there are any kids in your life you've probably spent a lot of time listening to them talk in the backseat while you're driving them from one activity to another so I've spent countless hours listening to teenagers talk candidly because you know they'll forget that there's anybody listening and talk to each other what is the main thing that people that teenagers will say about other teens you know they of course they'll say all the normal things that you'd expect you know they're smart or dumb or attractive or not attractive all the usual stuff but one of the most common things is they say is weird that people are weird and not normal but they don't mean not normal in some like major you know brain problem or anything just not quite the way they are the feeling

[43:46]

not quite the way they are the feeling that something is not standardized the way they would like to see a stain is off-putting that there's there's sort of an emotional biological natural reaction to anything that's non-standard and so I'm watching this weird inversion happening in which liberals and conservatives have changed sides have you noticed that if you were to define what a conservative was ten years ago you'd probably say something like well conservatives are the ones that don't like things to be weird we just like just keep it normal just don't be weird with your long hair you hippie and your drugs just go just just do the standard things that have worked before be conservative that's why you would have thoughts in a very general way you know traditional values and there's a religious element etc and you would have

[44:46]

religious element etc and you would have said that liberals would be defined by hey let's loosen up let's let's try some different things let's say you know experimentally I can I can live my life this way you can live your life that way you're fine I'm fine we're just different diversity everybody can do their own thing that would feel like that was the old liberal view but when you see the anti-trump errs revert to he's not normal he's non-standard he's non-presidential they've completely flipped sides what what did the Liberals say when the president used profanity in his rally speech let me give you an oppression of every flaming liberal who saw the president use a mild profanity in a rally speech [Music] what will we do it's the end of the

[45:49]

what will we do it's the end of the world who did that used to be it used to be the Conservatives wouldn't you imagine that if a politician used a bad word in public that the Conservatives would rush in and say yeah we don't act like that that is not the way to be presidential that's not the way it's been done that's not doesn't lead to good traditional values our kids deserve better it's all coming from the other side wonder what a Conservatives say about president Trump's show I like to use the word show because the president clearly and can in it's obvious that it's intentional puts on a show that's a little bit separate from you know who he is as a person or who he is as a politician he puts on the show and the show has many you know many benefits that help him in a variety of ways it gets people's energy up and you know takes attention away from his critics

[46:49]

takes attention away from his critics and everything else but what one of the conservatives say about his show that is very non conservative love it can't get enough on it we'd sure like to see another one so it seems that and and I guess conservatives always had the the seed for this for this and what I mean by that is one of the things I love most about Christians without actually being one so I'm not a believer we don't need to get into that but I'm simply not a believer but I'm a big fan of religion because I see that it has many benefits in people's lives and I like benefits so if people can get benefits out of religion I'm all for it as long as it doesn't hurt me in some way but one of the things I've always most appreciated about Christians is they'll all forgive this idea you know you'll hate the sin love the center that's a really strong

[47:50]

love the center that's a really strong concept and you can see that with Trump with Trump I think Christians are true to Christianity in the sense and that they're saying you know I don't love the sentence not approving of the sins but I kind of like the guy because I think he's he's moving us in a productive direction and so the Conservatives seemed true to course forgiving they are forgiving of this president and man as he given them a lot of things they need to forgive there's a lot of forgiveness going on there but it is also their core belief a core a Christian belief is that you can redeem yourself maybe you used to do some bad stuff if you used to do some bad stuff but now you don't what is a Christian say about you you're awesome right compare this a Christian sees that you did some bad stuff but you've

[48:52]

you did some bad stuff but you've clearly changed your life and now now you're you know working for the good Christian says that is ideal because we're all sinners we've all made mistakes I'm gonna judge you by what you did about it that's a powerful thought I'm not gonna judge you by the sin because we all sin I'm gonna judge you by what you did about it now in the legal sense you know you have to have legal penalties and stuff to keep society working but how you think about it personally in the Christian Way is not judging the sin not judging the sinner that's the sort of God's job but I'm definitely gonna judge what you did about it did you fix it did you fix it if you did I'm good with you what did the Liberals say if you're a little bit weird we can't deal with it if you're non-standard it has to be stopped if you are unusual maybe we should put the foot

[49:53]

are unusual maybe we should put the foot down on that if you're not presidential in the way it has been done classically and historically we're not comfortable with that so the Liberals have completely shifted with the Conservatives on sort visceral opinion of non-standard behavior so now the non-standard behavior is completely owned by the Conservatives weirdly enough and they have but the Conservatives have an established very very effective very powerful base of philosophical thought that allows them to do that effortlessly it's effortless for a Christian to forgive it's the basic thing it's the most basic thing they do alright I think I had one more point oh it this is it so for a variety of reasons I don't want the president to be impeached so in my

[50:57]

the president to be impeached so in my perfect world the president would not be impeached but if he's impeached and not removed from office I'm not gonna say that I won't enjoy the process I might I might sort of enjoy the show I might enjoy where that leaves I might enjoy that the Republicans would get up subpoena power in that situation and lots of things will come up about the Democrats I might enjoy the show but I was thinking today what if and I'm not predicting this happens I think it's hugely unlikely but what if Democrats succeeded and impeached the president and let's say that there are enough Republicans were mad about the Kurds that that even the Senate goes with it imagine if you will imagine if you will the president Trump removed from office there's an interesting thing that would happen after that and I was just sort of you know gaming it through in my head

[51:57]

you know gaming it through in my head like why would have what would that look like what would the world look like after that now forget about who takes over let's say let's say pence fills in for a few months and then Elizabeth Warren or somebody else becomes president what happens next well here's the thing what happens next is Scott winning so hard it would be harder than anybody ever and what I mean by that is everything that I've said predicted or promoted would look to be validated when President Trump if you were replaced getting a lot of incoming messages from the same person friend of mine is drunk texting me from another country so what I wondered why can I text was just blowing up at this early in the morning they had a friend in another country at another time zone he's he was a drunk texting that's funny

[53:02]

texting that's funny anyway what was I saying oh if President Trump left office you would have a new president and and here's and here's where I'm going with this what would the new president do about China and trade talks would the new president say President Trump you were wrong all along to hold to have a trade war I don't think so it wouldn't matter if he had a Democrat or Republican wouldn't anybody who became the new president no matter how much they hated the old president because Trump has already shown that China can be made to be flexible because this phase one he's talking about it's obvious that China is willing to do some stuff that they weren't gonna do before and it's stuff that we care about and seems to make a big difference wouldn't you think that the next president has to keep the trade war going or at least benefit by the fact

[54:03]

going or at least benefit by the fact that Trump finished it and we got a good result I think Trump is on the verge of being treated as the rightest president who has ever been right about China am I wrong that you that even the Democrat would have to take on Trump's stand with China or else they would look like idiots so I think no matter what Trump is going to be right about China I think he's going to be right about the other trade deals as well because the day that Trump Lee is probably Congress can approve the u.s. MCA right as soon as Trump is gone then everybody probably the Congress could say okay Trump's gone let's approve his deal so I think you'd be right on all the trade deals I think that at least the Conservatives would always say he got great judges in you know the other side will think the opposite I think that
let's say North Korea what will happen if if somebody who decided to get tough

[55:04]

if if somebody who decided to get tough with North Korea became president I think things would go south fast I think that North Korea would make Trump look like a genius if you put in another president before before North Korea it gets handled in some way and that's going to take years probably so I think he's gonna look right on that I think that Syria is gonna be a basket case no matter who's president and it's gonna look smart than we got out as much as we could so I think Trump will be vindicated on the economy trade Syria North Korea probably nuclear power because I think you know you see even the left starting to say yeah yeah we need nuclear power Bill Gates his company one of the that he invests in Terra Power has several designs that don't have any of the dangers of the old nuclear power stuff and we're ready to go

[56:05]

go so Trump is gonna look like he's right on nuclear power which makes the climate change argument not as powerful as it used to be because if you're doing everything you should do whether you believe nuclear whether you believe climate is at risk or not that takes away a lot of the argument and I don't think that Trump is opposed to green technology and if nuclear steps up as I predicted well he's gonna look right about that too and then there's immigration everything that Trump does on the immigration looks bad because it's Trump all right so imagine you remove Trump you
you Democrat in there what the hell is that Democrat going to do with immigration that is much different than what Trump is doing whoever it goes in after Trump is gonna have the same problem and they're probably gonna have to get tough on the border because otherwise people will just stream across the border and

[57:06]

will just stream across the border and no word no ripped no Democrat could really abide that situation so I think if Trump ever got impeached you would have this weird thing happened where he would be the moment of impeachment he would be you know one of the top disgraced presidents of all time five years later even after being impeached and removed from office if that were to happen again I don't think it's going to happen he would be considered one of the greatest presidents of all time because everything that he did would start to look like they were good choices you know five years later you say oh I'm glad he got us out of Syria glad that economy is going well glad we've got nuclear energy glad we got deals with North Korea China he's gonna look like a genius in five years even if he gets impeached so the best way to make President Trump look great is to give us

[58:09]

President Trump look great is to give us a couple more years of a Democrat as president I think you're gonna see things a little bit more clearly when you've got something to compare all right boo is saying hi back there she apparently has something to say to me and I will talk to you all later