Episode 1118 Scott Adams: Polls, Antifa Versus BLM, My Police Brutality Solution, Shy Trump Voters

Date: 2020-09-09 | Duration: 1:09:49

Topics

Find my “extra” content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com

Rough Transcript

This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

Transcript

---

• Will you take the vaccine?

• President Trump, the promise keeper

• Paul Krugman should help Antifa/BLM

• Antifa’s founding and history

• Kamala told Jacob Blake…she’s PROUD of him

• President Trump nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
[0:07]

hey everybody come on in it's another terrific day it's gonna be one of the best and it starts with the simultaneous sip which makes everything better we can do a scientific test yeah this will be a controlled scientific test some of you close your ears and don't listen to this you will be the control group and the rest of you will hear the simultaneous sip and participate and then we'll compare who had a better day you just watch all right are you ready half of you randomly cover your ears and don't listen to any of this all you need is a copper margarita glass attacker chelsea stein a canteen jugger flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day the thing that makes everything better at least for the people who are listening it's called the simultaneous hip and it happens now go

[1:08]

yes coffee is the best choice there is some controversy about it but really there shouldn't be
so i was just a moment before i signed on i was uh looking at somebody wrote an article making this observation which is funny when you hear about it remember when mueller testified and everybody said uh wait a minute we've been waiting for however long it was two years or whatever for mueller's report and now we're finding out that mueller was not even mentally capable because when he talked everybody looked at each other and said um you do know there's something seriously wrong with him right now he's you know done a great public service for years so i don't want to mock him but it is nonetheless true that he did not look like a competent senior citizen and now it's biden and it feels like is there some kind of theme going on with the with the

[2:11]

theme going on with the with the democrats that they don't mind putting a white person as you know the standard bearer for their cause as long as that white person is clearly mentally incompetent
is it an accident that the two people they've depended on to save themselves from trump are old white guys who are clearly past their expiration date what is going on over there do they feel like they can't put a a capable person of color or a woman as their standard bearer they would still just just hold this in your mind the democratic party the party that cares about you know inclusivity cares about everybody getting an equal shot cares about systemic racism on on two different occasions they've had a chance to take out their their moby dick you know the great white whale trump as their champion

[3:14]

trump as their champion an elderly white man who was clearly incompetent is that the group you won't run in your country i don't know all right so here's some good news to start off maybe who knows pfizer and bio and tech are both confident they'll have a vaccine um ready maybe as early as october for approval anyway doesn't mean it'll be approved but they might have it by then there was a one vaccine trial some other company i forget who who paused it because somebody got sick in a way that gave them some concern chances are it's not because of the uh the vaccination but abundance of caution they're going to check that out now i'm really curious about how many of you would take this vaccination because the thing with the vaccination is if you encourage everybody else to take it but then you cleverly don't take it yourself

[4:17]

then you cleverly don't take it yourself that's kind of the best risk management isn't it the best you could do if you were just like a total sociopath and you didn't care anything about other people and you were just looking out for yourself wouldn't your best play be to vocally say oh you guys you should all take this you know take that vaccine get that vaccination but then you don't do it yourself because as long as enough other people do it it's going to stop the the spread you just need to get to x percentage of people who are immune and then it's just going to die off in a few weeks so your best play is to get other people to believe it but don't privately believe it now this puts you well all of us and i would say me more than most of you it puts me in a moral dilemma it's a moral dilemma and it goes like this like many of our politicians

[5:18]

like many of our politicians such as the president and nancy pelosi etc
etc we are all and i say we as in public figures everybody who's a public figure is going to have to make a big decision
and do not do not underestimate how how much pressure that puts on public figures because i am well aware that my opinion influences other people to make decisions now i'm not sure i'm totally comfortable with that but i don't mind if i've influenced you to let's say change your vote you know because i think that's fair we live in a country where everybody's you know jockeying to do that all the time some people do it better than others i think everybody would agree that's fair game getting people to change their political opinion as long as you're doing it you know responsibly

[6:18]

and of course i heard tons of feedback from people who changed their vote in 2016 because of something i said lots of people said that i also heard people who made bets large bets larger than i think would be wise based on things i've said about what might happen so when it comes to this question of whether i personally will take this vaccine i'm in i'm in a tough spot aren't i think about it because if i were to say publicly i'm not going to take this thing it would cause other people not to take it
it i don't know how many i mean it might it might be five people in the world but it could be ten thousand it could you know i'm sure i've changed more than ten thousand votes if you count the entire time i've been talking about politics so i would personally be responsible simply by role model you know cause and effect

[7:19]

role model you know cause and effect i would personally be responsible for maybe thousands of people making a life-changing medical decision but beyond that it's not even the the 10 000 or so just to pick a number who might be affected directly it also causes a change to hurt immunity you know that's the wrong word but you know what i mean it causes a change to the whole dynamic so it's not just the people directly affected it's we're all sort of in this together right if you don't get the vaccine i'm more at risk if i don't get the vaccine you know if you know what i mean so what do i do what what is my moral obligation well i've decided as a as my strategy that i will not make a decision prior to hearing the full medical case but i will not make my decision

[8:21]

case but i will not make my decision purely on medical considerations some people will i won't because my decision has to be a risk management decision that looks up the whole because if you're a public figure you're influencing people you just can't there's just no way you can get away with that now i could be a weasel about it and tell you i'm not going to tell you you know so that you could be not influenced i can tell you for sure that i i legitimately don't know what i'll do because i haven't heard the story and i'm going to wait i will wait until the last moment before i make a decision because i want all the information i can get like right before the you know the needle goes in my arm if i think i'm going to do it like the moment before the needle goes in i'm going to be on google i'm going to say hold hold on give me five seconds update latest news vaccinations okay we're good to go but if i see

[9:23]

okay we're good to go but if i see one story that pops up that says uh maybe you want to double think this or rethink it might take another few days to think about it my i will tell you my bias have not made a decision my bias is toward getting the vaccination so i want you to know that in advance right because transparency is going to be kind of key here i'm either going to tell you i'm not going to tell you which is transparency in a way and that that might be the most reasonable thing to do if i don't want to influence your decisions because that would be i'm not a doctor right if i'm not a doctor i shouldn't be influencing you on this so i might i might recuse myself and just not tell you if i got it but that doesn't feel completely responsible to me
me i feel like my special case

[10:26]

i feel like my special case given that my role is helping you you know frame and understand your world i feel like i have a greater responsibility than just going silent so this is a tough one i'm going to weigh this you'll find out how it goes i'm biased toward getting the vaccination even if it's dangerous you know even if there's some risk to me personally i'm biased or getting it
it i could change my mind that's just where i'm at at the moment all right um trump has now announced and i don't know the details but he says he will be substantially lowering medicare premiums and prescription drug prices bringing them down to levels that were not thought possible now the first thing i love is if you notice that the president consistently uses um the phrases nobody thought it was possible you know everybody thought it couldn't be done he says that about just about everything

[11:27]

he says that about just about everything he does nobody thought it was possible and of course the first thing that you think is well that's not true i'm sure somebody thought that was possible you know it's it's almost never true that nobody thought something was possible that got done but as a persuasion little add-on it doesn't cost him anything he never gets pushback when he says this phrase nobody thought it was possible he if you if you think about it i don't know that he's ever gotten pushback for that because there's always something else that they would rather criticize him for so he gets this one for free and quite seriously i've thought of adopting it you know adopting the technique and just start throwing it in there now and then i'll just say uh yeah dilbert's in 2000 newspapers nobody thought it was possible everybody said it couldn't be done
you should try it as a try as a little uh accent

[12:27]

uh accent enhancer to everything you say nobody thought it could be done even for ordinary stuff it's like i went to the store got a loaf of bread nobody thought it could be done everybody thought it's impossible but i went to the store i bought a loaf of bread it just makes everything sound better and i always laugh every time he does it because because it works in its own in its own little subtle way because you don't question it it just sort of just goes past your defenses because you're not really guarding against it which is brilliant um where was i talking about oh yeah now i don't know if he can do this meaning who knows if he can accomplish this feat he did the he did make a change that looks like it would make you know drugs more competitive and we would have the most favored nation uh right to buy them at the same price as anybody else which should lower the prices but i

[13:28]

which should lower the prices but i don't know what he's doing about medicare premiums but it's a great thing to say right before an election it's one of the things a president can say before an election to practically buy votes with our own money the one thing an incumbent can do is bribe voters with their own money i'm going to take some of your money and i'm going to put it over here some of your tax money to lower these medicare medicare premiums so that's always a good trick because the people who are going to lose that money that they're they're not thinking of that as directly as they're thinking of the lowered medicare premium so it's a good it's good persuasion who knows how much of a difference he can make we'll see i would love to see by the way and i can't tell me if you've ever seen this comparison we've seen endless comparisons of the president's fact checking and not winning the fact checking

[14:29]

checking okay [Laughter] and has anybody done a comparison of the president president trump's promises and how well he's done keeping his promises is that anybody looked at his list of promises and then what he's done to it versus other presidents of either party and what promises they made in that one what percentage of the promises they accomplished now that would be a hard thing to compare because if somebody had only one promise but it was a big one and they kept it well that's pretty good right but if somebody had lots of promises and they were kind of trivial do you care if they kept 90 of them if they were mostly trivial so you know it's not a direct comparison but it seems to me just anecdotally observationally and i'd love to know if it's accurate it feels to me that trump is the best promise keeper as a president we've ever

[15:31]

promise keeper as a president we've ever seen and by promise keeper i don't mean he accomplished everything he promised but i mean that you can just look and you can see he's fighting like a wounded weasel to make those promises happen it's just not working in every case because some of them are harder than others take building the wall has president trump put a great deal of effort into building a wall i'd say yes i'd say he put his you know put his reputation on the line you know i'd say he laid it down on the line i'd say he pushed every door tried every doorknob he had lots of resistance he's got you know a few hundred miles of mostly replacement wall which is probably really good compared to not having hundreds of miles of replacement wall and it feels like he's just maybe the all-time best at at least attempting attempting and making a serious attempt at keeping promises i don't know i'd

[16:32]

at keeping promises i don't know i'd love to see a historian lay that out um here's a question could antifa and black lives matter the organizations be destroyed by having an economist on their team because the problem with antifa and black lives matter the organizations you know not the idea of black lives matter that's that's something everybody agrees with but the the organization it seems to me that their more radical uh propositions for getting rid of systemic racism is to get rid of the entire system and it feel i feel as though antifa many of them are artists and maybe black lives matter i don't know how many of them are economists or stem people but i feel as if they needed an economist and i would be you know maybe willing to help fund an economist

[17:33]

help fund an economist so that so that antifa and black lives matter could have the most coherent argument for their own case because you want them to make the best case possible because we live in a country in which democracy and freedom of speech are the the mother's milk as we like to say of the of the nation so i'm always in favor of even the people i disagree with making a really strong case because if i can't if if we can't prevail against the best argument well how good is your argument you know maybe if you can't beat somebody else's best argument maybe that's telling you something about your argument right so i'm always in favor of making the best case even if i disagree with it that's how our system thrives so shouldn't antifa and black lives matter have some good economist uh richard

[18:34]

economist uh richard what's his name reich reich one of the big critics of president trump yeah krugman how about paul krugman why doesn't paul krugman help antifa and black lives matter sort of game out and model what their preferred world would look like because i think if you gave them help it would destroy them because black lives matter and antifa completely defend depend for their support from their support from anybody who's not directly involved in the organization they depend entirely on people not understanding what they're up to am i right now i'm not talking just about who are the secret people funding them you know is it george soros trying to destroy the world is it some shady you know intelligence group from another country is it russia is it china you know i'm not even talking about that

[19:35]

talking about that i'm just talking about the fact that the the people who may have no influence outside influence at all who just genuinely believe that some kind of a socialist looking world would be better than this capitalist world just let them make their best case give them the best economist in the world how about a nobel prize winning economist paul krugman would you like to see a paul krugman assistance for antifa and black lives matter of course you would um that would end all of them i think i think that would be the end of all of them they would just they would just explode um
um all right rasmussen has some new information about uh people who don't want to tell you their political leanings and so the question was uh were you less likely than prior elections to tell people your political preference

[20:37]

to tell people your political preference now keep in mind that the nature of the question is are you less likely than prior elections which allows that you were already even in the prior election not going to tell the truth so how many of the people whether they were already there or not how many are additionally there remember so this is on top of the people who are already there and not wanting to tell their preference in the 18 to 39 year olds it's 24 percent 24 of the younger younger people who could vote 24 these are the likely voters 24 of them don't want to say what their political preference is so that's pretty telling and that's the highest percentage now what is it about young people that would make them the least likely to want to publicly say with their political preferences

[21:38]

political preferences well i would think young people would have the most social pressure which tells you something we also see that women are uh substantially more afraid than men
men to say their political opinion huh why would women be more afraid than men to voice their political opinion especially given that women are far more likely to support biden and biden is a perfectly socially acceptable person to support i feel as if there are a number of women who might support trump and maybe just can't say that out loud as well as these young people we'll find out so the actual polls where people are asked who they're voting for appear to be looking not so good for trump at the moment in the battleground states i think michigan is like plus nine for biden now do you think that there are enough shy

[22:38]

shy trump supporters to close a nine point gap that's a big gap do you think there are that many shy trump supporters well according to rasmussen you can't rule it out now of course you know we don't know anything because data in general is unreliable just a sweeping generalization about all data it's all you know especially about politics it's all unreliable uh and all polls are unreliable and you know except for the actual vote which might be unreliable this year too
so some people are saying biden is not socially acceptable that's just not true biden is completely socially acceptable because there's no recorded i don't think there's a recorded case of a trump voter abusing a biden voter is there is there any recorded case of

[23:40]

is there is there any recorded case of that but there are plenty of recorded cases of trump supporters getting in trouble just for wearing a hat or whatever uh all right um so just because there isn't enough noise in the news eg carol is in the news again she's got some defamation thing against trump because he said that she was not telling the truth about her accusations or something along those lines said some bad things about her maybe and now the because it was said on company time when the president was president uh the the government ends up footing the bill to defend it so the department of justice or whoever is defending it but the government is going to defend the president and people are mad about that but apparently that's just the rule if he if he did something that is causing him to be sued in the course of his job which is what happened it is the government's role to

[24:40]

happened it is the government's role to defend him they can they can take the case if they want to and they have uh so then there's a story about rochester so rochester had some uh protests and riots and looting and burning and stuff and
so the rochester police leaders resigned and the chief of police in rochester was black that's right the black chief of police was sort of forced to resign and you know he chose to resign but the pressure was on because black lives matter was feeling that the police were prejudiced so the black chief of police got so much pressure that he resigned and here is the the thing that this made me uh suggest
if you were going to try to design some way to get to a end of the police brutality

[25:41]

a end of the police brutality issue you know some way that we could all be happy that it's handled or doesn't need to be handled or we're doing all we can just something that would look like progress how how can you do that and here's my suggestion i think that uh i'm going to make a guess that there's something that exists like an organization of black police officers does that exist could somebody tell me if there's any kind of i don't know fraternal or you know social or political group which is black law enforcement people who just have something that they feel like they want to work on in common does that exist i'm assuming it exists if it doesn't exist it wouldn't be hard to form one because there's such interest in in this you know topic so suppose you formed or already had a group of black only black law enforcement people

[26:41]

enforcement people and they stepped up and they said this we would like to be the ones to negotiate with black lives matter or whoever else wants to negotiate with us to figure out what we could do in a practical sense what what we could do that's different and if we agree to it the black law enforcement officers we will help you help you sell it help you sell it to everybody else but in order to have credibility i feel as if we're in a place where you have to be racist you have to actually be racist to maybe get something useful done that's non-racist in this case the racist thing would be to have the black police officers take the lead because anything that you know ident anything that segregates is automatically racist just by definition but it might be a kind of racism that everybody says because of the moment

[27:42]

moment okay that makes sense you know you can say it's racist to just let the or or to promote the um black police officers taking the lead on the question of whether the police are being too abusive to the black population it's racist there's no way around it because any anytime you know you divide people by race it's by definition racist but it might also be practical and it might be the kind of racism that everybody would say ah okay just this once i see where you're going with this makes sense it's just kind of practical maybe more credible so let me put that idea out there that if black lives matter wanted to actually get something done that would be one path that i think would be credible but there is no evidence that they actually want something small done the the the evidence would suggest that there

[28:42]

the evidence would suggest that there are a lot of different opinions about what needs to be done and not all of them have to do with just solving this police thing i would say there are as many as or maybe more who want to change the whole system of capitalism and you know destroy it from the bottom up in which case i wouldn't help at all because they're not looking for a solution in that case all right here's a new new set of social standards i would like to promote as you know i've said that we need to add
add two sets of uh let's say etiquette or manners that were not necessary in in prior generations one of them is that you should have 48 hours to apologize or criticize or clarify if you get in trouble for something you did so everybody gets 48 hours to say oh i didn't mean that or clarify it or apologize whatever and then just accept it and move on and the other is my 20-year rule that says if somebody comes up with your

[29:44]

that says if somebody comes up with your i don't know high school yearbook and it's more than 20 years ago it just doesn't matter that we're all so different 20 years later that we shouldn't penalize anybody for anything they did 20 years ago you know unless it was you know murder or some kind of terrible thing like that um but here's another one i'm going to add to the list and it comes because there's a new new hampshire police chief refused to reinstate an officer who was fired over racist text messages so the police officer is um accused and incredibly obviously for sending some text messages to his wife only to his wife they had some unstated offensive things that sounded racist to the people who saw the messages now i say that the new law the new rule should be this

[30:45]

should be this anything that you said privately cannot be used against you publicly in terms of making you look like a a bad person if it's if it's in the commission of a crime then yeah i mean if your text messages you know show you're guilty of a crime that's different but if it's a thought crime something that would exist only in your head and you've only communicated it to someone who you have a reasonable expectation of confidentiality let's say a spouse if you have a private message to a spouse or lover and somebody decides to make that public or even to talk about it in this case i don't know if they know the details but the the public is talking about it as if they know what these messages are about i would say that the rule should be whoever took the message to the public is responsible for the content so if there were racist messages between

[31:47]

so if there were racist messages between one police officer and a spouse the rule would be that whoever took that to the public is the racist they're the racist because a hundred percent of the public have unpleasant private thoughts there's no exception to that do you think that if you knew everybody's private thoughts do you do you think you'd be happy with all of them i don't think so the reason that we have we talk differently in private than we do in public is that it is universally recognized that when you're talking in public you're having the impact on the public and so if you're going to be a good person in society you don't want to have bad imp bad impacts on strangers in the public of course so of course we have a different standard for public stuff but private stuff are you okay with private conversations between

[32:49]

with private conversations between spouses becoming a reason for you to get fired i say
say whoever is holding this up should be fired whoever is holding the standard up the private communication should get you fired from your job a private conversation you had every reason to believe would stay private i think anybody who makes that public should be fired immediately and should be labeled a racist if the message was racist should be labeled a troublemaker if the message causes trouble etc so this is the standard i am going to pursue anytime that i see anybody outed for a private conversation don't care what the content is do not care what the content is whatsoever i do care what they do in public i do care what they do on their job but i don't care what they think as soon as we allow that that standard is okay

[33:49]

is okay then it's it's just nothing but problems every one of you has got a big problem because you've all said things to people you trust that you didn't think would be appropriate in public
so that's my take on that um i've had a number of conversations with shall we say high profile anti-trump people recently and when i say high price profile i mean people whose names you would probably recognize and you might know that they're left-leaning but the conversations always take this form and i tweeted this a lot of people said they have the same experience and it goes like this and this this will be the the sort of generic version of it where somebody will say to me uh you know trump uh bit the head off a baby and i'll say um no that sounds like

[34:52]

and i'll say um no that sounds like uh fake news and then i'll show a link an argument to prove that the ver that the person's argument against trump is based on fake news i've done it with the drinking bleach hoax i've done it with the fine people hoax but often there's something they mentioned that's just clearly not true or they don't have the context or something so i'll add the context i'll prove to them that the thing they think is their biggest problem with trump literally never happened and then what do they do do they say well i guess everything i've learned is wrong i must have a bad news source i have now adopted your opinion and i'm pro-trump no no they don't do that here's what they do every time after you prove that the main reason that was a real reason if it had been true it would have been a really good reason to not like trump but it wasn't true once they learn that

[35:52]

that they go with they go with they go down the hoax funnel as i call it and they'll retreat to this position yeah but look at those tweets he said some bad stuff or don't you know he got fact-checked and was wrong on a fact to which i'll say um did you think i'm just curious as a democrat were you under the impression that republicans were not aware that the fact checkers have said that president trump has failed the fact-checking 20 000 times i don't think there's anybody who's not aware of that and i don't think there's anybody who supports the president who also thinks that all 20 000 fact-check things we're just all lies
nobody thinks that they're all wrong right but we also are adults many of us are

[36:53]

but we also are adults many of us are and we know that there's no such thing as somebody running for president or even being president who is not lying on a pretty regular basis obama lied lots of examples biden is literally basing his campaign on the most well-known lies in america most debunked lies the fine people hoax the drinking bleach oaks he's basing his campaign on those things those are literally the foundation of biden's campaign are two easily debunked lies and yet and yet democrats think that republicans haven't noticed that all the candidates do this like they like they think that republicans only think that the democrats do it have you ever met a republican who didn't think that republicans also will tell some tall tales is there anybody that dumb and so the democrats have to form this

[37:55]

and so the democrats have to form this ridiculous opinion of the world in order to preserve their their being right about everything and that ridiculous opinion is that you haven't noticed that the president uses a little bit of hyperbole if you know what i mean is there anybody here who hasn't noticed have you been following politics and it's the first time you're hearing the president trump sometimes will exaggerate first time you've heard it democrats literally believe it's the it's the first time you've heard it now that should be a such a glaring and obvious uh cognitive dissonance that that should settle the whole argument about who's hallucinating because it's so obvious so easily you know provable okay let me ask you republicans let's let's test out the theory how many of you have never noticed the president sometimes will exaggerate

[38:55]

the president sometimes will exaggerate has anybody ever noticed that sometimes takes something out of the context a little bit because it makes this case has anybody ever noticed
all right somebody says scott says i talk to find people but i won't tell you who hahahahaha now um i'm gonna block you just for being an
that's that's the only reason that's the only reason i need get blocked all right um so that's every conversation with every democrat goes that way all right i also learned that democrats who are actually like smart people who follow the news this will blow your mind are you ready for this there's some things you think the democrats just say because it's you know it might help their argument and then there's some things

[39:56]

argument and then there's some things that you think they actually believe i didn't think they believed the following thing i thought it was just something they say
but democrats have actually been convinced by the fake news that the reason the protests are happening is because of trump and that you know when you hear that you laugh right you think because of trump what did he do what the hell did trump do
do uh he didn't he didn't arrest anybody i mean he's pro-police but he's not in favor of police brutality he's not opposed to fixing it right exactly how did trump even get into this conversation did trump cause systemic racism i don't think so if you asked antifa and black lives matter the organizers not not just all the people in the streets but the organizers and you said to them

[40:58]

but the organizers and you said to them if trump went away tomorrow would you be good would we all be good then trump's gone what would they say i think they would say hell no i think they would say it doesn't even have anything to do with trump it has to do with 400 years of systemic racism i don't even think black lives matter and antifa blames trump for any of it and yet even though black lives matter and antifa are very clearly making the case that has to do with you know the whole system it's not something that trump alone is doing what's he doing uh opportunity zones um prison reform lowering unemployment for black people what you know helping you know protecting the the lowest income people in the country by having strong immigration preferences you really can't make a logical argument to tie these protests

[41:58]

to tie these protests to trump but they're actually educated smart people who are paying attention who have bought into the the fake news framing that trump is the problem isn't that kind of mind-blowing that anybody would believe that given given what we observe
so that's the power of the fake news the fake news can make you believe something that is quite obviously not true really sort of obviously and i have to admit that as much as i you know i prefer president trump get reelected i kind of would like to see what happened if he didn't you know what i mean i kind of would you know there's a part of me that would like to see biden try to stop uh everything and now the i asked i asked this one person i was arguing with a high profile person i said can you explain to me why they would stop

[42:59]

explain to me why they would stop like what would cause what is the situation in which biden would fix something that trump is not willing to fix or able to fix and the argument went like this that because biden would have the right let's say attitude and the right incentive and credibility that he would be the adult in the room and then he would start negotiating and of course you can't get everything at once but you can at least start to move in the right direction toward making things better for you know for everybody but black people in particular and that if biden were in the in the leader chair sure you wouldn't solve you know uh systemic racism right away but he would start chipping away at it and sort of moving things in the right direction such that the energy would come out of the protest and they would say okay we wish it were faster but now things are moving in the right direction

[44:01]

are moving in the right direction is that the most ridiculous opinion you've ever heard because i think it doesn't understand the protests at all because the protest the protesters have flat out rejected small change they have rejected without conversation any specific solutions they don't want any specific solutions if you don't know that i don't know if you should have an opinion on this stuff that's the most basic thing you should know is that they're not asking for anything in particular if you don't understand they're not asking for anything in particular they want the whole system destroyed and then it will be rebuilt in a way that they don't want to specify if you don't understand that you don't know what's going on all right um
did you know that the history of antifa is a little uh

[45:02]

is a little uh shall we say complicated now because history is written by winners and and and i doubt everything i read everywhere these days um take this with a little bit of grayness assault but this is my understanding that antifa was founded by this guy ernst fellman he was a german guy in 1932. do you know what was happening around the 30s in germany yes it was about the same time that hitler was rising now hitler of course wanted to overthrow the
the weimar republic the government of germany but another entity that wanted to overthrow the government of germany was antifa now antifa formed by this guy ernst talman was essentially a stalin guy so he was a communist who stalin supported and he supported

[46:02]

who stalin supported and he supported stalinism and so antifa was originally founded to be pro-stalin and against any form of capitalism now here's the other interesting thing fascism as it was originally put into the name antifa auntie pha didn't mean the same thing it means today so the whole argument that the anti-fa people make is they say hey it's right in our name we're anti-fascist it's writing the name it we can't not be that because it's right there in the name but it turns out the fascist didn't mean the same thing fascist just meant anybody who wasn't a communist that's it at least according to wikipedia's telling of it that it just meant that you were in the late stages of capitalism so it didn't matter if you were socialist capitalism etc

[47:04]

socialist capitalism etc so antifa would have been against a bernie sanders presidency let me say that clearly antifa as it was originally founded and what the name anti-fascist meant back then he would have been against bernie sanders because bernie sanders would have still democrat she would still have democracy he would still have capitalism but it would be a socialist capitalism that's no bueno for antifa
means anti-bernie sanders in its original form so if they try to tell you it's anti-fascist you should say it is it's totally anti-fascist and one of the things that is considered fascist is bernie sanders entire platform i'm not making that up that's originally what antifa meant and

[48:06]

that's originally what antifa meant and they haven't said we've changed it so they would oppose bernie sanders i wonder if how many people know that now both the nazis and antifa i've said that they were allied in defeating the german government and therefore that would make them an ally of hitler now i got a little pushback from that andres backhouse who's german he's german so he gets to have a better opinion than we do on this he said no no you can't call them allies because they were also killing each other it's just that they had a common enemy in the german government but they didn't love each other and indeed as soon as hitler came to power one of the first things he did was you know crush antifa so i will take that as true but it is also true that the enemy of your enemy is kind of your friend

[49:06]

your enemy is kind of your friend and i would argue also that the united states was allied with stalin against germany so in the same way that the united states was allied with russia even though we weren't friends we were just we had a common enemy antifa had a common enemy and they they were on the same side with hitler uh for different reasons all right uh but they also were they they also hated each other so you've got to add that in there too
all right um i'll bet that surprised you uh peter navarro likes to stir the pot which makes me like him uh i i can understand why president trump likes peter navarro i assume he does i mean maybe that could change tomorrow but navarro goes for blood on social media and also in his interviews

[50:07]

and also in his interviews he doesn't leave anything on the table you just he just like you know goes for the the provocation and he's not afraid of it so you can see why trump would like him if if that's the case i hope it is but there was a new study if you will in which um some credible group looked at all the other studies so it's observational it's not one of these gold standard randomized trials that you'd want but when they looked at all the existing studies they found this no credible study found worse outcomes with hydroxychloroquine use no credible study no mortality or other serious safety issue was found conclusions uh the conclusion is that hydroxychloroquine is consistently effective against coven 19
19 when used early in the outpatient setting it is overall effective against cover 19 it has not produced worsening and it is

[51:08]

it has not produced worsening and it is safe
so again this is a study of studies so the flaw if there is one don't know if there is one but the potential flaw and the reason that randomized trials exist is that all of those studies could have the same flaw that's possible in fact it's not even that crazy that they would all have the same flaw because the flaw could be this the doctors get to decide who gets the drug that could be the flaw so if the doctors are making a similar kind of bias on average then then every study would have that same bias in it and what would be that bias let me let me just say suppose that if somebody looked like they were in really bad shape you would be less likely to give them hydroxychloroquine and more likely to say well we better move you directly to

[52:09]

move you directly to whatever's a you know more more end of life dangerous situation so it's possible there's a selection bias don't know that but i'm gonna still stick with my thirty percent estimate uh thirty percent uh odds just based on stuff we see in the news not based on me knowing something in some deep way but i'd say there's still a good 30 percent chance that hydroxychloroquine is the real deal and 70 chance that it might be overstated but i doubt it's dangerous all right i ran a poll and i a twitter poll so it's not a scientific poll but i asked the following question in your personal circle are you hearing more whispers about voters moving to trump or away so you know you're always here before an election i used to vote this way but now this year i'm going to vote that way 70 percent of the people said that

[53:10]

70 percent of the people said that they'd heard people in their own circle their personal circle seventy percent of them said they'd heard people say they were moving to trump and four point three three percent said they'd heard it go the other way now of course my audience on twitter is highly biased but it was 32 000 people voted and 70 70 of them are willing to say that they've heard people going to trump but not away now would you necessarily hear about it if people went from trump to biden probably probably that sounds exactly like the sort of thing somebody would say out loud how likely are you to hear it the other way that somebody says i'm going to vote for trump but you know i didn't vote for him the first time well they usually whisper that that's sort of a whisper conversation so this is a deeply non-scientific poll

[54:10]

so this is a deeply non-scientific poll but uh when you get it when you get a result that that's grotesquely balan you know unbalanced it's still unscientific but i feel like it could mean something um the michael the michael cohen book is hilarious because he makes all these claims and i don't think anybody cares i just don't think anybody cares now of course michael cohen falls into my category of he's the because if there was anything that trump ever said to him in confidence that cohen decided to put in a book that does not reflect on trump that's my rule it only reflects on cohen so if there was something that he alleges was you know racist or offensive in some way and by the way we confuse offensive and racist all the time i feel like we should do a better job of distinguishing what's racist from

[55:11]

of distinguishing what's racist from what is offensive because you can be offensive to anybody doesn't mean that you hate them for their color you are just offensive um anyway but what was funny about peter navarro and hydrox chloroquine is that in his tweet he starts it with even more blood blood on the hands of cnn which which is a great framing because should time prove peter navarro correct and the people who think hydroxyquality color can should they be correct in the long run and i think there's a good chance of that
then cnn does have blood on their hands and a lot of it and that's just the truth so we'll see um this is this is so awful so kabul harris went and visited with uh jacob

[56:13]

went and visited with uh jacob blake who is credibly accused of some bad crimes and after she talked to him yeah he's the one who was shot seven times but survived shot by cops and she told them she was proud of him now megyn kelly wasn't too happy about that and she tweeted this proud of him proud of him he's accused of breaking into a sleeping woman's house sexually assaulting her humiliating her and later returning to harasser then the cops she called for help say he resisted arrest assaulted them and went for his knife how about a word for his victim senator that seems like a pretty reasonable comment doesn't it i would say that megyn kelly has every right to this tweet uh because it sounds solid to me and i say again that black lives matter if you keep if you keep what's the right

[57:15]

if you keep if you keep what's the right word idolizing or or making heroes and of the people who appear to be criminals you know they haven't all been convicted but they're credibly accused if you keep making heroes and giving respect to literally criminals
you just can't be taken seriously you just can't be taken seriously so stop asking us to stop asking us to take seriously making heroes and a criminals at the same time you want confederate statues to be taken down i'm in favor of taking down confederate statues because they're offensive but don't don't then reverse your opinion and say oh we can't make heroes out of these confederate statues guys because of slavery but why would you make a hero out of somebody who is a sexual abuser allegedly credibly accused

[58:18]

and then an actress who did not like megan kelly weighed in um
um rosanna arquette who was sort of a vocal democrat artist and she said to megyn kelly about after megan's comment you are a disgrace to journalism do you notice a pattern here here's the pattern megyn kelly gives an opinion backed by factual reasons right that's what happened so megan kelly said this person has all these accusations against them maybe you shouldn't show you know pride in somebody who's got those against them so she showed her reason she gave her opinion based on the reason okay and what does the democrat do goes after the person you're a disgrace to journalism but rosanna you left out your reasons

[59:18]

but rosanna you left out your reasons this is this is how the hoax funnel goes here are my reasons okay your reasons were all debunked oh yeah you're a jerk well that's not an argument after you lose your argument you're supposed to do something else go find something else to do you don't double down by saying the person is a jerk and don't even give a reason
the atlantic which did the fake news about president trump recently now when i say it's fake news this is another standard which i insist on
on and the standard goes like that this if any journalist or any person presents a package of claims and you can debunk any part of the package but you can't tell one way or another whether the other stuff is true let's say because it's a anonymous source so you can know that the anonymous

[1:00:19]

so you can know that the anonymous source said it but you can't independently verify it but the part you can independently verify turns out to be completely false like not even close to true you should discount all the rest of it that should be the rule like the steele dossier if you found out that some part of it is clearly and obviously not true obviously created to fool you you should discount the rest of it now you might want to look into it but you should certainly discount it while you're looking into it and i would say that would be a good standard to have um so the atlantic did yet another um fake news and it was about there was something a video of biden appearing to walk through a cemetery and it the fake news was that people were bothering him when he was visiting his
his deceased son at the cemetery except his deceased son was not in that

[1:01:19]

his deceased son was not in that cemetery and biden was not in the cemetery he was photographed through a cemetery as he was leaving a church that happened to have a cemetery in front of it so he wasn't in a cemetery really he was just passing through where one was nearby his son wasn't there none of the story was true comes from the same organization the atlantic one of their writers that the other stories that you're supposed to believe are true this should be enough to tell you that the atlantic is just not something you should pay attention to all right apparently trump said in his speech yesterday that he'll provide school choice to every parent in america that should be enough for him to win the black vote don't know if it will trump also banned anti-white training in government now he doesn't call it anti-white

[1:02:20]

doesn't call it anti-white or maybe he does but it was the critical race theory now uh critical race theory its proponents would say is trying to remove racism but anybody who looks at it can plainly see that it's anti-white by its nature so it is racist by its nature and the president quite rightly got rid of racist training in the government and brian stelter said here was brian stelter's comment about the president getting rid of racist training he goes it all comes back to whiteness and the backlash to a browning america and the president he eats it up and the feedback loop spins round and round so to brian stelter it's all about whiteness so that's not a good contribution uh brian uh and the best story of the day is that the new norwegian uh parliamentarian

[1:03:20]

new norwegian uh parliamentarian parliamentarian nominated trump for the nobel peace prize and justification for the nomination was that trump uh helped to bring about the deal with the uae and israel and also he was he was key to getting south korea and north korea to be in conversation now are those two things first of all are they true yeah yeah totally they're totally true so is this nomination credible and one that you should take seriously yeah yeah it is now i don't think politically speaking i doubt that the president can get the award but is it perfectly reasonable that he should be one of the top people in contention i don't even know who the others would be who would be who would be number two that you could think of that would get

[1:04:20]

that you could think of that would get the nobel prize for peace who's number two seriously name name one other person in the world that you could think of who might be in the top two or three i can't think of one
one can't think of one that doesn't mean he'll win but he's clearly the one but here's the part that i wonder about a deal between israel and the uae is a deal between primarily jewish people and islamic people you're with me so far not a hundred percent but largely speaking a deal between israel and the uae is jews and muslims getting along right now who was key to organizing this it was jared jared kushner took the lead in getting this done now how does that fit with the democrats and cnn's belief

[1:05:24]

fit with the democrats and cnn's belief that president trump hates all of those people
so the claim that cnn and the anti-trumpers have been making since day one
one is that the president doesn't like muslims that he supported the this is the fine people hoax that he allegedly supported the people who were anti-semitic which would mean that the president doesn't like israel doesn't like jews and certainly doesn't like jared kushner who is jewish so this is what cnn has sold to its idiot viewers that the president doesn't like any of those groups and at the same time you have to explain to the the little confused the cnn viewer heads can you explain why the cnn tells you that the president hates you know hates jews hates muslims and obviously would hate his own

[1:06:24]

and obviously would hate his own son-in-law for being jewish how do you explain that he's nominated for a nobel prize for helping those groups achieve peace does that make sense in your world view that that would be a major priority for the president to get peace for the two groups you say he hates why is he working so hard for a piece for groups he doesn't like according to you doesn't quite make sense does it which worldview would have predicted this well my worldview predicted this because if you will look at my if you look at my blogging record you will find that i might be one of the earliest people who said you know i think trump can actually make peace in the middle east now other people have said it but i think you will see that my record is one of the first ones to say i think

[1:07:25]

is one of the first ones to say i think he's going to make this happen now it's the beginning of something that could be better we hope it goes in the right direction but if your worldview did not predict this then you should adjust your worldview my worldview predicted it and it happened every time your worldview predicts something that does happen give yourself a check mark but also keep track if your worldview predicts the opposite you're going to have to keep track of that too i recommend this because otherwise you just don't know how much cognitive dissonance is getting to you all right those are the fun stories for today um
and is there anything i missed oh yes serbia the serbian and kosovo deal i don't know much about it but that would be yet another example of the trump administration being useful to get two warring sides together oh and the other the other argument was uh in the

[1:08:26]

the other argument was uh in the nomination for the nobel prize peace prize that uh it was noted that trump broke a 39-year pattern of of the u.s presidents getting us into war
war so trump is the least warring person
as president that we've had in 39 years somebody says greta will win it if greta wins the nobel peace prize and trump doesn't do we need a nobel peace prize we can just stop talking about the nobel peace prize if uh yeah oh yeah there's a story tucker carlson was talking about there's a taped conversation between michael cohen and jeff zucker of cnn uh in which it is revealed that zucker was hoping hoping for the best from trump and i don't think he thought trump would get elected but it sounded like zucker was trying to maybe get a tv show

[1:09:29]

zucker was trying to maybe get a tv show going on cnn with trump so it looked like uh zuku was playing both sides there so that was interesting all right that's all for now and i will talk to you thank you lynn that's very nice of you to say and i will talk to you later