メインコンテンツまでスキップ

Scott Adams : 離婚できる余裕ができるまで結婚するな

· 約59分

前置き​

久しぶりに老賢人、Scott Adams の話を取り上げる。賢人ぶりは相変わらずだが、胃が不調で痛いとこぼしている。

タイトルの助言だが、Scott Adams は実際に離婚歴がある。そして前妻の息子は（中国産の）フェンタニルが原因で死亡している。

結婚についての最悪の助言と最高の助言​

AI

「主要な出来事とコメント」のより大きな文脈において、スコット・アダムスは離婚に関して次のようなアドバイスを述べています。

スコット・アダムスの離婚に関するアドバイスは、世界の出生率低下と家族の価値観の変化についての議論の後に提示されています。

彼が提供する‌‌最も重要な結婚のアドバイス‌‌は以下の通りです。

  • 「‌‌離婚できる余裕ができるまでは結婚するな。これがお前が得られる最高の結婚アドバイスだ。離婚できる余裕ができるまでは結婚するな。‌‌」
  • 彼は、これが常に彼自身の計画であったと述べています。

このアドバイスは、彼が「‌‌最悪のアドバイス‌‌」と呼ぶものと対比されています。

  • 「離婚のことなど心配するな。ただ、決して離婚したがらないような相手を見つけるだけだ」という考え方です。

スコット・アダムスは、この「最悪のアドバイス」が非現実的である理由を詳しく説明しています。

  • 彼は、「決して離婚したがらない人」を特定できると考えるのは不可能だと指摘しています。
  • 「結婚する誰もが、生涯を共にできる唯一の人を見つけたと考える。そしてその半数は間違いで、離婚する」と述べています。
  • さらに、離婚しない人々の中にも、半数は離婚できるお金があればそうしたいと願っているだろうと推測しています。
  • 彼は、完璧な相手を選んで離婚の心配をしないという考えは、システムを「ごまかす」ようなものであり、「世の中は誰もがそのような素晴らしい人に出会えるほど素晴らしい人であふれているわけではない。そう簡単ではない」と結論付けています。

したがって、アダムスは、結婚においては理想主義的であるよりも、‌‌財政的な現実と万が一の備え‌‌を重視すべきであるという、実用的なアプローチを推奨しています。これは、人々が「嘘をつかれることを嫌う」という民主党支持者の動機付けに関する議論や、「本物」であることが重要だというトランプ大統領の政治的スタイルについての彼の分析とは異なる種類の、より個人的かつ実践的な洞察と言えます。

目次​

  1. 前置き
  2. 結婚についての最高の助言
  3. 情報源
  4. 概要
  5. 詳細
    1. 主要テーマ
    2. 最も重要なアイデアと事実
  6. 文字起こし

情報源​

動画(57:40)

Episode 2910 CWSA 072825

おまけ

概要​

AI

スコット・アダムスの日刊洞察：時事と人生の教訓

本資料は、スコット・アダムスによる‌‌「コーヒー・ウィズ・スコット・アダムス」というポッドキャストのスクリプト‌‌です。

このエピソードでは、まずアダムスが自身の‌‌猫たちと朝のコーヒー習慣‌‌について触れ、次に‌‌ニュージャージーにできる猫カフェ‌‌の話題からボードゲームと猫の組み合わせの難しさを考察します。その後、彼は自身がパンデミック中にワクチン推進派であったという‌‌誤ったインターネットの噂‌‌について反論し、‌‌虚偽の主張に反論することの難しさ‌‌を個人的な経験や政治的な文脈で語ります。

また、‌‌YouTubeショート動画のAIによる収益増加と依存性‌‌、そしてYouTube共同創設者の懸念に触れ、最後にトランプ大統領の外交政策、特に‌‌EUとの貿易協定の成功‌‌と、彼の‌‌「政治的アスリート」としての手腕‌‌について詳しく議論します。

詳細​

AI

ブリーフィングドキュメント：「スコット・アダムスとコーヒー：洞察と出来事」の主要テーマとアイデア

このブリーフィングドキュメントは、スコット・アダムスのポッドキャスト「スコット・アダムスとコーヒー」からの抜粋をレビューし、その主要なテーマ、重要なアイデア、および事実をまとめています。

主要テーマ​

  • 認知バイアスと現実認識の歪み: 人々が自分の信念を維持するために、証拠を無視したり、議論の論点をすり替えたりする傾向に焦点が当てられています。特に、スコット・アダムス自身がワクチン推進派であるという誤った噂に対して、確固たる証拠を提示しても人々が信念を変えない事例が挙げられています。

  • 情報とメディアの批判的評価: YouTubeショート、TikTok、AIが生成するコンテンツなど、現代のデジタルメディアがもたらす影響（ドーパミン中毒、集中力の低下）についての懸念が示されています。また、主流メディアの世論調査の信頼性や、政治的プロパガンダの性質についても疑問が投げかけられています。

  • ドナルド・トランプの政治的手腕と戦略: トランプ前大統領の外交政策（EUとの貿易協定、タイ・カンボジア紛争への介入の可能性）や、彼の政治的「アスリート」としての能力、ニュースサイクルを管理する手腕が強調されています。

  • 現代社会の傾向と課題: 出生率の低下と、その背景にある「個人の目標」への過度な焦点、結婚と離婚に関する現実的な視点、そして政府や諜報機関の腐敗といった、幅広い社会問題が取り上げられています。

最も重要なアイデアと事実​

  1. 議論における人間の行動と確証バイアス
  • スコット・アダムスは、自分がパンデミック中にワクチンを「推進」していたという「誤った噂」について言及し、「私はその反対のことをした」と述べています (0:03:25)。彼は、自分がワクチンを推進していなかったことを示す「コンピレーション」が作成されたにもかかわらず、人々は「論点を変え、まるで別のことについて話していたかのように振る舞う」と指摘しています (0:05:12)。
  • これは、「あなたが反論の余地のない文書で誰かの間違いを証明したとき、彼らは常に話題を変え、まるで彼らが常に別のことについて話していたかのように振る舞う」という普遍的な人間行動の例として提示されています (0:05:12)。
  1. デジタルコンテンツの心理的影響とAIの役割
  • YouTubeショートが「あなたが何を求めているかを非常に素早く知っている」ため、「純粋なドーパミン、あるいはあなたを幸せにする化学物質を供給し始める」と述べ、自身も「その中毒と戦っている」と告白しています (0:06:46)。
  • YouTubeの共同創設者であるスティーブ・チェンは、自分の子供たちにYouTubeショートやTikTokを見せたくないと語っており、その理由として「純粋なドーパミンジャンクだ。子供たちの脳を再配線し、15秒以上続かないことは何もやろうとしないようにする」と述べています (0:07:58)。
  • AIが「クリック可能なコンテンツ」を生成する役割を担っていることが示唆されており、アダムスは「AIが生成したものは確かに私をクリックさせる」と認めています (0:08:36)。
  1. トランプの外交政策と政治的評価
  • トランプ前大統領が米国と欧州連合の間で「巨大な貿易協定」を結んだと報じられており、多くの情報源が「米国は望むものすべてを手に入れ、欧州連合は基本的にすべてにおいて折れた」と見ています (0:10:04)。
  • この合意の背景には、「欧州連合は世界の『無関係な地域』になりつつあり、米国はトランプが言うように『ホットな国』である」という認識があり、「欧州は米国を、米国が欧州を必要とする以上に必要としている」という力が働いていると分析されています (0:11:25)。
  • アダムスはトランプの「異なる貿易協定を持つ戦略」を「非常にリスクが高いが、最終的には見事に見え始めている」と評価し、「彼ほどニュースサイクルをうまく管理した人はいない」と述べています (0:12:29)。
  • 彼の「驚くべき政治的アスリート」としての評判は、批評家ですら認めるほどであると指摘されています (0:13:55)。アダムス自身は、2015年にトランプが「これまでに見たことのない persuasive ability（説得力）を持っている」と予言していたことに触れています (0:14:00)。
  1. サムスンとイーロン・マスクの提携
  • サムスンがテスラの次世代AI6チップ製造に特化した新しいテキサス施設を建設する「非常に大きな取引」が進行中であることが報じられています (0:15:08)。
  • この取引の重要な側面は、サムスンのチップ製造事業における「安定性」を向上させる点です (0:15:28)。
  • さらに、イーロン・マスクがXで「サムスンがテスラに製造効率の最大化を支援することを許可した」と述べたことで、この提携はより興味深いものとなっています (0:16:05)。マスクは「製造効率を上げる」ことを自身の専門知識としており、サムスンが彼の助言を受け入れることに「満面の笑み」を浮かべるだろうと示唆されています (0:16:23)。
  1. 司法と政治の動向
  • アシスタント司法長官のハーミット・ディロンが、シンシナティで白人観光客が黒人の暴徒に襲われたとされる事件に注目していることが述べられています (0:18:21)。アダムスは、個別の犯罪状況を一般化することには慎重な姿勢を示しています。
  • ギレーヌ・マクスウェルが司法省からのすべての質問に答え、約100人の人物が言及されたことが触れられています (0:19:30)。
  • トランプが新たに勝利を収めるたびに、「エプスタインを理由に彼に投票しないと言うことがますます難しくなるだろう」と予測されています (0:21:23)。
  • トーマス・マッシー下院議員とロー・カーナ下院議員が、政府のエプスタイン関連ファイルをすべて公開する法案を推進していることに言及し、大統領の権限と法案の必要性について疑問を呈しています (0:22:17)。アダムスは、マッシーが自分よりも「明らかに賢い」ため、法案が必要だと考えるなら「彼が正しいのだろう」と自らの理解不足を認めています (0:22:53)。
  1. ダン・ボンジーノの「謎めいたメッセージ」と暴露の可能性
  • ダン・ボンジーノがXに投稿した「謎めいたメッセージ」が取り上げられており、彼は「私が学んだことの後、私は二度と同じではないだろう」と述べています (0:24:56)。
  • アダムスは、元FBI副長官であるボンジーノを「非常にショックにさせる」ような情報とは何かと推測し、「エプスタイン関連の何か」または「政府が実際にどのように運営されているか、誰も本当に理解していない」という可能性を挙げています (0:25:55)。
  1. ロシアゲートとトランプ陣営への攻撃
  • トゥルシー・ギャバードの「暴露」の要約として、以下の点が挙げられています (0:27:18)。
    • オバマが、最初の情報評価がロシアがトランプを助けていないと結論付けた後、新たな情報評価を命じた。
    • ロシアはヒラリー・クリントンが勝つと予想しており、彼女に関する「汚い情報」を持っていた。
    • スティール文書はオバマが命じた新しい報告書の一部であり、ブレンナンは議会に嘘をついた。
  • デビン・ヌネスは、マララーゴへの捜査が「ロシアのデマ陰謀論全体」の重要な要素である可能性があり、トランプが「ロシアのデマ文書を隠蔽するため」にそれらを持ち出したかどうかを確認するためであったかもしれないと推測しています (0:29:57)。
  1. 世論調査と民主党の不人気
  • 世論調査員のマット・タワリーは、「世論調査員はでたらめだ」と考えており、「トランプの実際の支持率はメディアが主張するよりもはるかに大きい」と述べています (0:31:28)。
  • 世論調査員のフランク・ルンツは、ギャビン・ニューサムと民主党がトランプを攻撃するやり方が「悪い仕事をしている」と指摘し、「ドナルド・トランプをトランプすることはできない。それはうまくいかない」と述べています (0:33:14)。
  • CNNのハリー・エントンは、民主党の支持率が「マイナス26ポイント」という「過去35年間で見たことのない」新記録の低さに達したと指摘しています (0:35:48)。
  • プリンストン大学の政治学者ローレン・ライト博士は、民主党が「嘘をつかれるのを嫌がっている」ために党を離れていると述べていますが、アダムスは、有権者がバイデンの「脳の隠蔽工作」や「民主主義が死ぬ」という主張が嘘であったことについて本当に気にしているのか疑問を呈しています (0:36:15)。彼は、民主党の不人気は「政策アイデアの欠如」と「カリスマ性のある全国的な候補者の欠如」に起因すると考えています (0:38:47)。
  1. 世界の出生率低下と結婚の現実
  • 世界の出生率が1960年代から低下していることが指摘されており、これはインターネットやスマートフォンの登場よりも前のことです (0:45:01)。
  • チャマス・パリハピティヤは、その原因を「家族を持つことの価値を見失い、個人の目標に超集中するようになった」ことにあるとコメントしています (0:45:59)。
  • アダムスは、結婚に関する最良のアドバイスとして、「離婚できる余裕ができるまで結婚するな」と述べています (0:47:07)。これは、ほとんどの人が離婚するリスクを過小評価しているという認識に基づいています。
  1. 国際紛争とトランプの交渉術
  • トランプがタイとカンボジアの短期間の戦争を「無条件停戦」に導いたという話が取り上げられており、これは彼が「関税」という「新たな小さな武器」を使ったことによるものだと推測されています (0:40:22)。アダムスはこれが「fake because（偽りの理由付け）」のケースである可能性を指摘し、両国が戦争を終わらせる口実を必要としていたのかもしれないと述べています (0:40:56)。
  • イスラエル政府がガザへの人道支援ルートを開設していることについて、アダムスは「戦場から出てくるものは、どちらかの側からのものであり、自軍をよく見せ、敵軍を悪く見せるためだけに公開される」ため、その情報を「ほとんど信じない」と述べています (0:49:17)。
  • トランプがこの問題について質問された際、「私は今、人々に食料が行き渡ることを望んでいる」と答えたことを「完璧」だと評価しています (0:50:24)。これは、道徳的な議論に巻き込まれることなく、実践的な解決策に焦点を当てるトランプの能力を示しています。
  • リンゼイ・グラハム上院議員は、トランプとイスラエルの指導者が「ハマスとの停戦協定は不可能、あるいは望ましくない」と考えていると信じており、これはアダムス自身が紛争当初から抱いていた意見と同じであると述べています (0:51:06)。「全面的な勝利」は、第二次世界大戦後の日本やドイツのように、敗者の文化や政府を完全に再構築することを意味すると説明されています (0:51:36)。
  1. 議論における誤引用の戦術
  • 議論で勝ったことを知る方法として、「相手の主張があなたの意見を捏造し、それを引用符で囲むことに依存している場合」は「勝利を宣言できる」と述べています (0:53:39)。これは、相手が有効な論点を持っていないことを示す兆候です。

文字起こし​

展開

There you are. Hold on. Come on in. It's time. Yep. We'll get our comments working and then... it all comes together. Might be a little bit loud in the office today. There are two other mammals in here with me. And they look like they're ready to destroy something. More on that later. Good morning everyone and welcome to the highlight of Human Civilization. It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and you've never had a better time. (0:00:58)

But if you'd like to take a chance about elevating your experience up to levels that no one can even understand with their tiny, shiny human brains. Well, all you need for that is a cup or mug or a glass of tequila, chalicestine, a canteen, sugar flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of being at the end of the day, the thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip. (0:01:30)

And it happens now. Ah, everything's working. Paul, your timing is perfect. I know you did that intentionally. You always know when I'm looking at the screen. Good for you. All right. Well... Good news. There's a New Jersey cat cafe coming. It will be called the Calico Cat Cafe. It's not ready yet. But Ben and Dora are opening it and they will have 12 cats. (0:02:13)

You can go in there and pet cats and play board games. And good luck playing a board game with... I don't think they thought this out. Imagine combining these two things. Board games and cats. Everybody who has ever been around a cat knows you couldn't possibly have board games and cats in the same place. Those cats are going to scatter your board pieces. (0:02:47)

It might literally be the best idea and the worst idea of all time. It sounds so good on paper. It's like, wow, I can go and play games and pet cats. And then the cats come in and say, how's your chess game? Wap, wap. All right. Well, as you may know, we won't talk about this at length, the Internet has a rumor that is false, of course, that I was pushing vaccines during the pandemic. (0:03:25)

Well, I did the opposite of that. And Jay Plemons was nice enough to put together a compilation of me doing what Jay calls, whatever is the opposite of pushing the vaccines. So it's a compilation of all the times I say things like, but I'm not promoting the vaccine. I'm not a doctor. Only your doctor should promote it. Don't take medical advice from cartoonists. (0:03:55)

So I thought to myself, will this settle the question? Because there will be lots of people who say it's on X. And I thought, what are all those people going to do who were positive that I was pushing the vaccines, when in fact, I was not? And what do you think happened? Have you ever been in a situation where you were having, it might have been your spouse, and because we write everything down, you know, their text messages and emails and stuff. (0:04:32)

Have you ever had the experience where you could prove that your side of the argument was right, in a way that was just undeniable? (0:04:40)

Here it is. Well look, it's right there. It's right there on that message. Just read it yourself. And you can see that I was completely right and you were completely wrong. What happens in every domain, whether it's your marriage or your coworkers or anything else, what happens next? When you prove somebody wrong with documentation that's irrefutable, they always change the topic and pretend they were always talking about something else. (0:05:12)

And that's what happened. So already this morning, some of the commenters are coming and saying, well, it wasn't really about the question of whether you were promoting the VACs. It was, oh, I know what it was. It was that you weren't fighting against mandates hard enough. And I thought, what? So that was always the question? So it was people who thought that if I didn't fight against the mandates hard enough, that was sort of kind of almost the same as promoting the vaccines. (0:05:55)

So that's what happens when you prove you're right. Somebody will say, well, you're not right because the topic was something related but different. That'll happen every time. All right, YouTube is on track to bring in $40 billion in ad revenue in 2025, according to a user called Dexerto. And they say the revenue is so high because of AI making shorts. I don't mean the kind that you wear to cover up your naughty bits. (0:06:35)

I mean a short video. Now, if you have not been hooked yet on YouTube's short video product, it's really good because it knows exactly what you want very quickly. And it starts feeding you just pure dopamine or whatever the chemical is that makes you happy. I have been battling an addiction to that. That's pretty bad. On the other hand, I also tell myself, well, why would I want to quit something that feels good? (0:07:14)

Because it's not like it's preventing me from working or falling in love or something. It's really not preventing anything. It's just filling in some hours. So I'm not sure if I'm addicted or I just found a new hobby that I like. But in related news, the co-founder of YouTube, one of the people who invented the thing and launched it, Steve Chen, he says he doesn't want his own kids watching YouTube shorts or even TikTok or any of that kind of content because, he says, it's pure dopamine junk. (0:07:58)

It's rewiring kids so that they won't do anything if it doesn't last, you know, 15 seconds. If it's more than that, they just won't do it. Actually, 15 minutes. And according to Steve Chen, some parents are now forcing their kids to do long-form stuff, whatever that is, just so that their brains are not destroyed by all the, you know, fast-form AI stuff. So I guess AI is what created all the clickable content for those reels. (0:08:36)

And I have to say, the AI-generated stuff does make me click it. But it's not as good as, you know, human-made stuff that would be much more expensive to make. (0:08:49)

It looks like somebody just has a prompt where they go in and say, Hey, AI, I want you to make me a video that would be like one of the viral ones on YouTube. And it will be about something in history that's not covered, but you can make it look interesting. Go. And then it makes you a little reel that's so clickable you can't believe it. (0:09:16)

Anyway, the big news today is that President Trump has another big win, he will tell you. He got a huge trade deal between the U.S. and the European Union. And would you be surprised to know that, like everything else, this is one of those two-movies-on-one-screen situations? Quiet, Gary. There might be some cats in the room. So, the positive news about this deal with the EU is that even allies outside of the EU are saying that Trump got an amazing deal and the United States got everything it wanted and the European Union basically rolled over and caved on everything. So it's basically just better for us. (0:10:17)

Now, do you believe that? It might be true. I'm quite open and willing to believe that that's the case. This is Gary. I want to introduce Gary, who may be disturbing our future. His brother Roman is around here somewhere. Roman around. But anyway, as I was saying, not everybody will agree that this is the best trade deal of all time. Peter Schiff, who's famous for accurately predicting things in the past. (0:10:55)

I don't know how he's done lately, but he's one of these famous predictors about the economy. Basically, he says it's a bad deal for the U.S. and it's good for the EU. So, there's at least one famous smart guy who believes that the deal is better for Europe. But the larger consensus, looks like about 99 to 1, is that the U.S. got a great deal. (0:11:25)

And there's even some thinking about why that is. And the why is that the European Union has become sort of an irrelevant zone of the world. And the U.S. is a hot country, as Trump says. And to put it in summary form, Europe needs the U.S. more than the U.S. needs Europe. Because they can't even defend themselves. So they need markets to sell to. (0:11:55)

And they need somebody to defend them. And I guess Trump did a good job of convincing them that giving us a good trade deal would be really, really good for their future defensive needs. Which would have been sort of a brilliant way to approach that. So, Trump's legend continues. And I will point out once again, the high risk, but ultimately it's starting to look brilliant. (0:12:29)

The strategy of having all these different trade deals. Which on one hand, you say to yourself, my goodness, all the chaos he created back in April. But he did tell us it would all calm down once they started making deals. And then what happened? (0:12:45)

He started making deals, and it all calmed down. And the stock market said, oh, all right, no problem. Continue, go make some more deals. So Trump's out there making deals. And he gets to announce a new one at least once a week now. And it's just going to be win, win, win, win. So Trump has created the ultimate summer event. Normally the summer doesn't have any news. (0:13:17)

But because of these trade deals, there's going to be probably one of these a week for the rest of the summer as well. So brilliant, brilliant, brilliant managing of the news cycle by the Trump team. Nobody's ever done this better. The one thing that the Democrats and the non-Trump believers have in common is that even his critics have started to say that he's an amazing political athlete. (0:13:55)

Have you heard that? They say he's just the most amazing political athlete. And do you remember in 2015 when I was the lone voice saying, I don't think you realize what's coming. That he has more persuasive ability than anything you've ever seen before. And here we are. I don't like to crow about my good predictions. But it is a show in which I make predictions and then crow about them. (0:14:32)

So you have to put up with it. It's sort of baked into the business model. I make predictions, I tell you how it's going. And if they're wrong, I eat crow. Anyway, apparently there's a very big deal going down between Samsung and Elon Musk. So Samsung is building a new Texas facility that will be dedicated entirely to making Tesla's next generation AI6 chip. (0:15:08)

Which I guess is important. Now what's important about this, beyond the fact that two big companies are having an agreement to do something big. Is that I think that Samsung's future in the chip making business was a little bit uncertain. And this big deal with Elon Musk gives them much more stability. So that would put another chip making entity in the United States proper. (0:15:42)

So that's a big deal. And it would be related to our most advanced technology. So that's all good. But Elon has made it even more interesting. Because he said on X that Samsung agreed to allow Tesla to assist in maximizing manufacturing efficiency. So apparently Elon Musk personally, and I assume some of his lieutenants, will be able to inspect the Samsung factory for making chips. (0:16:23)

And figure out how to make it more efficient. Which is sort of his expertise. Making manufacturing efficient. Not sort of, it's his expertise. And imagine if you were Samsung and Elon Musk said to you, you know that factory you're building? Do you mind if I give you some suggestions? If you were Samsung, you wouldn't be able to get the smile off your face. (0:16:52)

You'd be like, really? Are you serious? You personally want to walk the line and make suggestions about how to make this more efficient? (0:17:05)

Yes. Oh my god. So obviously they said yes to that. Although I suppose you could imagine a world in which they made the wrong decision, but they did not. So Samsung will be a little more stable. Tesla's got a big source for their chips. And something big's happening there. So as we're watching these big businesses, some of them foreign owned but coming back to America. And revitalizing things, it's happening pretty quickly. (0:17:45)

Pretty quickly. So Assistant Attorney General Hermit Dillon, whose job it is, among other things, is to get rid of all the racism in the country. Get rid of all of it. That's all. That's all she has to do. Get rid of all racism. But one of the things she's calling out is that apparently, I guess it was last night, in Cincinnati there was some kind of a mob that attacked some white tourists. (0:18:21)

I guess the attackers were black and the people being attacked were white tourists. And they got beaten quite vigorously. And I don't know anything about that specific situation, so I'm not going to wade into the outrage of it. I feel like with these individual crime situations, it's too easy to say this is telling you the story of everything. It might be just something that was very unique for that situation. (0:18:52)

You don't want to generalize it to the rest of the country. But Hermit Dillon says she's got her eye on it. So if it turns out that that was literally a racial hate crime, which it might have been, it might have been just that, she's on it. Good. Well, as you know, Ghislaine Maxwell answered all the questions that were asked of her by the Justice Department. And about 100 people were mentioned or talked about. (0:19:30)

And I guess there's some talk of clemency, but Trump has not made any kind of opinion on that yet. So we'll see. That'll be controversial if it happens. It will break apart the mega-coalition. You know what's funny is that I totally understand when people get mad about one issue with Trump. But I feel like people ultimately will understand their own best interest. If you thought that Trump did 25 great things and two of them you really thought were, you know, you would have gone the other way. (0:20:18)

But you observe that there are plenty of people who are on your team who think Trump was right about those two that you don't like as well. Would you not vote for Republicans because you didn't get your two things? Is that the way you'd play it? Sorry, my cat's in my coffee. Cats, don't get in the coffee. No. All right, take a look at him. (0:20:56)

That's Gary with the red collar on. All right, so every time Trump gets another victory like this European Union trade deal, it's going to be harder and harder to say that you won't vote for him because of something about Epstein. And he's back. (0:21:23)

All right, so Representative Thomas Massey and Democrat Ro Khanna are pushing for some legislation to release all of the government's files on Epstein. And this raises a question to me. Can Congress overrule the President just by passing some legislation that says release all of that stuff? And wouldn't the President need to sign it? So if you need the President to sign the legislation, but also the President could just tell people to release it anyway, what does the legislation do? (0:22:17)

So this is yet another one of those situations where if I had an extra minute, I would have used Grok to look into it and say, can you explain why we need legislation for something that the President could just say, yeah, release all that. So I'm missing something. And by the way, here's a good general rule for you. If someone who is clearly smarter than you has a different opinion about what to do, you should assume that the problem is on your end. (0:22:53)

And that's what I'm doing on this one. You know, Thomas Massey, he's got an MIT degree. If he and I took an IQ test, I wouldn't like how that would work out for me. He's definitely smarter than me in a lot of obvious ways. So if he thinks this legislation is necessary or useful, he's probably right. So when I tell you I don't understand why we need it, that's pretty much on me. (0:23:25)

So my assumption is that the problem is on my end. You should always do that. If somebody is smarter than you and you don't get why they're doing what they're doing, don't assume the problem is on their end. They didn't suddenly get dumb. Well, Dan Bongino left a cryptic message on the X that I think is just wonderful. So I'm going to read it to you because the whole thing is pretty interesting. (0:23:59)

It's a little bit long, but Dan Bongino posts, During my tenure here as the Deputy Director of the FBI, I have repeatedly relayed to you that things are happening that might not be immediately visible, but they are happening. So the first thing we need to know is that there might be a bunch of things that are really a big deal that are coming our way, but we don't know when. (0:24:27)

The Director and I are committed to stamping out public corruption and the political weaponization of both law enforcement and intelligence operations. It is a priority for us, okay? But now it gets to the good stuff. But what I have learned in the course of our properly predicated and necessary investigations into these aforementioned matters has shocked me down to my core. Listen to this. (0:24:56)

We cannot run a republic like this. I'll never be the same after learning what I've learned. Wow. I'll never be the same after learning what I've learned. Now, might I point out that Dan Bongino has seen a few things in his life? (0:25:18)

How hard would it be to shock him? Wouldn't it be really hard? I mean, unlike the public that's not paying attention, he's watched everything. He's seen behind the curtain. He's seen the ugliest political shenanigans. He's seen crimes the kind that you and I, you know, we're lucky that we haven't seen. What in the world would change him permanently? I'll never be the same after learning what I've learned. (0:25:55)

What in the world could that be? The only thing I can imagine is as maybe an Epstein thing, or maybe he learned that the way the government is really being run, nobody really understands. Maybe that. I don't know. But wow, he knows how to tease us. So he says we can't go on like this, which clearly indicates that we're going to find out what he knows, at least that summary level. (0:26:28)

Do you think it's aliens? No, it's not aliens. He's clearly telling you that you're going to find out. Yeah, I mean, the obvious guess would be something Epstein and child related. But I don't know. I also feel like, well, maybe he learned that the entire governments of the world are all run by blackmail. That's possible. I don't know. I saw a post yesterday, I guess, by Joel Pollack of Breitbart, and he said the sum of Tulsi Gabbard's revelations. (0:27:18)

Now, I think there's more coming, so we might see some more stuff. Maybe it's already dropped this morning. But here are the three things that Joel summarizes of what we've learned from Tulsi. Number one, Obama ordered a new intelligence assessment after the first one said Russia did not help Trump. That's a good summary. So we know that Obama had an intelligence assessment that said that Russia did not change any votes. (0:27:54)

But that Obama ordered a new one that would mention that Russia was meddling in the election. All right. Number two, the Russians expected Hillary Clinton to win and had dirt on her. So we did learn that. That's new. And that does change the narrative. Because if you know that the Russians were not really even taking seriously that Trump could win, that makes everything look different. (0:28:24)

Obviously, they weren't trying to help him win. They were just trying to weaken Hillary Clinton's inevitable government, they assumed. And the Steele dossier was part of the new report, the new thing that Obama ordered. And Brennan lied to Congress when he said it wasn't. And this part I told you about the other day. I guess Brennan found a clever way to include the Steele dossier but put it in the top-secret area so that people couldn't tell that it was in there. (0:29:00)

Oh, just trust us. There's also some top-secret stuff that goes into this analysis. Well, separately, there's more coming. So CIA Director Ratcliffe says there's more evidence coming. And there's at least some people who are speculating that whatever's new is coming implicates Hillary Clinton even more than she's already implicated. (0:29:30)

I think Gunther Eagleman had that take today. Devin Nunes, who you know was the hero who took all the arrows going after the Russian collusion hoax when it was brand new and he was in the government. He's not part of the government now, but he's very relevant so he's been on a lot of podcasts and stuff, news reports. And he says, Devin Nunes says that the raid on Mar-a-Lago might be an important element of the whole Russia hoax conspiracy story, even though you thought they were completely unrelated. (0:30:12)

Because it could be that they were raiding Mar-a-Lago just to make sure that Trump had not taken some of the Russia hoax documents with him. For what, I don't know, blackmail or something. And that maybe the point of the Mar-a-Lago raid was to look for Russia collusion hoax evidence that they could then hide, I guess. I'm not so sure that I would jump to assume that those stories are connected. (0:30:45)

I think it would be just as likely, maybe more likely, that the bad guys were just doing everything they could to get Trump in every way, every possible way. All right, there's a pollster named Matt Towery, the Daily Colored News Foundation is talking about him. He was on somebody's show recently, I guess he was on Fox News on Friday. And he says that the pollsters are sort of full of BS and that he believes that Trump's actual approval rating is far bigger than what the media claims. (0:31:28)

Now the media looks at the pollsters and both of them are fake news apparently. So not every pollster. There are some pollsters that are, let's say, assertively saying that the other pollsters are fake. So Rasmussen would be one of the ones who asserts that the other pollsters may not be as accurate as people think. But they've got a great track record with presidential stuff, especially. (0:32:01)

Anyway, so somebody who's in the business, professional pollster Matt Towery, believes that the polls are just sort of rigged and fixed, that Trump is way more popular than the polling shows. Do you believe that? Does that line up with your, let's say, anecdotal lived life experience? I can't tell because I'm definitely in a bubble. I just don't know what the average person thinks. I just don't spend time with the average person, I guess. (0:32:43)

So I don't know. So pollster, I guess he would be a pollster, Frank Luntz, he says that Gavin Newsom and the Democrats are doing a bad job on the attacking Trump stuff. Now other people have said it, but when Frank Luntz says it, it's a little bit more of a professional opinion than when people like me say it. So apparently Frank Luntz is saying that attacking Trump is just bad, and if the way you're attacking Trump is by acting like him, you can't out-Trump Trump. So he's sort of mocking and criticizing the Democrats who say, well, we just have to fight harder. And he says, quote, and so we need to punch them in the face harder than they're punching us. (0:33:44)

And Luntz said, you cannot out-Trump Donald Trump. It will not work. It's why the Democratic Party has its lowest numbers nationwide that it's ever had. (0:33:54)

Yeah, so he says the negativity just isn't working. Now, you can't out-Trump Trump. You've heard me say that as well, right? And this is where that authenticity thing happens. The reason that Trump can be the way he is is that that's who he is. It's authentic. That's who he is. He's literally being the way he's always been, and he's just being Trump. So you can accept a lot when people are transparent and consistent. You just get used to them. So we've now sort of gotten used to Trump. But you can't suddenly be the person who is nothing like that and then try to just layer that over your existing personality and sell it. (0:34:48)

That's going to look the opposite of authentic. Why would it look the opposite of authentic? Because it literally is by design. They're literally telling Democrats that they should act. They should act. Nobody tells Trump he should act because you're getting full unadulterated Trump all day long. He doesn't need to act anything. You know, sometimes he could be full of hyperbole, so to speak, but that's who he is. That's who he is. (0:35:23)

Well, Harry Enton of CNN points out that Democrat favorability has, in fact, hit a new low. CNN is recording them at negative 26 points in favorability, and the Wall Street Journal has them at negative 30. And these are numbers that we haven't seen for 35 years or some very long time. So, yeah, they are completely falling apart. (0:36:15)

There's a Princeton political scientist I saw, I think, on Fox News, Dr. Lauren Wright, who says that Democrats are abandoning the party in part because they don't like being lied to and that the whole episode about Biden's brain might have turned off Democrats. I have not seen that. Have you? But again, I'm in a bubble, so what I see is not really a guide to anything. But do you believe that people are turning on Democrats, like the existing Democrats, not Biden? Biden is already, everybody knows, is out of the picture. (0:36:36)

So, are Democrats, just Democrat voters, who are casually paying attention to politics, do you think they really cared about the Biden brain cover-up? And that their own team was lying to them the whole time? I don't know that people really care about that. I think they really care about capability and personality and who can get something done that they want done. I don't believe that they're activated by that. It might be a little bit, but I'm not even sure the average voter could even describe to you the whole auto-pen story. (0:37:26)

I mean, that's something that the political right is dining out on, but I don't know if the political left even sees the story or cares about it, or they saw it once on CNN, but didn't follow up on it. I don't know. And then the other lie, according to Dr. Lauren Wright, is that when Trump got into office, democracy would die, but that we don't observe any democracy dying, so the Democrats are losing credibility. To which I say again, are they? Because the Democrats would say, you can see with your own eyes that he's destroyed your democracy. (0:38:08)

Now, that wouldn't be true, but they believe it. So I don't think that they've wised up and seen that their party is a bunch of hoaxers and liars, and I don't think they're affected by the Russia collusion hoax and knowing that the top people in the party were probably colluding to run a coup in the country, and that January 6th was a total projection sort of play that they always do, that they would run coups and then accuse the other side of running a coup, and there's no evidence that happened. (0:38:47)

So, yeah. I just think that the lack of having any policy ideas and the lack of a charismatic national candidate is all you need to explain why the Democrats aren't looking good. They lost everything, so people don't like losers, and they don't have anybody who has a positive message that they can turn that around. (0:39:13)

So you don't want to be associated with somebody who, number one, lost everything, and number two, has absolutely no idea what to do about it. And basically tells you that, by the way. They basically tell you, we have no idea what to do about it. We think we have to punch people in the nose harder. So, yeah, I guess I understand why they're not so popular anymore. (0:39:43)

Well, here's another story. I don't know if I believe this one, but what's the word for a luxury belief? So I'm going to make this one of my luxury beliefs. I think I'm using the term wrong. But the idea is I want to believe this is true. All right. So the story is that Trump got Thailand and Cambodia to drop their very brief war against each other. I guess they went to war. (0:40:22)

And the story is that Trump convinced them to have an unconditional ceasefire, which they've done, and that he may have done it by threatening to give them tariffs. Isn't that a little bit too neat? That all he did was get on the phone and tell two warring countries, I'll give you bad trade deals unless you stop firing. And then they immediately just said, all right, all right, and they backed down. (0:40:56)

I feel like that might have been a case of what I call the fake because. Probably Cambodia and Thailand really, really didn't want to be in a war, as in really, really didn't want to, like really, really, really didn't want to be in a war. But they would have national pride and ego and, you know, you can't just say, nevermind. Oh, nevermind. I really don't want to be in a war. You'd look like a loser. So you need some excuse. You need some outside pressure to say, well, okay, given that outside pressure, I guess we'll do a ceasefire. (0:41:38)

So Trump, because he's got this new little weapon that he's created out of nothing, which is the tariff, which by the way, is the smartest thing anybody ever did in politics, to create a weapon and then use it right in front of people. He just created it, the whole tariff idea. It didn't really exist. I mean, it existed as a thing that people can do. (0:42:07)

Nobody used it this way. And it's possible that the tariffs ended the war. It's like Trump wakes up, you know, ends a war, and then he golfs. How many wars has he ended while golfing? But he's still got two big ones. He's got Gaza and he's got Ukraine that he's not successful at, but he'll find a way to monetize both of those. Apparently, there's a big FBI sweep in which 205 child predators were arrested. I hate these kinds of stories. I usually stay away from them because they're just too ick. But this looks like a major deal. And 55 FBI field offices were involved. (0:43:03)

So, I often wonder how big this, you know, child predator thing is. I mean, if you went by what you see on social media, you would think it's, you know, half of your neighbors are in on this. But I don't know. Because I don't have, you know, the good news is I don't have any connection to that world. (0:43:28)

So, I have no independent way to say, yeah, they don't know the half of it, which might be true. Or, oh, they're making a big deal about it, but it's so rare, which I don't know to be true. I have no idea how to size this. Obviously, if it's one person, it's way too much. I'll say all the NPC things you have to say. It's the worst thing ever. And even if it happened only once to one person, we should do everything in our power to stop it. We all agree. (0:44:03)

All right. Trump says that Caballeros broke the law by paying for endorsements. That would include Beyonce, Oprah, and Elle Sharpton. I believe all three of them say, we didn't pay her. We didn't get paid for these endorsements. I think they would say, oh, no. All they did was reimburse the production company so that we weren't paying you. And Elle Sharpton, maybe something got donated to a charity he's involved with, something like that. (0:45:01)

So they would say, no, no, technically we did not get paid for endorsements. I don't know which way that would go. I suspect that even if they went to court, I don't think that they would be found guilty, but I don't know. Maybe. Well, what else is happening? So you know how people say that the world fertility rate is going down everywhere. And we think it's because the internet or smartphones. Well, Mark Andreessen points out with a chart that showed that the fertility rate in the world has dropped since 1960. And that was well before internet and phones. (0:45:33)

So whatever it is that's taking the average number of children from five, five worldwide, it was five, down to, you know, less than two, whatever it is, it started well before the internet and smartphones. So what is it? Well, I saw Chamath Palihapitiya on X comment to that. He said, what actually happened was that we stopped valuing having a family and instead became hyper-focused on individual goals. Now, he doesn't say that that happened to women, although some of you want to stick that in, right? (0:46:19)

The myriad books, courses, contents, slogans over the past 50 years all reinforce the same incentive. Your fulfillment is largely from professional endeavors. So double down and lean in. Again, he doesn't say that that message was for women because I feel like men always thought their profession was their identity. But here's what I think. So I think he's definitely on to something, which is that we stopped valuing it and started valuing individual attainment. But I think it's a follow the money situation. And for other countries, it's also a follow the birth control. (0:47:07)

They may just have more birth control. It could be that if you eliminate the accidents, your birth rate drops really fast. But I would give you this advice. Don't get married until you can afford the divorce. That's the best marriage advice you'll ever get. Don't get married until you can afford the divorce. (0:47:34)

That was always my plan. Because the people giving you the worst advice were commenting to my comment. And the worst advice is this. Don't worry about divorce. Just make sure you meet somebody that would never get divorced. How in the world do you think that you can identify the person who will never want a divorce? That's not a thing. Every person who gets married thinks that they found the one person that they could be with forever. And half of them are wrong and they get divorced. And of the ones that don't get divorced, I suspect half of them wish they had the money to get divorced. (0:48:22)

So if you look at the odds, that whole idea of, well, I'm going to game the system by being so smart, I'll pick the best mate that will never have to worry about divorce. Well, okay. Some of you will get lucky. But the world is not full of awesome people where everybody can get one of those. Not so easy. All right. Trump says he's going to reduce his 50-day deadline he gave Putin to come up with something to do with peace in Ukraine. And after the 50 days, which now Trump is talking about reducing, because he says he knows what Putin is going to say, which is no to peace, that I guess he's going to sanction them harder. So that's coming. (0:49:17)

The Israeli government is reportedly opening up some humanitarian aid routes to get food to the starving Gaza people. I will remind you that I don't believe much of anything that comes out of the war zone. So everything that comes out of the war zone is either from one side or the other. And they're only going to release it if it makes their side look good, the other side look bad. So I don't know what caused the food not to get where it was going. I don't know whose fault that was. But if the kids get fed, that's good. (0:49:57)

I will just point out that when Trump is asked about this, he frames it perfectly, because they're trying to fool people like him into taking a side and saying, oh, Israel's bad or, oh, Israel's doing a great job and Hamas is the ones who's keeping the food from people. And I frankly have no idea what's going on, because I don't believe anything that comes out of there. (0:50:24)

But when Trump was asked about it, he said, quote, I'm looking for getting people fed right now. That's perfect. So if they try to get him to talk about the ethics and the morality and which side was good and which side was bad and who's lying, it's just a dead end. I mean, nothing good can come from that. So instead, he just makes you focus on the part of the matter. I'm looking for getting people fed right now. Nicely done. Yeah, and then he just says you have a lot of starving people and he wants the European nations to step up as well. (0:51:06)

Senator Lindsey Graham believes that Trump and the Israeli leaders do not believe a ceasefire deal with Hamas is possible or maybe not desirable, which would be the same thing. You will recognize that opinion as the one I had at the beginning of the conflict. At the very beginning, I said, you don't think that they're just going to give Gaza back, right? (0:51:36)

I feel like I was the first one to say that out loud. And Israel was saying from the start that they were looking for, quote, total victory. What does total victory mean? It doesn't mean we give them a black eye and then put them back in business. That's not total victory. That's the opposite. Total victory looks like Japan after World War II or Germany after World War II, where there's an unconditional surrender and one side completely redoes the culture and education system and government of the conquered country. (0:52:15)

So given that Hamas is never going to go the way of Japan or Germany, there's no realistic possibility they're going to say, all right, you won fair and square. We're going to play along because that's our best bet. This is not going to happen. So to act as if it might is crazy. So it looks like Lindsey Graham and Trump and Israel have all the same opinion that the one and only thing they can do is completely dominate Gaza, kill everybody in Hamas and probably depopulate it because otherwise it just reconstitutes the way it was. (0:53:03)

So I would expect nothing to happen about a ceasefire. You're not going to see a ceasefire anytime soon. And I would like to give you a way to know you won a debate. If you get into lots of debates with people, as I find I often do on X, if the other person's point depends on making up your opinion and putting it in quotes, you can declare a victory. You don't need to debate anymore. (0:53:39)

Because if somebody has a real point, they'll say, you said, and then they'll quote you correctly. And then they'll make their point about it. If they have a good point. If they don't have any points at all, a frequent thing that people who have no point do will say, well, you said, and then they'll put quotes around something that you definitely didn't say and would never have said. (0:54:06)

And then they'll demand that you defend the thing that they just made up. That happened to me twice yesterday. Twice people quoted me just making up something. It wasn't anything I said. They just made it up and put it in quotes and said, well, if you're saying this, that means you won. If somebody misquotes you, and that's the only way they can win, you don't need to go on. That is your victory right there. (0:54:38)

All right, ladies and gentlemen, that is all I have for you today. I'm going to talk privately to the locals, people, the beloved locals, people, and the rest of you. Thanks for joining. We'll be here tomorrow. Same time, same place. Sorry I missed yesterday. I had just an insane stomach problem. I feel as though I have the same problem as today. I just decided to power through it and pretend I'm not in severe pain. But it seems like it might be a reaction to my new meds because apparently that's a known side effect. (0:55:22)

So I think that's what's going on, but I'll look into it a little bit more. And locals, coming at you privately in 30 seconds. (0:55:33)

(2025-07-29)