Here’s a little thought experiment for you:
If a friend said he could see a pink elephant in the room, standing right in front of you, but you don’t see it, which one of you is hallucinating?
Answer: The one who sees the pink elephant is hallucinating.
Let’s try another one.
Comments temporarily disabledAccording to many of my Twitter followers, Twitter is “shadowbanning” me. If true, that means someone at Twitter has decided to suppress my free speech on the site, presumably because I have said good things about Trump’s talents for persuasion. My tweets do not align with Twitter’s political preferences as I understand them.
Comments temporarily disabledWhen Clinton’s surrogates respond to questions about Wikileaks by saying the Russians are behind it, that’s an acknowledgment of guilt. Guilty people almost always question the source of the information first. Innocent people start with a clear denial, or sometimes confusion as to why the question is being asked.
Comments temporarily disabledThis is a fun election. Trump and Clinton have provided us with one juicy rumor/scandal after another. But how do you know which rumors are true? I have taught you in this blog that even smart people are routinely fooled by confirmation bias. You think you can use your “common sense” to sort out what is true and what is an illusion, but it doesn’t work that way. Humans don’t have that sort of self-awareness.
So what do you do?
I’ll help you sort out truth from fiction using the Persuasion Filter plus some pattern recognition.
Comments temporarily disabledIf the latest groping/kissing allegations against Trump hold up – and I assume they will, based on quantity if not credibility – it won’t matter what Wikileaks says about Clinton. She will win easily.
Comments temporarily disabledThis is the most scandalicious election of all time. I’m losing track of all the allegations and rumors. As a public service, I will use the persuasion filter plus some pattern recognition to give you my subjective impression of the odds of each rumor being true. I will do this in the form of poker hands.
Let’s play Scandal Poker!
Comments temporarily disabledI’m heading out to record an interview at the London office of the BBC, for News Hour. It airs in the 8 PM hour in London, so 2 PM EST.
The topic is Trump. They asked me to explain why so many people in America would vote for him. Apparently that is a bit of a mystery over here. I’ll clear it up for them, even though I endorse Gary Johnson.
—
You might like my book because they drink a lot of tea over here.
Comments temporarily disabledI just watched the debate on replay. Trump won bigly. This one wasn’t close. And keep in mind that I called Clinton the winner of the first debate, and I now endorse Gary Johnson, primarily to avoid being called an alleged enabler of alleged sex abusers and their alleged enablers. That basket of deplorables includes both Bill and Hillary Clinton (the alleged doer and the alleged cleaner-upper) plus Trump and his alleged misdeeds.
Some quick reactions…
Comments temporarily disabledI don’t know how to write this post without unintentionally disrespecting the real victims of abuse in any form. I apologize in advance if it comes off that way. But it’s part of the national conversation now, and unavoidable. The best I can do is focus on how voters perceive the situation. I don’t have an opinion about who did what to whom because I wasn’t in the room any of those times. That said…
Comments temporarily disabledBy now you know about the Access Hollywood recording in which Donald Trump said bad things eleven years ago. Many of my readers asked me to weigh in. One of the requests came from anti-Trump GOP elite person Erick Erickson. (Middle name Erick, I assume.) This was his polite request and my response. Read it from bottom to top.
Challenge accepted!
Comments temporarily disabled
Scott Adams' Blog