Scott being an utter faggot again on his podcast today. Trump tweeted at Bubba and Scott cried about how Trump‘s tweet basically treated Bubba like any other person rather than talk to him in the “special way” we are told by libshits how to talk to black people. So Scott now says Trump will not get re-elected..
Bubba could have said “looks like the NASCAR president psyched me up that there was a noose and and it was not a noose so maybe you should ask the NASCAR president why he hyped that to me, cuz I think it is retarded to think that was a noose.”
But no.....he decided to play along and say “well technically it WAS. a noose, and so technically I felt threatened because of my skin color”
And so yes, it was CORRECT for Trump to recognize that he PLAYED ALONG with it.....Scott thinks since he did not instigate that makes all the difference.
What would have made all the difference Scott, is if Bubba said some retards thought it was a noose or PRETENDED TO ME that they believed it was a noose...but it was not so I have no idea what the agenda of the people are who were trying to get me to also claim it was a noose.”
So Scott has gone utter fagggot twice in two weeks.
Fuck him. And no he is NOT a master persuader, no, he does NOT have “moments of genius”.
I like most of what he says, but I agree with you that his whole "you didn't adequately tiptoe around their feelings, so you will now lose the election" schtick is tiresome. And the way he says it is obnoxious. "Oh well, Trump loses now. So here's the next thing I wanna talk about."
The thing about Scott is, I disagree with a good chunk of his beliefs. But the remaining opinions he has are some of the most unique in the internet. And, if we restrict people who support Trump to only those who agree 100.000%, then Trump will get two votes. We need as many people to vote for him as possible. Most Trump voters aren't Pedes.
Scott Adams understands persuasion a good bit. Everything points to Trump being a grandmaster. Scott can't follow every move he makes, just understand and explain some of them.
Comments get deleted if you don't agree 100% and you disagree politely. Don't ask how I know. And yes Trump needs to appeal to the masses instead of just the most hard-core supporters. And on that note, Scott Adams was correct when he said Trump should work harder to persuade uncommitted voters or he's gonna lose. It's not possible to win the election if only republicans vote for him. This is sad but true. Trump still has a few months to turn things around. Will he?
Comments get deleted if you don't agree 100% and you disagree politely.'
He's making his own bubble.
Scott exhibits a lot of contempt for his viewers as of late. Trump needs to persuade the middle. The commited left is a waste of energy. The anti-trump narrative IS in danger of snowballing.
Rehtorical appeasement of the left is not the answer. Trying to be their friends is not the answer. Standing up for our Civiliaztion and trusting the liberal cray meltdown to turn off middle voters is likely the way.
A good bit of what scott does is play at persuasion in his own audience, make claims just to see if they can form an argument against a position which he doesn't Really hold but will hold just to be contrarian. Scott is Intelligent but he almost exclusively relies on "perception management" and "persuasive rhetoric" and bases beliefs on whatever happens to be widely available information. He can jump Straight to the right conclusion ( i.e. Tik Tok should be banned along with all other chinese spyware ) but only After he can point at a public source. Watching him waffle over General Flynn before rallying behind him was silly, as is his ongoing simping for Heels-up Harris.
Honestly i think Scott mostly talks Harris up just to aggravate his viewers and knows he can do it convincingly.
The other day, he was saying that Trump was using bad words in his speech, and that if he wanted to persuade uncommitted voters, he shouldn't have been using words that the left finds offensive.
The lesson of the last 5 years, which Scott lived through, but apparently forgot, is that the left was going to say that Trump's words were offensive no matter what he said. The articles attacking his Independence Day speech were written weeks ago.
When I'm reading news articles I mentally highlight with actual color coding. What ever the news item is actually covering, any factual description or quoting of that event I leave unadorned.
But whenever they open some paragraph 'retrospective' of something I mentally color it yellow. Things like, "Our readers recall that Trump once said..." or "This comes on the heels of..." or "despite [something that has noting to do with the event]" ... a smart commenter here pointed out use of the word 'amid' to inject these toxic non-sequitirs ... check out that thread!
Whenever they break from describing the event to supplying the remarks of some tapped 'expert' I color it pink. It's interesting if the expert is interesting but you have to pay extra attention. For many of these you realize it is expert copypasta and the 'expert' is NOT referring to the event in the article.
And when I'm done, I often find there are yellow and pink splotches everywhere, with little actual content about the event. News articles are like a parched desert sometimes.
He is sometimes very interesting. Sometimes he is a complete idiot. No one is perfect.
I agree with everything else you said about Bubba tho. He took the first opportunity to go on TV and talk to all the press and start crying about racism. Instead he coulda been like "let's not make a fuss about it until we get more info. The FBI are looking into it and hopefully it is just all a misunderstanding. We'll see." instead of unleashing a world of shit on NASCAR.
Scott being an utter faggot again on his podcast today. Trump tweeted at Bubba and Scott cried about how Trump‘s tweet basically treated Bubba like any other person rather than talk to him in the “special way” we are told by libshits how to talk to black people. So Scott now says Trump will not get re-elected..
Bubba could have said “looks like the NASCAR president psyched me up that there was a noose and and it was not a noose so maybe you should ask the NASCAR president why he hyped that to me, cuz I think it is retarded to think that was a noose.” But no.....he decided to play along and say “well technically it WAS. a noose, and so technically I felt threatened because of my skin color” And so yes, it was CORRECT for Trump to recognize that he PLAYED ALONG with it.....Scott thinks since he did not instigate that makes all the difference. What would have made all the difference Scott, is if Bubba said some retards thought it was a noose or PRETENDED TO ME that they believed it was a noose...but it was not so I have no idea what the agenda of the people are who were trying to get me to also claim it was a noose.”
So Scott has gone utter fagggot twice in two weeks.
Fuck him. And no he is NOT a master persuader, no, he does NOT have “moments of genius”.
He is just an utter faggot.
I like most of what he says, but I agree with you that his whole "you didn't adequately tiptoe around their feelings, so you will now lose the election" schtick is tiresome. And the way he says it is obnoxious. "Oh well, Trump loses now. So here's the next thing I wanna talk about."
The thing about Scott is, I disagree with a good chunk of his beliefs. But the remaining opinions he has are some of the most unique in the internet. And, if we restrict people who support Trump to only those who agree 100.000%, then Trump will get two votes. We need as many people to vote for him as possible. Most Trump voters aren't Pedes.
Scott Adams understands persuasion a good bit. Everything points to Trump being a grandmaster. Scott can't follow every move he makes, just understand and explain some of them.
Comments get deleted if you don't agree 100% and you disagree politely. Don't ask how I know. And yes Trump needs to appeal to the masses instead of just the most hard-core supporters. And on that note, Scott Adams was correct when he said Trump should work harder to persuade uncommitted voters or he's gonna lose. It's not possible to win the election if only republicans vote for him. This is sad but true. Trump still has a few months to turn things around. Will he?
Scott exhibits a lot of contempt for his viewers as of late. Trump needs to persuade the middle. The commited left is a waste of energy. The anti-trump narrative IS in danger of snowballing.
Rehtorical appeasement of the left is not the answer. Trying to be their friends is not the answer. Standing up for our Civiliaztion and trusting the liberal cray meltdown to turn off middle voters is likely the way.
A good bit of what scott does is play at persuasion in his own audience, make claims just to see if they can form an argument against a position which he doesn't Really hold but will hold just to be contrarian. Scott is Intelligent but he almost exclusively relies on "perception management" and "persuasive rhetoric" and bases beliefs on whatever happens to be widely available information. He can jump Straight to the right conclusion ( i.e. Tik Tok should be banned along with all other chinese spyware ) but only After he can point at a public source. Watching him waffle over General Flynn before rallying behind him was silly, as is his ongoing simping for Heels-up Harris.
Honestly i think Scott mostly talks Harris up just to aggravate his viewers and knows he can do it convincingly.
He's pacing us for the Heels Up Presidency,
^ Found Dogbert
The other day, he was saying that Trump was using bad words in his speech, and that if he wanted to persuade uncommitted voters, he shouldn't have been using words that the left finds offensive.
The lesson of the last 5 years, which Scott lived through, but apparently forgot, is that the left was going to say that Trump's words were offensive no matter what he said. The articles attacking his Independence Day speech were written weeks ago.
When I'm reading news articles I mentally highlight with actual color coding. What ever the news item is actually covering, any factual description or quoting of that event I leave unadorned.
But whenever they open some paragraph 'retrospective' of something I mentally color it yellow. Things like, "Our readers recall that Trump once said..." or "This comes on the heels of..." or "despite [something that has noting to do with the event]" ... a smart commenter here pointed out use of the word 'amid' to inject these toxic non-sequitirs ... check out that thread!
Whenever they break from describing the event to supplying the remarks of some tapped 'expert' I color it pink. It's interesting if the expert is interesting but you have to pay extra attention. For many of these you realize it is expert copypasta and the 'expert' is NOT referring to the event in the article.
And when I'm done, I often find there are yellow and pink splotches everywhere, with little actual content about the event. News articles are like a parched desert sometimes.
I don't get why people fawn all over him on here. Guy's just another snarky libturd who is smart enough to pull in sheep from both sides of the fence.
he's an authoritarian with no concept of "the sacred" and a disdain for objectivity, but he's smart otherwise lol
He is sometimes very interesting. Sometimes he is a complete idiot. No one is perfect. I agree with everything else you said about Bubba tho. He took the first opportunity to go on TV and talk to all the press and start crying about racism. Instead he coulda been like "let's not make a fuss about it until we get more info. The FBI are looking into it and hopefully it is just all a misunderstanding. We'll see." instead of unleashing a world of shit on NASCAR.