Scott Adams endorses Hillary Clinton
Can you blame him? You can almost smell the fear:
I’ve decided to come off the sidelines and endorse a candidate for President of the United States.He still thinks Donald Trump is going to win. But he is supporting Hillary Clinton, so if you are a Clinton supporter, please don't kill him.
I’ll start by reminding readers that my politics don’t align with any of the candidates. My interest in the race has been limited to Trump’s extraordinary persuasion skills. But lately Hillary Clinton has moved into the persuasion game – and away from boring facts and policies – with great success. Let’s talk about that.
This past week we saw Clinton pair the idea of President Trump with nuclear disaster, racism, Hitler, the Holocaust, and whatever else makes you tremble in fear... I’ve decided to endorse Hillary Clinton for President, for my personal safety. Trump supporters don’t have any bad feelings about patriotic Americans such as myself, so I’ll be safe from that crowd. But Clinton supporters have convinced me – and here I am being 100% serious – that my safety is at risk if I am seen as supportive of Trump. So I’m taking the safe way out and endorsing Hillary Clinton for president.
As I have often said, I have no psychic powers and I don’t know which candidate would be the best president. But I do know which outcome is most likely to get me killed by my fellow citizens. So for safety reason, I’m on team Clinton.
Labels: politics
155 Comments:
I love this! Adams really knows how to twist the knife after San Jose.
San Jose undercover cops say that Trump supporters were running for their lives.
Is this real? How can anyone be such an unmitigated pussy?
@3 Adams takes trolling to the "hurt me plenty" level.
It's a very clever post. Perhaps too clever, but there's just enough hyperbole in there to persuade me that this is a comment on the over the top rhetoric of the anti-Trumpers rather than a genuine endorsement of Hillary.
@3 You really need to learn to not comment on things without taking the time to investigate them.
It's satire.
LOL, @3.
Well, not really an endorsement.
Very clever way to make a statement without giving the lefties an easy target.
@6, the incredulity was lost on you.
This is rather good, too:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/145560612726/the-robot-judge
A man who knows how fragile his income and lifestyle are, and speaks with corresponding subtlety.
Some are saying the young failed to vote for Bernie in CA on Tuesday.
They are perhaps just as likely to forget to vote in November, so Trump probably cannot expect any help from Bernie supporters then.
However, the article also claims that older voters were concealing their choice of candidate as well.
How many of them were strategically voting for Clinton knowing that Trump was going to win in the general?
So in double-speak terms he's actually pro-Trump, just shining a light on the rabid hostility of the left?
Scott Adams smeared poison on his lips and then gave Hillary a big wet kiss.
Fear? Despair?
Nullsense! One is felled by their own intellectual deceptions, I cannot support Hillary, I cannot ever support a woman for office and I wont. I did like Charlotte's Fern Shubert, she is a dear and fine lady but that was NC 2003 or so...
I hereby virtue signal or snowflake (really, I am nothing special) that I am lost without the patriarchy. I am lost without good, intelligent men guiding things, whether its guiding and stomping out my own despair or reminding me Life Is Not Fair, or calling me to back to reason separate from emotions. I fear the Lord (and kinda going hungry) but no fear. Fear over politics is absurd, I cannot believe Scott Adams is serious, but if I did, I fully suggest he is WRONG and pulling a boner or humor or something - why would he really fear, I thought Adams was insulated from such fears.
It is not OT, its on topic, weakness and fearing women is untenable even invective to men whom what a future minus the henhouse!
Roseanne Barr supports Donald Trump?
What is that, the Vince Foster defense?
Scott Adams: Safe, legal and rare.
Whoever wins, there's going to be a market for bumper stickers:
"Don't blame me: I voted for Bernie!"
TL/DR: "Fear Mongering works. Go Hillary!"
A man who knows how fragile his income and lifestyle are, and speaks with corresponding subtlety.
He has a large load of "fuck you" money. It's more than just satire, he is practicing his Vulcan persuasion skills on his readers and planting the idea that Hillary is to be feared, and thus not voted for, under cover of his "support".
and I might say doing it from their own backyard in Berkely/SF. The man has stones.
I'm a little slow today - he's a clever one he is.
When you have rats you call the Trumpinator.
(Apologies to the veteran for borrowing his expression.)
Cuck.
@Orville
I stand corrected.
In that case, I'd go with this being a clever trolling of Clintonite fanatics...
There have been quite a few very convenient deaths where Hillary Clinton is concerned. More than the average mob boss, at any rate. Scott Adams makes that point in a unique way. Well done, sir!
She's going to need Kabuki make up to hide the welts from that compliment.
Is this real? How can anyone be such an unmitigated pussy?
He did write an article about how he hires tall men off the internet, no $5 5 foot wetbacks for him."When I need a service that only a tall guy can perform, I rent one on the Internet and order him to" ~Scott Adams
http://www.dangerandplay.com/2016/05/10/how-to-troll-people-using-nlp/
Trust me Scott Adams, you are not even in the top 1000 list to be knocked off by Hillary or her supporters. Hell, I am probably higher up on the list than you are by just being a Veteran. Calm down Dilbert, you've been drinking too much of your own juice and are now sounding goofy. Just breath....breath....
So...no one is getting this.
Guess I'll go eat a poor Irish child.
Some of you gents are just killing the rep of the alt-right, please crackas.
Scott Adams is batting his eye lashes at all of you "altright" while grabbing a handfull of Dem snatch to cover all bases. There is no trolling here just Scott Adams doing what he has always done. Look out for himself.
Scott Adams has made his living by being extremely sarcastic. Don't really trust anything he says.
@30 - Nice one, well said.
Speaking of riots, violence etc., I wonder if there will potentially be riots again tonight on San Jose? After all... Crosby does time that damn puck! And I bet he'd vote for Trump, too!
Rough days if you are San Josayan... riots, riots galore. Riots!
@31 +1
@30
Things are just too swift for me today.
lol, Loved the reference.
I just finished reading his book How to Fail Big and greatly enjoyed it. The man is a master.
This comment has been removed by the author.
"There have been quite a few very convenient deaths where Hillary Clinton is concerned. More than the average mob boss, at any rate. Scott Adams makes that point in a unique way. Well done, sir!"
Well yeah, but it will be lost on them. They're (the left) are ok with violence anywho. So not sure what Mr.Adams "subtlety" or indirection accomplishes.
Clinton 2016: Smell the Fear
"So...no one is getting this."
And neither will the left because... they don't care.
@32.
Ceasar, it hasn't occurred to you that a public endorsement that consists of "I support her because her followers are vicious and might hurt me" isn't really an endorsement.
And no, you're not higher up on the Left's kill-list than is Scott Adams, because you're not smart enough to pose any kind of threat. In fact, you're probably not on it at all, given that you once served as a soldier for the the beast that must be slain.
Scott Adams is endorsing Hillary Clinton? Well, shoot, I guess I have to disavow Dilbert now.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/140155514891/disavowing-trump
@21: He lives in Danville, which is only technically even in the Bay Area. John Madden lives there.
It's the lefts playbook (The “revolutionary terror” of Lenin and Trotsky- https://www.lewrockwell.com/political-theatre/puffho-wants-violence-trumpsters/) so they aren't going to be bothered by Scott Adams snark. The need their heads bashed in, no snark needed.
Talk about damning with faint praise ...
So not sure what Mr.Adams "subtlety" or indirection accomplishes.
1. It's pretty funny for people who get the joke.
2. It shows that he's very clever.
VD,
What's your take on Trump's comments on the judge?
I'm thinking it's possible he's diverting attention away from any talk of fraud and moving it to the meaningless cries of racism. Plus, they've been saying Hispanics hate him... hard to say he's wrong when he says one of them might hate them, especially after they've advocated judges using their ideologies.
@43
More people will care who Kim Kardasian endorses then Scott Adams.
No one cares why someone endorses just that they endorse.
I am smart enough to put a high velocity bullet in someone, therefore a threat.
Could care less of what you think of the military.
@35 - Jesus, San Jose. I don't know who I hate more, that shithead of a mayor, the token police chief or Joe Thornton. Go Penguins.
@50.
You are smart enough to shoot someone but not smart enough to know whom to shoot.
Pathetic attention seeking behavior by Adams....too bad, he couldabeenacontenda...
The dude talks like a man who has no children.
How are people this poor at reading comprehension that they're taking what he says at face value?
@50
My enemies. Its really not that hard. Its not like your video games.
@50 you're doing nothing to dispel the stereotype that Army pukes are fucking morons.
@57
Just get online to defend your girlfriend? Let me guess you were in the navy? Maybe a submariner?
kennymac wrote:@50 you're doing nothing to dispel the stereotype that Army pukes are fucking morons.
There is a world of difference between enlisted and officer.
Adams is quite the merry prankster.
If you can't read this and realize it is satire, you probably shouldn't be allowed to vote or own a weapon. Some of you need to ask your house monitor to loosen your helmet.
@59 Yes, one group is made up of just plain morons. The other is made up of morons and gentlemen.
Not a good showing by the peanut gallery today.
My hope is that people are reading the snippet and shooting their mouths off, then reading the full article and comments, realizing how stupid they are and slinking off.
I had really hoped to see a whole lot more, 'this post deleted by the author' messages by now. Really, peeps, there is nothing wrong with admitting your first reading was wrong. We respect admissions like that.
exactly...he is not writing this for the alt.right or the left. He is writing this for the norms...the undecided and his message is spot on...
Hillary is dangerous and is not afraid of using intimidation to get folks to follow her.
"But Clinton supporters have convinced me – and here I am being 100% serious – that my safety is at risk if I am seen as supportive of Trump. So I’m taking the safe way out and endorsing Hillary Clinton for president.
Notice one part of this statement, "and here I am being 100% serious". Unlike most of the rubes, I am actually taking Scott Adams at his word. After all, if no one believes anything he writes, how does this help his brand? Trolling to the point of being completely unbelievable makes someone irrelevant.
This was a brilliant piece of writing by Adams. He is un-endorsing while officially endorsing. Simply brilliant haha!
Reading comprehension here is at an all-time low. Really? Do you think he's actually fearful, actually endorsing her?
DISAVOW
I
S
A
V
O
W
Adams is breddy smart, and, with the rest of the lite-libertardian white nice guys in 'murica, he's choking down a big ol' red pill this election, no water.
This past week we saw Clinton pair the idea of President Trump with nuclear disaster, racism, Hitler, the Holocaust, and whatever else makes you tremble in fear...
Trump's answer should be "Don't fear change!"
Haha, I always knew that triangulating, posturing fag was playing a passive-aggressive anti-Trump game.
Mr. Wizard, thy rod is limp. Draw more spergy atheist repetitious cartoons.
I recall investigating "God's Debris" & sequel, which basically amounted to Socratic levels of dishonesty, with an extra helping of pointless clever that meander for hundreds of pages until the big atheist anti-Jehovah reveal at the end.
Congrats, you've managed to simulate Chinese self-interested unaltruism. AKA the country that is so corrupt people don't even bother to leave honest reviews for online products, thus destroying the trustworthiness of intra-national ecommerce. That's all Adams is, and thus it's no wonder Dilbert contains no hope of redemption.
How these geriatric leftist atheists can read Ecclesiastes and still give a damn about preserving their wrinkled hides is beyond me. Meaningless, meaningless. Arrange Adams' lifetime oevre on a single wall, step back, and watch as the cacophany of jovial cartoon squiggles animate into a single emergent pattern - a somnolescent cockroach, antennae sluggishly twitching.
About such men one can only say: Thank God Heaven will not contain them.
@30 Pass me that plate will you? I hear roast paddy helps with an irony deficiency.
@65. Ceasar
Notice one part of this statement, "and here I am being 100% serious". Unlike most of the rubes, I am actually taking Scott Adams at his word. After all, if no one believes anything he writes, how does this help his brand? Trolling to the point of being completely unbelievable makes someone irrelevant.
People who have half a brain can read between the lines. You apparently can't read between the lines, so you throwing out that everyone else are "rubes" is a bit of a howler.
@70. Neanderserk
Oh ffs.
Did you actually read the link? Or even any of the previous comments before you posted?
Both of those are extremely important before commenting.
16. Anonymous Wanderer June 09, 2016 11:59 AM
Roseanne Barr supports Donald Trump
Barr....told THR that she supports Trump in the 2016 election because to her, “[Trump] is saying that the order of law matters.”
“When a president can just pass laws all on his own, that is a little bit different than what America was supposed to be about,” Barr explained. “And Trump is saying people will have to be vetted, we’ll have to have legal immigration. It’s all a scam. I mean, illegal immigration. When people come here and they get a lot of benefits that our own veterans don’t get. What’s up with that?”
this is what everyone should be saying - its just common sense
This comment has been removed by the author.
He's 100% serious that supporting Trump is hazardous to his health.
He's not wrong.
The sentence about supporting Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, enjoys no such 100% guarantee.
Jon M wrote:I had really hoped to see a whole lot more, 'this post deleted by the author' messages by now. Really, peeps, there is nothing wrong with admitting your first reading was wrong. We respect admissions like that.
eh...I can understand some folks saying that they want him stop with the word games and speak plainly. However, I was say if he came straight out and supported Trump, he would get pushed off to the side and ignored. His way of subtlety keeps people talking and gives them more chances to be converted.
64. Blogger lowercaseb June 09, 2016 1:58 PM
Hillary is dangerous and is not afraid of using intimidation to get folks to follow her.
its not her in particular, its the left that is dangerous and violent
Caesar, you sure do talk big.
I've got twenty bucks that says you're full of shit.
SF
Jumbo Joe and Brent Burns should come out tonight clean shaven.
It's their only chance.
Student in Blue wrote:@65. Ceasar
Notice one part of this statement, "and here I am being 100% serious". Unlike most of the rubes, I am actually taking Scott Adams at his word. After all, if no one believes anything he writes, how does this help his brand? Trolling to the point of being completely unbelievable makes someone irrelevant.
People who have half a brain can read between the lines. You apparently can't read between the lines, so you throwing out that everyone else are "rubes" is a bit of a howler.
Sad! Make Blog Comments Great Again!
Seriously, how hard is it to notice that an explicitly fearful endorsement has different message content than a typical endorsement?
@73
It's not Adams' virtue that he wound up helping Trump more than hurting. He just wanted to show off his wizard hat by concern-troll analyzing charisma. Score some cheap virtue-signalling points and slow the steamroller. Unfortunately his natural cowardice reacted with unter-leftist mass idiocy to generate a perfect storm of unintended consequences. He's still a geriatric atheist urinal (white outside, yellow inside).
One way or another, he'll flip-flop soon enough.
But Clinton supporters have convinced me – and here I am being 100% serious – that my safety is at risk if I am seen as supportive of Trump.
That is the only sentence to be taken at face value
Most of the people in my Facebook friends did not like this. I thought it was reasonably funny. I might need new friends.
@82. Neanderserk
It's not Adams' virtue that he wound up helping Trump more than hurting.
Have you ever read a piece of satire in your life?
@CM
That is the only sentence to be taken at face value
Even more, by him saying "and HERE I am being 100% serious" that should be red flags and warning alarms to everyone that all of the rest of the piece is not 100% serious.
way to call attention to how many low IQ commenters troll your threads, VD.
IT's like it's an IQ test or something. Maybe a rhetoric test.
Can you read the endorsement and see that Adams is literally and directly saying, with a big "I'm being 100% serious here" flag, that Clinton supporters are thugs who will not shirk at violence to get what they want?
Or do you only see "I endorse Clinton" and lose your shit?
Wonder what (((Gonzalo Curiel))) thinks about this?
I think it is funny how many people misunderstand his post.
Some of us are entertained by Mr. Adams.
The rest of you don't take him seriously enough.
Student in Blue wrote:@82. Neanderserk
It's not Adams' virtue that he wound up helping Trump more than hurting.
Have you ever read a piece of satire in your life?
Oh, I think hew understands the satire, he just doesn't like Adams. YMMV with Adams' humor...so I can understand.
I don't think Adams is a coward whatsoever, however.
@Snidely - Asperger Test
S1AL wrote:@Snidely - Asperger Test
Can't be. I passed.
@93. lowercaseb
Oh, I think hew understands the satire, he just doesn't like Adams. YMMV with Adams' humor...so I can understand.
If that's true, then he completely shifted goalposts, where his original post was almost literally, "ha ha! I always knew Adams was a #NeverTrump-er!"
Now it's just simply "Oh, uh, well I only meant to say I didn't like him." In which case it's as simple as saying, "Then why in the hell did you bring this up in the first place? Who cares?"
lowercaseb wrote:Hillary is dangerous and is not afraid of using intimidation to get folks to follow her.
Be careful being around her in Fort Marcy park.
@39
When you eat the babies for breakfast, as Nathan Bedford Forrest said he did after Fort Pillow, then we'll know you're really tough.
@62
They are gentlemen only by act of Congress.
@85
You're actually on Facebook?
Salt wrote:lowercaseb wrote:Hillary is dangerous and is not afraid of using intimidation to get folks to follow her.
Be careful being around her in Fort Marcy park.
Heh, she's harmless. Vince Foster can attest.
I admit I've always been suspicious of Adams because I read about 1/2 of his Failing book and felt like it crossed some spiritual lines for me with its advice. It felt So, when I first started reading this, I completely took it the wrong way. It wasn't until a few seconds after reading the "100% serious" line that I realized what was going on.
Quick anecdote: my buddy flies in the reserves and occasionally pilots Air Force One. Hillary was getting on the plane with Chelsea, lambasting her for her lack of ambition. Hillary glanced at the flight attendant (a black woman) and pointed to her while telling Chelsea, "if you keep this up, you're going to end up like her." The flight attendant went to the front to tell my friend that she would not be going to the cabin for the rest of the flight and refused to even look at Hillary.
Hillary will bulldoze anyone or any law to get what she wants. But who here doesn't know that? At least pass on the personal story for those of your family/friends who are less convinced.
He's trolling all the SJWs giving him shit for "supporting" Trump.
Adams is in the foxhole aiming at the enemy.
He's shouting at the SJWs, "don't fire at me, fellas, I'm not with these guys!" even as he lobs a grenade into their bunker...
... And some of you are then screaming, "Did you hear this guy? He just said he's not one of us! Get him!"
Speaking of endorsements. Obama has finally made good on whatever backroom deal was in place with Crooked Granny Cankles and endorsed her.
He also basically ordered Bernie to quit the race.
Bernie looked genuinely shocked when he heard the news. As if much beloved Tibetan Spaniel had suddenly pooped on his pillow.
Is there a consensus as to who is behind the rally rabble? a) actual crazy Bern-in-hellions b) Hillary financed rent-a-mobs posing as crazy Bern-in-hellions c) Soros financed rent-a-mobs posing as crazy Bern-in-hellions d) genuine crazy Mexicans e)drug lord rent-a-mobs posing as genuine crazy Mexicans e) none of the above f) some or all of the above.
I just can't decide and my tin-foil antennae aren't helping.
"98. Quartermaster June 09, 2016 3:43 PM
@39
When you eat the babies for breakfast, as Nathan Bedford Forrest said he did after Fort Pillow, then we'll know you're really tough."
Wait just a damned minute..where are you supposedly quoting that from? Please provide a link.
@GraceL
So far, everything I've seen has pointed to c),but I'm sure there quite a bit of the others too, especially d).
Snort.
Hilliary is the pointy-haired boss! It all makes sense now!!
Now that Adams is in the Hillary camp, we should all fear being attacked by him. Anyone who has ever read a Dilbert cartoon and not laughed is in mortal danger!!!
Geir Balderson wrote:Hilliary is the pointy-haired boss! It all makes sense now!!
Ted Cruz as Dilbert
Marco Rubio as Asok
Kasich as Alice
Jeb! Bush as Wally (please clap)
Bernie Sanders as Ted the Generic Guy
Megyn Kelly as Catbert
and Donald J Trump as Dogbert.
How is it that some of you don't get it? It's not even really subtle. Scott is very obviously mocking her 3rd world followers for their violent actions in San Jose.
> So far, everything I've seen has pointed to c),but I'm sure there quite a bit of the others too, especially d).
Yes. I'd guess a combination of c) and d) also.
How is it that some of you don't get it?
Partly because Adams tends to be so in love with his own cleverness that people are overthinking it trying to find a true hidden meaning behind the satire.
As I tried to post the other nite...satire and sarcasm are inquired tastes.
Sometimes, hard to translate on the net.
Ah, crap...I meant acquirred tastes.
Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus wrote:Wonder what (((Gonzalo Curiel))) thinks about this?
I thought is was //[Gonzalo Curiel]\\?
Ah, crap...I meant acquirred tastes.
That post was like watching a professional magician on stage. Scott has explained confirmation bias before, while also explaining that the trick works even if you know about it.
So if like or dislike both Scott and Hillary, you will probably see an endorsement; if you like one and dislike the other, you will probably see an anti-endorsement; and if you remember that you're at a magic show, you will probably suspect that it was all an illusion. A trick of the light. All in your head.
For entertainment purposes only, and don't try it at home.
@111
Alice is too angry to be Kasisch. I feel he's more of a ratbert.
Rubio as Asok is perfect though.
Roland wrote:Alice is too angry to be Kasisch. I feel he's more of a ratbert.
Good call.
So who's Alice? NRO?
Snidely Whiplash wrote:Roland wrote:Alice is too angry to be Kasisch. I feel he's more of a ratbert.
Good call.
So who's Alice? NRO?
There's only one who punches people; Carly Fiorina. Destroyed a lot of lives that one did.
@3
You don't read Scott's blog do you? He is a fantastic shit poster.
But Alice is competent.
Only one choice;
Lewandowski
You had me for a moment with that headline.
Not the same Rosie that fueds with Trump
Madden?!
Love the backhanded endorsement
@14 Kudzu Bob
Well put
@30 DiscipleofSheiko
Guess I'll go eat a poor Irish child
Don't forget to add salt...
@74 andon
“When a president can just pass laws all on his own, that is a little bit different than what America was supposed to be about,” Barr explained. “And Trump is saying people will have to be vetted, we’ll have to have legal immigration. It’s all a scam. I mean, illegal immigration. When people come here and they get a lot of benefits that our own veterans don’t get. What’s up with that?”
Never thought I'd say this, but, Rosanne Barr actually made sense with that statement.
@95 Snidely Whiplash
Can't be. I passed.
You too? Cool.
The sentence about supporting Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, enjoys no such 100% guarantee
Just ask ambassador Stevens
IT's like it's an IQ test or something. Maybe a rhetoric test.
A mirror self recognition tests for 6yo non Asian minorities.
) actual crazy Bern-in-hellions b) Hillary financed rent-a-mobs posing as crazy Bern-in-hellions c) Soros financed rent-a-mobs posing as crazy Bern-in-hellions d) genuine crazy Mexicans
There was a white guy that came forward when Jeb was still running that said he responded to an ad for a rent-a-mob place and they paid him 4x what they did latrinos & blacks while women/children earned 1/2 what men of their race got. Some of them are no doubt crazy but getting paid for it.
Soros Cheerleader: Qualifications.
Mad Mestizo: Rape, murder, arson, trashing cop cars, hitting white women and rape.
Soros Cheerleader: You said rape twice.
Mad Mestizo: I like rape.
"How is it that some of you don't get it? It's not even really subtle. Scott is very obviously mocking her 3rd world followers for their violent actions in San Jose."
What some of you don't get is that satiric blogs aren't going to cut it in the long run. But yeah they are fun for now.
@65. Ceasar
Notice one part of this statement, "and here I am being 100% serious". Unlike most of the rubes, I am actually taking Scott Adams at his word.
You've clearly NOT read much Adams. He often says "I'm being 100% serious here" when, in fact, he is about to pull your leg twice was hard! Sheesh!
Scott Adams: "I support Clinton because I'm a coward!"
The converse of that would be to support Trump because you have a pair.
There are very good reasons Trump's MAGA hats are considered prime PUA gear by Heartiste and others.
Also, unfortunately, for those of you who think Adams is a shitlord playing an act and trolling the left, Vox has labeled him a Gamma.
@132
The vast faceless majority of channers/gamergaters are incel gammas/omegas, and they've been shitlording for over a decade.
Do NOT read too much into Adams' post. It's tongue in cheek, designed to play on the current zeitgeist. Something like a wake-up call.
Satire, yes. But satire still reveals a lot about the personality of the guy writing it. Gammaish tendencies.
Samuel Nock wrote:Satire, yes. But satire still reveals a lot about the personality of the guy writing it. Gammaish tendencies.
Is the Dilbert character a Gamma?
The answer to that is the answer.
@133 My Dead Gramps
Subtle difference. Omegas are able to convincingly shitlord on the internet because "we don't care" comes naturally to them. Gammas just come off as obnoxious twats and are more likely to be politically correct or rulemongers. I imagine that most of the manpower behind Gamergate is of the Omega sort, not the Gamma.
129. Anonymous BGKB June 09, 2016 7:08 PM
There was a white guy that came forward when Jeb was still running that said he responded to an ad for a rent-a-mob place and they paid him 4x what they did latrinos & blacks while women/children earned 1/2 what men of their race got.
yeah, I got a chuckle out of that
114. Blogger Cail Corishev June 09, 2016 5:01 PM
How is it that some of you don't get it?
Partly because Adams tends to be so in love with his own cleverness that people are overthinking it trying to find a true hidden meaning behind the satire.
I think he's on our side but I cant really decipher his message.
He's too clever for me.
andon wrote:I think he's on our side but I cant really decipher his message.
He's too clever for me.
I think he's on our side, because while doing a confirmation bias magic trick, he planted some nuclear sleeper persuasion with a trigger. Not only are we primed to see violence as Clinton-supporter initiated, but we're also primed to see Clinton endorsements as motivated by fear.
If you happen to be with people the next time someone endorses Clinton, try something like "Wow, I wonder what she threatened him with." Especially if it's Sanders.
But since the whole thing is riddled with confirmation bias ploys, I can't rule out the possibility that he suckered me too.
He's on his own side, because he supposedly has a unique view of reality. If anything he tends slightly towards Trump because Trump supporters have been very nice to him, and he finds Trump's persuasion prowess interesting, but if I recall it correctly he's not a believer in nationalism and various other core concepts.
Reading between the lines, he seems to be talking himself more and more over towards Trump, mostly because of how horrific the other side has been, but not so much because he thinks a wall is the best idea.
Ya know, VD?
You should dedicate a blog post as to who can bust with the best satire/sarcasm post.
Any subject goes. Mebbe limit it to 500 words or so.
Could be amusing.
@141 Student in Blue
And if he is trolling, I'll admit I found it as funny as anyone -- he did, after all, tar Hillary supporters as a bunch of cowards -- but at the same time he took out his own manhood in the process.
Gamma either way, whichever side he is really on.
@143. VFM #7634
Joking at your own expense isn't necessarily automatically Gamma. Remember that the key defining feature of a Gamma is he's a "Secret King", and whenever he's losing he's actually winning.
And really he's not *trolling*, but he's continuing to dredge up interest in himself in a similar way that Trump does it. Scott Adams is still selling himself as a brand and he knows it, keep that in mind. Not that this is a morally bad thing, but rather this is one of his long-term goals so that explains some of why he chooses to approach things the way he does.
Reactions to Adams' magic act by demographic:
Dumb & evil: uncomprehending violent hostility to apparent badspeech fragments. Pearls, swine.
Smart & evil: comprehension of magic trick genre, but persecution for elements of honesty integral to those tricks. Ostracisim of a deceiver for being insufficiently dishonest.
Dumb & good: Taken in by the show. Buys the confirmation bias misdirection. Is understanding of apparent badspeech; rationalizes it away.
Smart & good: Gazes past squid ink of tricks to evaluate the magician's soul based on the grand artistic themes of his act. Knows that out of the overflow of the mouth, the heart speaks.
Those alt-righters who think Adams is on their side need only ask one question:
Would an equally credible threat of physical harm have caused Adams to endorse Trump?
No, it would not have. If truly threatened, he would have simply fallen silent. Out of the overflow of his heart, Adams surrenders. The road to hell is broad, and paved with virtue signaling.
Adams' self-serving misdirection shouts "like me," "I'm clever," and "don't hurt me!" It is similar to how his fellow atheists yield meekly to distant untargeted brown Muslim violence while fearlessly persecuting white Christians.
The spirit of Anti-Christ animates them. They hate God's people: Adam "he-who-blushes", the ruddy David, the white-skinned Solomon, the Israelite tribe of Dan that became the Spartans.
I enjoy Dilbert because it honestly portrays folly as foolishness. I dislike Adams blog because it honestly reveals that he thinks his own foolishness wisdom.
I do not for a second buy Adams' hypno-suasion 101 posturing as a snowflake outlier on the political spectrum. He is a son of Belial - as common as grass, and just as flammable.
Trump is the latest incarnation of the white mighty man, of the eternal Aryan aristocracy. He is much larger than that obsolete branch of PUA, NLP, which barely ever sufficed to persuade history's sluttiest women to spread their legs.
@144 Student in Blue
Joking at your own expense isn't necessarily automatically Gamma.
I think to myself, WWDTD? Or, rather, WDTDT? To which I had to conclude, "H*ll no."
If that particular case isn't Gamma, it'll do until Gamma gets here.
Remember that the key defining feature of a Gamma is he's a "Secret King", and whenever he's losing he's actually winning.
Sure, but public debasement often involves Secret King-itis. Which was the main point of that recent "Don't be that guy" post on Alpha Game.
Man in Black: All right. Where is the poison? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both drink, and find out who is right... and who is dead.
Vizzini: But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the poison into his own goblet or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in Black: You've made your decision then?
Vizzini: Not remotely. Because iocane comes from Australia, as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.
Man in Black: Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
Vizzini: Wait till I get going! Now, where was I?
Man in Black: Australia.
Vizzini: Yes, Australia. And you must have suspected I would have known the powder's origin, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in Black: You're just stalling now.
Vizzini: You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? You've beaten my giant, which means you're exceptionally strong, so you could've put the poison in your own goblet, trusting on your strength to save you, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But, you've also bested my Spaniard, which means you must have studied, and in studying you must have learned that man is mortal, so you would have put the poison as far from yourself as possible, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in Black: You're trying to trick me into giving away something. It won't work.
Vizzini: IT HAS WORKED! YOU'VE GIVEN EVERYTHING AWAY! I KNOW WHERE THE POISON IS!
Man in Black: Then make your choice.
Vizzini: I will, and I choose - What in the world can that be?
@146. VFM #7634
I think to myself, WWDTD? Or, rather, WDTDT? To which I had to conclude, "H*ll no."
There are more ranks than Gamma and Alpha, you know. And in no case was I trying to argue that Adams was an Alpha instead.
@145. Neanderserk
Again, since you didn't bother answering the first time, have you ever read a piece of satire in your life?
Scott Adams persuades no-one that he shouldn't be targeted, irrespective of who wins.
FAIL
Adams has written some insightful things, and many funny things, sometimes at the same time. But this business (if he's indeed doing what people claim) of cleverly writing stuff that doesn't say what it seems to be saying, and also doesn't say what it seems not to be saying; so that a small group of clever boys can laugh at all the rubes trying to figure out what you're saying and sagely pat themselves on the back for recognizing that you're not saying what you said you were saying or not saying....
Gay.
If I wanted to read satire, I would pretend that an intelligent person wrote your comments.
The leftist argument, "Don't vote for Trump or a big angry NAM will beat you up," is 100% serious, and reflects literal daily reality on the streets.
Amen Cael
@Cail - If even this overly-literal pedant can understand the (obvious) satire, so can you. Take a deep breath and try again.
Yes, the satire is obvious. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the claims that he's not really satirizing anything, or making a straightforward statement, or trying to communicate any meaning at all -- that it's really a sort of Schroedinger's inkblot test, where different people's prejudices cause them to see different things, and only the truly gifted can see through the illusion and appreciate the trick.
You mean like this?
Muh NLP.
Post a Comment
Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.