Mr. Adams Goes to Washington
"Totally normal day in the Simulation." ~ Scott Adams
Yep, just totally normal. Those were the words captioning the photo you see accompanying this article. The words on Scott's Instagram. I saw this posted online last night and I immediately had to do a double take.
On the one hand, I could totally see this being a thing that exists - and indeed, stranger things have happened. Scott's a high-profile rich and famous dude whose spoken in defense of Trump quite often. He has lots of connections. Don Jr. even follows him on Twitter, so in some sense, it was only a matter of time before a meeting like this took place.
On the other hand, as an artist - and just a child of the Internet - I've seen enough Photoshops in my day that it gave me pause to question whether this was real or merely a simulation. The caption only added to my confusion as I wasn't sure if Scott was trolling.
Add to that the fact that Scott will be the first to warn you against putting too much trust in videos and photos, while also suggesting we mere mortals have within us the potential to hack reality through affirmations.
Put all that together and you could forgive my initial skepticism.
But no, it turns out this was indeed for real as he confirmed later that night via Tweet and then again this morning on Periscope:
If you've been following my blog for any length of time, you know how much of a fan of these two I am and how excited I and his other followers are about the prospect of these two meeting. Of course, while I do understand and respect his decision not to disclose the details of their private conversation, at the same time ...
COME ON, MAN!! GIVE US THE GOODS!!
No? Really? Seems he's serious about playing coy.
Sigh ... fine, alright. Have it your way, Scott. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, really. It's not like this the first time he's teased his audience with some big and secret project in the works, but in this case, it's a bit bigger and damn it, I wanna know what it is!!
Oh well, guess that means it's speculation and prediction time.
The first question I have is: Who was it that invited him? Scott's lips are sealed, but I think we can narrow it down to a reasonable short list. For starters, he's confirmed that his book has circulated around the White House, meaning it would have to be someone in Trump's inner circle. Scott won't confirm or deny that the Donald has read his book and suggests it unlikely he's seen his Periscopes, so if it was the President who invited him, someone had to recommend him first.
We can be sure of this, because Donald Trump would have Tweeted in praise of Win Bigly otherwise:
Unless I just missed it, which is possible. Fact-check me on that.
Trump has met with the Kardashians and has a personal relationship with Kanye West. We know Kanye has likewise watched a few of Scott's Periscopes - at least those concerning himself, Candace Owens, and the black mindset. Thanks to the media, their association is well-known, so it's possible Kanye West mentioned it to him, but I would rate that as unlikely.
Far more likely would be Don Jr. since, as I said, he follows Scott on Twitter and has likely seen his videos talking in praise of his father's technique.
Given how close the President is to his family, I would rate it as highly probable that some of Scott's observations have trickled up to the highest level. Equally likely may have been Jared Kushner, who was at the meeting along with Ivanka, whereas Don Jr. was not. At least, Scott failed to mention that, or maybe he was busy and wasn't able to attend.
That would seem like a wasted opportunity, given it was set up two weeks in advance.
Of course, it could just as easily have been a close advisor to the President, depending on the specific topic. Someone who knew of Scott's expertise and his particular talent stack for persuasion, technology, and philanthropy, whether from his book or his Periscopes. I'd rate it highly unlikely they were simply a Dilbert fan.
That brings us to the question of what did they discuss?
Obviously, only the people who were actually in the room know for sure, and Scott isn't saying for the moment; but here again, I think we can narrow down the possibilities.
I should point out it's entirely within the realm of possibility that they just talked about pleasantries without touching politics or policy or persuasion. That, much like with certain other prominent figures, he merely called him in to congratulate him on his success and to thank him for being out in the vanguard, fighting against TDS.
This would certainly fit with his statement that he didn't know why he was going there beforehand, and what they'd be talking about.
Again, I'd rate that as highly unlikely for the same reason as it'd be a missed opportunity, and Scott being the savvy businessman that he is, with lots of experience under his belt, doesn't seem the type to waste a trip to the White House like that. Even without knowing the agenda beforehand, I'm sure Scott has prepared a hypothetical list of things he would like to talk about in such a situation and maybe a few of those found their way into the conversation after it began - he did say, repeatedly, that it was an extremely comfortable experience.
That said, it could also be a form of strategic ambiguity to get us to think his trip was way more awesome and significant than it really was. Knowing him, that seems the sort of game a pair of Master Persuaders would enjoy playing to troll the media.
Sort of the same mind trick he pulls when asked how many guns he owns. He won't say, which is actually smarter than simply admitting you're unarmed, even if you are, because any would-be victim now has to calculate the possibility that maybe you could be armed and do they risk that chance? Odds are, they'll go rob the house they know to be disarmed, leaving you alone.
But probably not. I only mention it for completeness, really.
And that's why he's the Jedi Master.
Assuming there was actually something of substance discussed between Scott and Trump, and I can't imagine there wouldn't be ... no, wait. Scratch that, I just did. Ok, odds are they talked about something of note and Scott is just playing coy about it. He also won't say how long the meeting was, using the same strategic ambiguity. He said the meeting was brief. What does that mean? How long is brief?
Could be five minutes of small talk and a selfie or it could have been several hours of substance, or even something in between, like my "brief" exchange with Sargon of Akkad when he came to Manhattan, or my "brief" exchange with Feminist Frequency when they came to Brooklyn.
Personally, I think Scott wants to downplay the length to control how many potential options we might fit in there so as to throw us off the trail, making it easier for him to avoid talking about it.
So here is my short list of possible topics:
Housing and Urban Development
Scott recently has been teasing some big project with Bill Pulte, regarding his work in blighted urban areas such as Detroit and elsewhere. Areas that disproportionately impact the poor and minorities and which are ripe for renewal. We know that Trump is a real estate guy suffering from branding issues in terms of his handling of race relations and that he appointed Ben Carson as the leader of HUD, so a few recommendations from Scott could go a long way there.
On that same topic, he could have just improved ...
As I write this, Scott just put up a Periscope of him interviewing Hawk Newsome of Black Lives Matter, promoting the Agape March for Love. Using the Persuasion Filter to translate between Republicans and BLM has been another pet project of Scott's and was one of the first ideas that sprang to mind when I found out this meeting was legit. Trump's image of course suffers terribly in this department, with even Scott giving him a D- on his report card. If Scott could broker a meeting between Hawk and Trump, I think tremendous turnaround would result from that, both in terms of optics and substance.
The three of them are all New Yorkers, so they should get along rather well and have a productive meeting. One way he might do that is by ...
It's no secret that Trump is a teetotaler. He's had friends whose lives got fucked up because of drugs and alcohol, and doesn't want to become another victim, which is perfectly understandable. Despite this, he's paid lip service to legalizing marijuana, talking tough about cracking down on the opium epidemic, while simultaneously giving people the right to try experimental treatments, and appointing a bizarre lame duck Jeff Sessions who is at once a law and order guy but is (rightly) applying prosecutorial discretion here.
He'll bark at drugs but never really bite them.
It's strange, really. It's almost as if Trump is struggling within himself to do the right thing, even against his personal convictions.
While I do have sympathy for his conflict, the fact remains that the War on Drugs has been an unlawful, murderous, racist waste of resources and human life. I'll employ a bit of strategic ambiguity myself and refrain from stating publicly what drugs (if any) I've ever done or not done and leave that to your imagination, but simply say that if Trump won't end the war entirely, he should at least start by AB testing with marijuana, which already has a track record in some States (and soon New Jersey if Lawless Murphey would get up off his lawless ass and fix it, that is).
Legalizing weed at the federal level would not only play to his strengths economically, but would have a ripple effect on health and race relations, two of Trump's biggest sticking points at the moment. It would be hard for his critics to hold in their heads he's a racist at that point, and is something a pot-smoking cartoonist skilled in the dark arts of persuasion would be primed to bring up.
Speaking of systemic health effects ...
Something else Scott frequently talks about, which is a sticking point for Trump, is the use of technology to solve issues of healthcare, bringing costs down so we don't have to resort to a Red Cortez platform of Medicare For All. Trump has already done a few small things in conjunction with Rand Paul to help ameliorate the issue - not to mention having a good economy with lots of jobs really helps - but it lacks the same impact.
Personally, the conversation I would have about healthcare would be very different from the one Scott may or may not have had with him; but regardless, I'm in favor of directional progress so I won't look a gift horse in the mouth if he wound up seeding a few good ideas in Trump's head.
Among some of the other issues that might have come up in the meeting would be general branding and framing of certain topics that, like a cloud of gnats, continue to hover around the President, being all annoying. Things like the migrant kids in cages, Russia Collusion, meeting with foreign heads of State, or the environment. Just a few subtle changes to his overall approach that could give him a slight edge going forward and possibly secure reelection and a subsequent legacy of greatness..
Scott is fond of saying he doesn't just observe reality, he actively creates it. While those of us on the outside can't really know for sure what he and Donald Trump talked about, one thing is certain. Scott Adams is helping steer the world towards a brighter future and helping to bring about the Golden Age.
If you're interested in politics and pop culture, you might like reading my book. Certainly the people who've reviewed it so far all have positive things to say about it. I even put up a trailer for it online. You should totally check it out. You can also support me on Patreon if you enjoy articles like this and want to read more. It really helps and I appreciate your generosity.
May you each find love, peace, purpose, happiness, and will in your lives.