Scott Adams vs. Vox Day

This is pretty funny…it looks like Vox Day is sperging out about Scott Adams, in regard to the latter’s alleged betrayal and flip-flopping in regard to vaccines.

Below is Scott’s response to Vox Day’s blogpost:

Scott Adams and Vox Day have large platforms, but Adam’s is much bigger, so evidently he is doing something right. Even though Vox may be correct, it doesn’t matter. Few of Scott Adams’ followers actually care if he flip-flopped or is wrong, because part of his brand is not toeing the line for any party/side and being skeptical of prevailing narratives. Being anti-vaccine is a popular belief (as in, a lot of people, absolutely speaking, are opposed to Covid vaccines even if it’s not of the majority of people, relatively speaking), so Scott’s angle is to look at how both sides are wrong, or the intersection of these opposing narratives.

For example, here is Scott regarding congressional insider trading, in which I agree that if you have a large number of traders, because if returns follow a normal distribution, you would expect some congressmen outperform an index fund and others to lag, just by virtue of pure luck/randomness:

People who follow pundits do not expect that pundits will be right all the time, or will agree 100% of the time. If these people had to pass purity tests and shit tests, they would not be in business. Everyone flip-flops or is wrong at least once on an issue. A pundit may still provide useful information or a unique perspective even if he is wrong most of the time. Vox is hoping, similar to his attacks on Jordan Peterson in 2018-2019, that Scott Adams’ followers will defect or disavow in protest or anger, but that is not going to happen. Look at Peter Schiff, who has has over six hundred thousand Twitter followers despite being wrong about almost everything. Being right and having a successful personal brand are evidently not the same skillset. Ben Shapiro in 2016 was part of the ‘never Trump’ movement, and then in 2020 pivoted in support of Trump. Despite getting a lot of criticism for both opposing Trump and then flip-flopping, his personal brand and influence is larger than ever: a recent tweet he made regarding omicron got an astonishing five thousand ‘likes’ just an hour after posting it.

In the comments on Twitter, a few of Scott’s followers are irked, but most couldn’t care less. They are not holding Scott to some impossibly high standard of correctness, but just enjoy the community he has created, and even if he is wrong on occasion, he is still better than the mainstream media.

Not related to Scott Adams, regarding Trump:

That doesn’t mean he can’t win election in 2024, although the failure to successfully address the 2020 fraud may do so. For all we know, his continued support of the vaccine regime may be the price he is paying in order to return to the presidency. But if he does, it is unlikely that his second term will be as successful as his first.

Yeah, major successes such as investigating the Clintons (as he promised during a debate), ‘returning jobs to America’, building a wall, deporting illegals, stopping ‘big tech’ censorship, stopping the insanity of far-left, etc. He was good for the economy, but other than that, got stonewalled on the rest of the agenda, and then Covid came along, so it’s hard to find any successes. This does seem like the cognitive dissonance Scott Adams is always talking about. Vox has to be juggle supporting Trump but admitting he failed/failing and is a shill for ‘big pharma’. I do think Trump has a good shot at winning in 2024 given that at this point it’s easier to find intelligent life in space than anyone who thinks Biden is doing a good job. I don’t however think he will accomplish more if given a second term, than he did in his first. He will probably delegate much of his work to his Ivy League cabinet, and then pick fights with the media on whatever social media platform has not banned him yet.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.