Is this the same Scott Adams of Dilbert fame? He’s been a political weirdo for years and years, so naturally he’d allow himself this cognitive dissonance.
He fell into the trap of thinking his success came from being a genius, so when people don’t like his crappy opinions he just assumes everyone else is wrong
This explanation is awesomely succinct and also explains some people I know that I could never easily pinpoint why they bothered me. Thanks!
That’s tough. Good perspective, hopefully he’ll see this and do some reflecting on his life. Probably not but I still hope so
Unfortunately people like him rarely do. He got Dilbert dropped from most papers in 2023 for (in the most charitable interpretation) having a completely tone deaf reaction to a poll about race relations. Rather than think about why everyone got so angry with him he said his words were taken out of context and that they were hyperbole.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Adams?useskin=vector#Race
Part of the plotline involved a black character who “identif[ied] as white” and the company management asking him if he could also identify as gay.
I know he never would, but I really want him to give the proper context for that to not be offensive.
That’s pretty funny in the sense of a company trying to sell themselves as diverse and whatnot while being really offensive to the actual people. I can see a corporation doing that
Yes it is. He went full MAGA early on.
If people ever wonder how someone like Trump got elected in the first place, this is the prime example of why. “I forgot everything except the one thing he lied about the most, genius”.
“I only remember the most ridiculous part of the debate, so whoever said that was the winner.”
In the 30 second attention span era this is all that counts.
Sure, Kamala won the debate but does that get more people voting for her?
I doubt it will get more people to vote for Trump. The election is his to lose at this point.
“directionally correct” is a fun euphemism for “false, unless you assume some insane slippery slope argument”.
more like “it isn’t true, but it feels like the kind of thing that would be true about the people I don’t like”
It means that it doesn’t have to be true if it targets people they love to hate.
Tell the masses what they want to hear.
Directionally correct.
Directionally correct? That’s an interesting turn of phrase. So basically saying it’s not right but it feels like it could be right? That’s some straight bullshit right there.
Fascist reasoning–we “know” immigrants are evil therefore making up shit about them to gin up anti-immigrant sentiment is morally justified–if not required.
He thinks there’s some Truthiness.
I feel like it’s the ultimate catch all. Absolutely anything is directionally correct. Flat earth? I mean the earth has a shape and there are plenty of flat shapes so it’s directionally correct. Bigfoot? Easy. There are plenty of animals with very large feet. Directionally correct. Hatians eating dogs? Hatians eat animals with four legs and there are both hatians and animals with 4 legs in the United States. Directionally correct. Checkmate Kambala!
Odd. All I remember is a 78 year-old man-child being owned by a boss bitch.
I thought Trump was making up the stuff about post birth abortions, but then I watched a 78 year old baby get aborted on live TV.
I remember a narcissists head almost explode when she clowned his rally crowds
I’m ashamed of having liked Dilbert a lot in the past
No need to. He wasn’t always like this. He was always misanthropic but he was more of an equal opportunity misanthrope. The far right bullshit came later.
He was always like this, but his comics weren’t that deep and the ideas in them were just things people sent him. They were vague enough that we all just put our own meanings into them. Rewatch some of the cartoon, and you’ll see the red flags. The Bob Bastard episode clearly comes from an incel mindset.
I haven’t read any of his stuff in over ten years. I started reading it in the mid nineties. Things were definitely different then.
Here’s the first BtB on Scott Adams. He’s always thought of himself as a very special boy.
He joined the “man-o-sphere” during or shortly after his divorce and that sent him down the right wing rabbit hole.
Feeling this.
I was such a fanboy. Long before I could even work, I was obsessed. I even read God’s Debris and as a teen thought it was fire.
I got an office job (call centre) because of Dilbert. I thought everything was so fucking funny because people were talking just like in my favourite comic.
I think I can say without embarrassment that the art style was incredibly cute. Very kawaii. I loved the characters’ wide eyes and semicircle mouths like when they’re mindlessly bullshitting. :D
I know it’s parasocial, but I’m disappointed in myself for how badly I misjudged Scott Adams.
My worst opinion might be that terrible people can (and often enough do) make good creative output. Nice folks with no internal strife to burn off can work competently, but are not always deeply compelling.
Yeah that’s pretty toxic, but maybe there’s a kernel of truth to it. I wonder if any serious thought or study has gone into this phenomenon (if it even is one).
I’m open to being wrong, but I did say it might be my worst opinion
Edit: typo
I chose my words poorly. I think there’s merit to your ill take, though would love to be proved wrong.
I’m ashamed at being a tech worker who laughed along with others because people expected id like Dilbert as a tech worker, even though Dilbert reminds me of engineers who bring one good idea to a meeting and take all the credit when all the actual work on a project is done by someone else.
And just wasn’t that funny to me.
Nothing wrong with enjoying content someone makes in my opinion, you can’t know the opinions and ideals of everyone at every time.
Yeah I like a lot of Mel Gibson’s movie even though he turned out to be an antisemitic douchebag. I’ll watch them but I won’t pay to watch them.
Dilbert struck a chord with my IT friends and me but yes his politics are a complete meet of mental gymnastics.
Yeah a sharp distinction between good and evil, where bad people can never do anything good, is one of those ideas that makes a lot of sense emotionally but utterly zero sense rationally. There’s simply no reason someone can’t be a good cartoonist while also being a racist.
Scott Adams’s thing used to be that he had a good bullshit detector. Now he doesn’t have that thing.
Didn’t expect to see the Dilbert guy talking about Trump’s long balls this morning
It’s on brand for him really. The guy was weird long before we started using Weird as an insult.
Then obviously you never heard the Behind the Bastards episode on him. This tweet is typical Scott.
Strong copium vibes from Adams…
I guess Howard Dean won because all anyone can remember is his scream.
I guess Romney won because all anyone can remember is “binders full of women”.
People laughing at and being disgusted with the convicted felon / village idiot is not a win.
He won the debate because you are stupid enough to be influenced by shock politics, got it. Just admit it, you don’t want a debate, you never wanted it, you just wanted a spectacle, and that’s something your cult leader can easily provide because it’s just a matter of bullshit to him, not fact. Scott Adams, a has-been in mediocre corporate entertainment, praising entertainment based politics, who could have guessed?
deleted by creator
And Fox is built to produce and incubate fear and hate.
Some fucked up part of me wants Trump to succeed and allow all of his fascist dreams come to fruition, just to see the looks on these clowns faces when they realized they are responsible for cementing fascist rule in the US.
Unfortunately, I know that in reality, they never will. Their brains will not allow it.
But to just see the look of realization when they start seeing their friends, family, and neighbors executed for being homosexual, or having an abortion 2 decades prior. “Oops.”
Of course, then I snap out of it and realize I’m not a sociopath.
It would be awesome if they could have exactly what they’re voting for but it applies only to the people who supported it.
What I’m reading here is “I have the memory of someone with frontal lobe dementia, therefore Trump won.”
you know he’s a good critic because he’s changing his metrics after seeing the thing he’s critiquing
What were his original metrics?
he probably didn’t have any
i recall a lot of the debate, for example harris casually dropping she has a gun (while the other guy was recently shot at) 😄
there was a lot going on, ngl
She baited Donald alot, but the other half of the time like this comment, she was speaking to the voters. She doesn’t need to spend minutes explaining why she won’t ban guns when she can just casually mention owning one in a few seconds. She gave a master class on messaging to many, many distinctive groups of the voters, sometimes to try to win votes, sometimes to deflate enthusiasm of opponents by undermining lies and distortions about her or dem positions.
She really did do some masterful needle-threading that night. Despite my issues with some of her policies (yes, I’m still voting for her), that was just some masterful politicking that I couldn’t help but be very impressed by.
I can see this opinion being justifiable to someone who doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with racism.
Yeah he calls (racism) directionally correct in terms of immigration risk.
Some people are citing the 15,000-20,000 Haitian Immigrant influx to Springfield Ohio (formerly 60,000 total population) as a cause for crimerate increase when the city actually had 146% higher crimerate than the US Average BEFORE the immigration influx and city officials have said there has been NO INCREASE (it might have even gone down but we won’t know until the 2024 index is published).
The woman who first shared the pet-eating hoax has apologized and said she was mistaken. Another user who posted a bodycam footage has been debunked as a completely different location and not a Haitan at all but a lifelong resident of Canton.
But they don’t care. They think Racism was correct. They don’t care about pets or children or crime statistics, they care about Racism.
Did you say the population if the town grew by 30%ish and it was entirely Haitians? That’s odd. Why that small town out of all the other options?
QAA did a look into it, apparently they tried to open a bunch of new factories there and were only able to fill positions by pulling in immigrants.
I’m also pretty intrigued by that. Supposedly the city was in decline until the migration boom.
Trump had no base hits in the debate but his long ball is still rising.
What fucking game is he playing? You either round the bases or you don’t. Trump claimed that immigrants ate the game ball while he lost and now that everyone’s packed up and gone home, someone’s saying that “actually, because the immigrants ate the game ball, Trump scored a home run. Change the score!”
P.S. (for the innuendo): someone should ask Lauren Loomer which one is Trump’s long ball, left or right?
What? Baseball isn’t about which players you remember?
Well in 20 years will you remember that weird guy eating cats or the other candidate?
P.S. what balls
I’d certainly remember a weird guy eating the other candidate.
Pretty sure most of the country saw that as “old man yells about what ‘the people on the TV’ are saying”.
