Speaker 1: All right.
This is going to be super interesting.
Adam Mackler, who has a YouTube channel, recently went out in Iowa at the failed Trump rally.
Remember the one that got canceled either because of weather or because not enough people
showed up?
Trump was scheduled to speak and Adam spoke to Trump supporters.
And this is really, really, really good stuff.
But it is very scary.
The topic of attitudes towards trans people came up significantly.
Conspiracy, conspiracy theories and conspiratorial thinking came up significantly.
So let's just get right into it.
Adam does a really good job here.
This is Adam Mackler, who you can find at YouTube.com slash at sign Adam Mackler.
Let's just jump in and brace yourselves, okay?
This may not be appropriate for children, and I think I should say.
Speaker 3: Banging hookers, Right.
What percent of Americans do you think are transgender?
Speaker 1: I would say.
Speaker 2: Before it was cool to be transparent gender or well before is probably like I would
say, 1.5, and now it's probably like 20%.
Okay.
Speaker 1: This is something we see when antisemitic conspiracy theorists are asked.
How many Jews do you think there are?
And very often they'll say, you know, in the world they'll say, Oh, it's like 5% of the
population, or it's 10%, 20%, 30%.
And then you go, actually, it's it's 0.2% of the global population is Jewish.
One of the things that's common is folks who see groups as problematic will dramatically
overstate their prevalence in the population.
The most Islamophobic folks will say, oh, I don't know, like 10% of the U.S. must be
Muslim or something like that.
Really common thing.
Speaker 3: 20%.
It's still 0.5%.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Okay.
I was pretty close on 1.5.
Speaker 3: So.
Yeah.
Let me ask you this.
If an adult goes to the doctor, what gender dysphoria and they try to decide on a treatment.
Do you think the government should be able to step in and stop it?
Speaker 2: Oh, no, no, not not if they're paying for it.
Speaker 5: As long as, you know, they have their own insurance that they're paying for.
Speaker 2: I don't think a state, you know, health insurance should have to pay for, you
know, your gender reassignment.
Speaker 3: So you're okay with people getting gender affirming care, though?
Speaker 2: Oh, yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
As long as I'm not paying for it.
Speaker 1: Now, this sounds sort of open minded, right?
I mean, okay, But what's interesting about it is this whole thing of am I paying for
it?
He says as long as state insurance isn't paying for it.
Well, you know, one of the realities is the way insurance works.
Everybody pays in based on what actuaries believe is expected to be the total amount
of spending that's going to be done on procedures and services of different kinds.
In a sense, even with private insurance, if gender affirming care is covered, everybody
who's part of that risk pool is, in a sense paying for it.
Now, I know this guy doesn't understand that he's not thinking of that.
And he says it's not it's not the procedures I have a problem with.
It's who's paying for it.
But the reality is that it's a little more complicated than just as long as I'm not paying
for it.
If insurance covers it at all, then it's being paid for in shared responsibility by everyone
participating in that risk pool.
But, you know, it's it's at least he's open minded in saying it shouldn't be illegal.
All right.
Let's continue then.
Then Adam speaks to a woman who says the country is more divided than ever and then immediately
brings up the Biden crime family, which isn't a thing.
With absolutely no understanding that part of the reason the country is divided is because
people like her are saying things like Biden, crime, family.
She also says cannabis causes mental issues.
Let's listen.
Speaker 4: Now, then, I watched when Martin Luther King marched when I was a kid.
Blame.
Let's talk.
Speaker 3: Blame.
Let's talk blame.
Speaker 4: Have you ever heard any Democrat say that it was their responsibility or they
did this?
Sure they have.
You looked at the records, the actual information that we found about Biden and his crime family.
Speaker 1: We've found about the Biden crime family.
Speaker 4: I would eliminate so many of their drugs.
I believe that children are able to get a hold of nowadays.
There would be far fewer mental issues.
Speaker 3: What kind of drugs?
Speaker 4: Pot for one.
Speaker 3: You really you disagree with.
Speaker 4: You best your sweet baby.
I grew up with kids that when it was just coming in and I saw them make complete idiots
of themselves.
Speaker 1: Now on cannabis.
Yeah.
It's not a lie to say marijuana can have negative effects for some people on mental health,
depending on the person, the amount, the frequency of use, the type of marijuana product in some
people.
Cannabis causes anxiety or paranoia.
There are instances of temporary psychosis that can be caused by cannabis in very, very
high doses.
The truth is that all these things are very rare and we have lots of legal products like
alcohol, that are arguably far worse, but they actually are really morally concerned
that you have to understand this if you show.
My guess is if you showed this woman the data on alcohol in cannabis and you said, hey,
look, but look at alcohol, there is a moral a connotation that folks like her have when
it comes to cannabis.
And that's that that's that's a big part of this.
Let's continue.
Now, I'm sort of skipping around.
Now we go.
Oh, this is really wild.
Okay, let's let's just jump into this one, then we'll talk about it.
Speaker 6: Transgender has just been publicized just like other issues that they tried to
distract us from when it's more of a mental issue, mental health issue.
Speaker 3: Well, if it's a mental health.
Speaker 1: The argument here is we've been distracted by trans.
Trans really is just a mental health issue.
Okay.
Well, let's explore that issue then.
Speaker 3: Wouldn't it follow that treatment would improve these people's quality of life?
Yeah.
So you're for gender affirming care?
Speaker 6: No.
Speaker 1: Trans is a mental issue.
Okay, So then we should provide the treatments that reduce the mental issues, right?
Yeah.
Oh, like gender affirming care?
No, not that.
Speaker 3: There's tons of studies that people who receive gender affirming care have a way
better quality of life than people who don't.
Speaker 6: You just seen it from the one side, or are you seeing both sides of it now?
Speaker 1: That's an interesting question, right?
Randomized controlled trials.
Peer reviewed show this.
But her question is which side are you getting that from?
Well, it's what the science shows.
Speaker 3: What's on your side?
Speaker 6: No, I'm just saying.
Have you seen the research on just the one side or are you seeing it from the.
Speaker 1: This is that that's such a critical thing here, right?
The idea that it's all just opinions.
Okay.
Yeah, research.
But it's like one person's opinion research and another person's opinion research as opposed
to we have a scientific foundation for how we can evaluate what is to be believed that
is separated from our opinions about it.
Very difficult for lots of these folks to understand that idea.
It's all sort of an opinion, isn't it?
Speaker 3: Opposite of gender affirming care, I guess, would be conversion therapy.
And there's zero studies showing that conversion therapy works actually, that increases the
suicide rate of trans people.
Right.
Speaker 6: I don't know.
The statics statistics aren't now.
Speaker 1: Now she doesn't know.
And this is a very common retreat.
You go forward and you assert, assert, assert, assert.
You then have pushback, which is, well, here's the data.
I don't really know the data.
Let's move on.
Speaker 6: That.
I'm just going by, you know, my own thought of, you know.
Speaker 3: What makes you think Trump will be able to beat Biden in 2024 when you already
lost to him in 2020?
Speaker 6: Well, he didn't lose to him in 2010.
Speaker 3: You don't think.
Speaker 6: So?
No.
There you go.
Right.
Biden is just a puppet anyway.
Speaker 1: Now, this is where it gets really crazy.
I dare you to follow this.
So, so far, she's asserted Trump won and Biden's a puppet.
But who's the puppeteer?
Get ready to.
I hope people like pretzels because this is a completely to total logic pretzel to.
Speaker 3: Okay, who's who's controlling them?
Speaker 6: The white hats.
Speaker 3: The white hats, the white hat.
Can you define who the who those people are?
Speaker 6: That would be our military, our generals, and our current and sitting President
Trump.
He's our commander in chief.
Speaker 3: Do you think Trump is still a sitting president?
Yes.
You think Trump is currently making all the decisions in the country?
Speaker 6: Yes.
Speaker 3: So would you blame the current inflation on Trump?
Speaker 6: Yes, because this is where we would have been.
Speaker 1: All right.
At least she's consistent.
She's saying, listen, Trump's the president and everything that's going on can be blamed
on Trump.
Okay.
At least that's some level of consistency.
Speaker 6: I'm not blaming him, but in order for everybody to actually start waking up
and seeing what was going to come down the pipeline, if Hillary would have gotten in
and they would have been able to do their new world order.
This is what we were going to get.
Speaker 3: And the border crisis that's also on Trump.
Speaker 6: Have you been to the border?
Speaker 3: No.
Have you.
Speaker 6: Know.
So how do we actually know if the wall was actually done?
How are they getting in?
Speaker 1: So this is where we go into something that unfortunately happens Often when folks
like this are questioned about their beliefs, they go to how do we know?
They become almost metaphysical.
They become philosophers of of epistemology.
How do we know anything?
What is the nature of reality?
They become Deepak Chopra all of a sudden?
Speaker 6: Is it really a crisis or is it just crisis actors?
Speaker 3: I don't think there's a crisis at the border, honestly.
So either you think people are at the border acting like immigrants?
Speaker 6: Correct.
Speaker 3: Well, what's the purpose of this?
Speaker 6: To wake more people.
Speaker 3: Up to what?
Speaker 6: To seeing.
We would be going socialists in a communist country.
Speaker 1: So now it's just a word salad.
Now she's just.
It's coming out of her like a projectile.
Vomit.
Socialist.
Communist crisis Actor.
This is barely English.
It's just words.
It.
I recognize the words, but it's not making any sense.
Speaker 6: That's not what America is about.
Speaker 7: Leave.
Speaker 1: Okay.
That's really serious.
And what I want people to think about is, okay, it's funny.
It's entertaining.
Okay.
That could be you know, they talk about teachers left and that could be someone I don't know
what job this woman has, if any.
That could be someone's teacher.
That could be I mean, like, I guess she could be your accountant, right?
As unhinged as she is, she might be able to hold it together and be a CPA.
I don't know.
But there's tens of millions of these folks.
Now we go to another guy who goes into election conspiracies.
Let me get fast past his introduction.
Here's a guy who he has his own series of on January 6th, conspiracy.
Speaker 7: To get the Democrats and all the deep state out.
We need to take back the country for the people.
Yeah, peacefully.
No violence.
Speaker 3: No violence.
So you disagree with what happened on January six?
Speaker 7: It was not an insurrection.
We were set up by Democrats in a deep state and people within the FBI.
Speaker 3: You don't think there's a part of individual responsibility to do with it,
though?
So like, if you make the decision to walk into the Capitol, break glass into riot, don't
you think it might be justified to be charged with?
Something.
Speaker 7: Yes.
If you break the law, of course, there's consequences to breaking the law.
Now you get a group of people.
I don't care who it is.
It could be Christians.
Whatever.
You get someone or a couple of people in there that are instigators.
They're going to get the whole crowd to go.
Speaker 1: Even Christians, I love that.
Even Christians might be able to either convince or be convinced in this sort of mob mentality.
But, you know, these are sort of like it's again, it's this projectile vomit.
Who did the setting up on January 6th?
Well, he mentions FBI, Antifa, Democrats.
I think he said they all, I guess, work together or separately with the same goal.
It was extraordinarily organized.
It makes no sense.
But it doesn't matter.
Speaker 7: It takes one flame to get the can of gas to burn.
Yeah.
Now, there was people there.
Yes.
That should not have done what they did.
The destruction should not have happened if you get caught on it.
Prosecution.
Speaker 1: All right.
So now we're going to go to another woman who says the election was stolen.
Speaker 4: Because the election was stolen.
Speaker 3: You think so?
Speaker 4: I do.
Speaker 3: How come every time they brought it to the courts, all the evidence was rejected
immediately.
Speaker 4: Because the courts.
Speaker 3: Will bring a lot of those judges were appointed by Trump.
The.
They still.
Speaker 4: Have a lot of under courage.
Speaker 1: Things that are going on.
There's a lot of undercurrent things that are going on.
Simple.
How does Adam not understand and should not be going?
Speaker 3: So you think Trump appointed over 60 judges that were part of the swamp?
Maybe.
Doesn't that reflect poorly on Trump's judgment?
Speaker 1: No, because look.
Speaker 6: Look at all these people that will wear masks.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: We're seeing a fool, too.
No, no, no.
Oh.
Speaker 1: I that.
What is she talking about?
This.
I've talked about this before.
These are endless special pleadings, Right?
I've given the example before.
Hey, you know what, guys?
Right here in the studio with me, there's an invisible tiger.
It's here.
You just can't see it.
So I say, Oh, okay, well, it's invisible, but it still has mass, right?
So let's put baby powder on the floor.
So even though we can't see the tiger when it walks around, it'll move the baby powder
and will prove that, you know, it's an invisible.
Wait list, tiger.
Okay, well, so how about this?
It needs to eat, right?
Let's put some beautiful steaks down for the tiger.
And then even if we can't see the tiger and even if the tiger doesn't have any mass and
isn't going to disturb the baby powder, we'll see the food move.
It's going to need the food.
No, it's an invisible weightless tiger that also doesn't eat.
And then you go further and further and it doesn't matter.
Now, the look on this woman's face, you see, she sort of is starting to realize she seems
kind of like a moron.
Not all of them have that recognition necessarily.
All right, Last guy here, this guy says there should be no trans people.
Now, how you get to that?
I don't know.
I don't know what he means.
There should be.
Well, who's going to get rid of them?
I don't know.
But they get into an interesting discussion, actually, about gender identity that almost
like it almost goes in an interesting direction.
Take a.
Speaker 4: Look.
That were humanistic.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I think there should be no transgenders.
I'm pretty sure there's only two different genders that are born and that gives two different
types of sex.
Speaker 1: So.
I He's pretty sure there are only two types of genders that are born.
And that gives you two types of sex.
Mixing genitalia with gender expression.
Admits he's only pretty sure this is what we're dealing with.
And listen, he gets to vote.
And good for him, right?
I'm not suggesting restrictions on voting.
We just have to understand these folks vote.
And if we don't vote, these are the sorts of ideas that end up being reflected in the
leaders that we choose.
Speaker 3: But even with there being two genders that can still fit under the transgender worldview
because you're just switching from the generally masculine features to feminine features.
Speaker 5: A woman has female reproductive organs and a male has male reproductive organs.
And that's about it.
Speaker 3: If you look at people's genitals when you're figuring out where to call them
sir or ma'am, sir.
Speaker 1: Please show me what you have there.
Speaker 3: Or do you generally look at a vague set of social characteristics.
Speaker 5: You can just by walking around.
You can tell by the way they're voices.
You can just just watch more about your morals than what's morally right in this world.
Speaker 3: So you can look at people and know if they're transgender based off their morals.
Speaker 1: This is funny, but it's very sad.
It's very sad and it's very scary.
You know, the world looks at this and we have a lot of international viewers.
Every time we do this, people write to me, they say, David, what has happened to the
United States?
Is it an education issue?
Is it a cultural issue?
This this is crazy.
Speaker 5: A person knows if they're men or women and that they know their morals.
They know if it's right.
Speaker 3: And I totally.
Speaker 5: Agree that honest is a big thing.
We're all about honesty in this country.
Oh.
Speaker 1: That I didn't know.
Not from looking at the last presidency.
I could have fooled me.
Speaker 5: There are a woman generally.
You'll know that they're a woman just by the way, they walked away the way they're there.
Speaker 3: To Sounds pro trans to me, though.
So you're saying if somebody knows they're a woman and they walk around with features
that are looking like a woman, then they can be considered a woman?
Speaker 5: I no, they a woman certainly went over what?
Speaker 1: A woman in a male.
He doesn't want to go over it again.
But is and I think we agreed on this.
So there it is really, really good job there by Adam Mackler and we'll link to Adam's channel.
This is good stuff because he's he's going a little deeper than you sometimes see people
go and one of the things I've told you sometimes happens in political discussions is folks
can go one talking point deep or maybe two, and then it all falls apart.
And then it's just words come out that they heard Trump say, but they don't make sentences
that we can identify in any reasonable sense.
Really scary.
It is funny.
It is funny, but it's scary and sad more than anything else