☕️ GET ON IT ☙ Monday, November 3, 2025 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

C&C army gears up to vote; Scott Adams’ moving plea for medical help grips the nation; social media and healthcare take center stage; WSJ admits error as the economy surges into a golden age; more.

Good morning, C&C, it’s November! It’s the day before election day in many places— block out time to vote tomorrow. We can’t go back. We won’t. With that public service message out of the way, today roundup includes: C&C army orders about voting tomorrow; the astonishing and heartwarming story of jab victim Scott Adams’ dramatic plea for healthcare help; implications for social media; implications for the healthcare discussion; and the Wall Street Journal again admits its experts were wrong but nevermind, while the economy continues booming toward a golden age.

⛑️ C&C MORNING MONOLOGUE ⛑️

Yesterday, the New York Times ran a jubilant story headlined, “Elections Across the U.S. Will Test Democrats’ Momentum Ahead of 2026 Midterms.” The first paragraph blushed with anticipatory glee: “Elections across the country on Tuesday will offer the Democratic Party its biggest chance yet to assert its viability as a serious opposition party.”

If Democrats ever regain power, it is all over. You know I’m right. You saw what happened last time.

They can see thirty years of progressive gains slipping through their bloodstained fingers. Democrats and their foreign allies are more motivated than ever. As evidence— they have finally let the far left off the leash, as amply evidenced by their New York City Mayoral candidate, an open islamo-socialist born in Uganda.

If Democrats win more than a few races tomorrow, we will never hear the end of it. They will run it wall-to-wall. They will claim a mandate. They will say the nation has rejected Trumpism. They will use that to argue judges who break the law to stop Trump are responding to the will of the people.

“What this is all about is Democrats getting back on our toes — not our heels — getting our mojo back,” California’s oleginous Governor Newsom said at an event yesterday with Kamala Harris. “I cannot wait for Nov. 5, Nov. 6, and all the punditry,” he gloated. (He’s gloated prematurely before. He probably needs medical treatment.)

“Momentum matters,” Pennsylvania DNC chair Gene DePasquale said in an interview. “We just have to start winning.”

We must ensure they get no momentum. It would be a crying shame if Republicans lose broadly tomorrow. As an off-year election, turnout will scrape the barrel’s wooden bottom. Races will be decided by hundreds or thousands of votes rather than tens or hundreds of thousands. There is no reason we should lose. But Republicans are relaxing while Democrats have kept their battalions organized by marching them around in pointless “No Kings” circles.

Go vote tomorrow. We must hold the line.

Coffee & Covid’s mission shall be to make 100% sure we don’t fall back to sleep like we did in 2018 when we lost the House and all the troubles started. I’ll remind you again tomorrow, but go ahead right now and schedule time to vote. Do it now, then read today’s terrific post.

🌍 WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY 🌍

🔥🔥🔥

In case you missed it, a heart-hugging scene played out on social media Sunday. Believe it or not, CNN covered the story below the headline, “Trump says he is ‘on it’ after ‘Dilbert’ creator Scott Adams pleads for lifesaving help.” It began early yesterday morning (or very late in California), when beloved former Dilbert cartoonist and now conservative influencer Scott Adams —who has been slowly and publicly dying from a jab injury— heartbreakingly cried for help:

Yesterday, Scott faced a familiar problem: the medical runaround. At least, anyone over 18 is familiar with the classic pattern:

HOSPITAL: Hello, Grey Hospital. Press ‘1’ for Portuguese.

YOU: Hello? Oh, thank heavens. I’ve been holding since the Lakers game started, and the score is now 97-53.

HOSPITAL: This line is being recorded for quality assurance. Thank you for calling Grey Hospital we value your confidence how may I help you today.

YOU: I got a text reminder for my bloodwork appointment, but it says the date is November 10th, 2052.

HOSPITAL: How may I help you?

YOU: That’s in thirty years. That must be a typo. I just want to confirm that it’s really next week.

HOSPITAL: (dramatic sigh) State your name, social security number, date of birth, astrological sign, the name of your firstborn child, and the capital of Botswana.

YOU: (provides details, while also questioning life choices)

HOSPITAL: Close enough. I see here that you need prior insurance authorization. Did you get your authorization?

YOU: Yes, I called them first. They said I had to call you. The authorization number is 123458-stroke-90-stroke-QQ7.

HOSPITAL: 123458-stroke-90-stroke-QU7.

YOU: No! Q, Q, 7. Two Q’s. Q as in “quicksand.” Not U, as in “useless.”

HOSPITAL: I’m sorry, sir, that doesn’t match the number in our system.

YOU: Did you put in the right one? With two Q’s? What number do you have?

HOSPITAL: Unfortunately, I cannot give out private information by phone, especially to patients. You’ll have to come to the desk. Would you like me to text you directions?

YOU: I live two hours away. Can I speak to a supervisor? Or a human?

HOSPITAL: Please hold. (cheerful hold music resumes—‘Don’t Fear the Reaper’)

You know I’m not exaggerating. Scott didn’t say exactly what kind of Kaiser snafu he encountered trying to get his special (off-flowchart) experimental infusion scheduled — to save his life — but one can easily imagine. Anyway, a chain of miracles followed, a few hours later generating a tweet from the President of the United States himself.

🔥 There’s so much to unpack here beyond the surface layer of an imperfect but mostly wonderful balding man in distress, and his friends rushing to his aid. But first, let me show you how Scott’s tweet sparked a massive societal response. In short order, a series of extremely influential people responded to Scott’s modest tweet that hadn’t actually even asked for anything.

Right after church time EST, HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy appeared:

Dr. Afshine Emrani, a California cardiologist connected to Kaiser, tweeted several times as he contacted Kaiser’s medical directors:

Billionaire biomedical developer (who bought the LA Times) Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong chimed in, offering to bypass Kaiser altogether by going straight to the source of the company that makes the experimental prostate cancer drug that Scott needs:

White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications Dan Scavino joined the chat:

Then Donald Trump, Jr. confirmed he’d also make sure the President knew.

A long laundry list of well-wishers, including a who’s-who of MAGA influencers (such as FNMA Chairman Bill Pulte and angel investor Naval Ravikant) also added their support. Finally, around two o’clock, the President posted a two-word reply on Truth Social:

One suspects by that point, the President’s help was no longer needed, but I’m confident it was welcome. Reuters reached Kaiser late yesterday —Sunday evening!— and the hospital confirmed that Adams’ oncology team “is working closely with him on the next steps in his cancer care, which are already underway.”

You can’t please everybody. Not everyone’s heart was warmed by the story. The San Francisco Chronicle’s sub-headline sneered, “As millions of Americans fear losing their health insurance, oligarchs coalesce to save Scott Adams’ life.” (Later, the article more generously —and more accurately— described the ‘oligarchs’ as “a cast of political Avengers.”)

More interestingly, the Chronicle also referred despairingly to “America’s terminally terrible healthcare system.” Maybe Scott’s story could be good news for us all.

🔥 Is there any legitimate remaining argument left that social media has become the new town square? Corporate media’s television shows and newspapers used to claim the mantle of being the ultimate litmus test of truth— but now, if something isn’t on social media, is it even important?

Think about it: This widely covered, influential medico-political story was in fact just about a bunch of people tweeting on X.

Don’t get me wrong; it is a wonderful story of a healthy community reacting in real time to the urgent need of one of its own members. Whatever actually happened in real life, happened behind the scenes; that part is almost an afterthought. Nor, despite how the San Francisco Chronicle would prefer to frame it, was Scott’s story about ‘unfair privilege.’ Scott earned his access through sweat and blood: his social media influence, his daily podcast, and his steadfast support for President Trump since long before it was cool.

Scott even sacrificed his cherished cartooning career to back the Bad Orange Man.

Gradually, and then all at once, we have transitioned to a new, more honestly democratic age. The media used to frame the public conversation; now the public conversation corrals the media. They once crafted the front page; now they chase the feed. This is no minor accomplishment.

The media’s power has been undermined by citizens’ ubiquitous, real-time digital access. More and more, the media is deprived of time to craft its fake narratives.

No longer does the media define reality. Reality now forces the media to react. Yesterday, for example, 60 Minutes interviewed President Trump. The broadcast show could only afford to air twenty minutes clipped from the 90-minute interview. But corporate media wisely chose to report from the full interview, which 60 Minutes simultaneously posted online.

The short-lived era of censorship and cancellation we survived during the Biden years was the media’s last, desperate attempt to protect itself from a trend that the Founders would have approvingly considered a pleasant march toward a more democratic society. The Chinese and the Europeans, lacking Constitutional safeguards, are still trying to stuff the social media genie back in the bottle. But the clock is ticking.

🔥 Now, what about the much bigger message that Scott’s widely covered story suggests about the healthcare system? It drives me wild with fury that this had to happen at all.

Will people wonder why a dying man needs presidential help to get a life-saving infusion? They should. Because the real headline isn’t “Trump Saves Cartoonist.” It’s “System So Broken, Only President Can Fix Infusion Appointment.”

The deeper message isn’t about the optics of Scott Adams pulling strings or Trump rescuing friends. It’s about the collapse of a system that made such a scene necessary in the first place.

A functioning healthcare system shouldn’t need a viral tweet and a presidential intervention to do its job. In a healthy system, Scott wouldn’t need a desperate hashtag to survive. What about the rest of us, who don’t have a twitter feed that’s read by top government officials?

The Chronicle accidentally got one thing right: calling the healthcare system “terminally terrible.” Democrats, crying about healthcare, have shut down the government over their precious Obamacare subsidies— the same vast billions that have long papered over the true cost of care, disguising waste as compassion and deceiving voters.

But we now spend more on “healthcare” than any nation in history, and somehow get the worst results. During the pandemic, more Americans died than in any other country— indisputable proof that insanely expensive medicine can’t buy health.

It only buys more bureaucracy.

It’s still early, but this story feels like a sort of turning point— a moment when the curtain slips and everyone can see the truth: the system isn’t merely inefficient, it’s sick. And it’s making us sick, too. No subsidy on earth can heal a system that doesn’t remember what medicine is for in the first place.

Godspeed, Scott. We are all praying for you.

📈📈📈

Yesterday, after spending months predicting tariff apocalypse, the Wall Street Journal ran a story headlined, “How the U.S. Economy Has Defied Doomsday Predictions on Tariffs.” The baffled sub-headline admitted, “Inflation is lower than expected after President Trump’s steep levies. The U.S. economy continues to grow.”

You remember the refrain: “Foreign countries don’t pay tariffs— American consumers do!” But, as Trump predicted, companies have adapted. “Companies,” the Journal explained, “have moved production from countries facing high tariffs—especially China—to countries such as Vietnam, Mexico and Turkey that face lower levies.”

“Economists worried tariffs would drag down consumer spending,” the Journal said, in a paroxysm of understatement. But for some reason the experts’ predictions failed to account for adaptation. Don’t wait for an apology.

“I’m not sure tariffs mattered as much as people thought they would,” graciously conceded Kelly Kowalski, head of investment strategies at MassMutual. Now they tell us. For example, “Average auto prices in September were only about 1.1% higher than March, even though car imports from many countries faced tariffs of 15% or more.” So.

The stiff-necked Journal, not even slightly prepared to concede defeat, stubbornly embarked on a convoluted, circuitous argument that all the companies had decided, maybe at a group therapy session, to eat the costs themselves, since they were all already enjoying stellar profits. In other words, the Journal wants us to believe they sacrificed profits to avoid losing sales from higher prices, which would have sacrificed profits. Okay.

(If that math doesn’t add up, that is correct.)

Curiously, as things stood yesterday, India (100%), Canada (45%), and Mexico (35%) now face the highest tariff rates. All the Asian countries (even China) plus the UK enjoy the lowest rates. There’s much to say about how Trump’s tariff strategy is helping squash globalism like a pudgy palmetto bug; instead, the tariffs are steadily building a new, more stable multipolar world. But I’ll save that for a future post.

And, what more can we possibly say about experts? In legal circles, litigators and judges have long viewed experts with cynicism, slightly below payday loan operators, since we know from daily experience that any decent lawyer can scare up an expert to advocate a radically different opinion about the exact same facts, such as whether the sky is blue or not. “Consensus” is but one factor in admitting expert evidence, and minority or dissenting views are usually always allowed.

Guess who gets to decide which expert is right? We do. Juries of lay people, chosen at random from local pools of registered voters. Not scientists, technocrats, elites, bureaucrats, journalists, or former bartendresses. Just regular Americans. Even sleepy ones.

The Real Experts

This fatuous article proved once again that expert “forecasts” are just biased guesses wrapped in doublespeak. But never ever forget that, in our Constitutional system, you are the final expert. So. Never give that right up.

Have a marvelous Monday! Coffee & Covid will be back tomorrow morning, with all the essential news you need plus a side order of snarky commentary. And, dearly beloved procrastinators— schedule your time to vote right now!

Don’t race off! We cannot do it alone. Consider joining up with C&C to help move the nation’s needle and change minds. I could sure use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope, if you can: ☕ Learn How to Get Involved 🦠

How to Donate to Coffee & Covid

Twitter: jchilders98.
Truth Social: jchilders98.
MeWe: mewe.com/i/coffee_and_covid.
Telegram: t.me/coffeecovidnews
C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com