[DiogenesLamp]

Okay, I have read the article. The tactics listed are directed at a particular sort of opponent and it is the sort of opponent we don't have.

It is offering intellectual arguments to combat an emotional foe. The biggest problem with liberals is that they aren't motivated by reality based concepts, but instead are motivated by emotional feelings.

Reasoning with them, especially using "green eyeshade lingo" as Rush used to say, is not going to be successful. You have to argue with them using emotional tactics, in the manner that Trump does it.

They will respect an @$$whupping in a game of "the dozens", but if you try to express complex concepts, their eyes will glaze over and they will simply ignore anything you say, or even attempt to shout you down.

This book taught me a lot about the nature of human interaction.

A lot of stuff happens in human exchanges that don't register on an intellectual basis, and that is because they are primal. Trump appears to understand these human interactions on an instinctual basis.

[Ohioan]

Appreciate your comments, but the arguments in favor of preserving the ethnic heritage of the Founders need not be on a particular level (intellectually). They can be on a level no more complex than some of the children's books that once taught American kids about American folk heroes in terms that resonated with kids.

On the other hand, the Founders were themselves on such a high level, that the Kid Level approach can be a part of a far wider spectrum of arguments. The important thing is to create appealing images that make the points. Words, after all, are only symbols, not actual impressions. One size--or one description--need not fit all.