Posted on 01/26/2016 8:19:43 PM PST by ground_fog
Donald Trump says he won’t appear at the upcoming debate on FOX if Megyn Kelly is a moderator, and as of this writing, it appears she will be. Some of you asked me how this move by Trump could possibly be a smart thing.
On the 2D playing field, Trump appears petulant and whiney. Maybe narcissistic, fascist, and a little bit of Hitler too. And as FOX cleverly pointed out, negotiating with foreign leaders won’t be easier than Megyn Kelly’s questions.
So Trump loses badly in the second dimension.
Let’s shift to the third dimension and see if the view is different. For starters, tell me what you learned about all the other candidates today.
Nothing?
Trump sucked the oxygen out of the room. Again. And the issue – as always – is something we can jabber about forever. It is jabber-ready by design, so the media and the public will have no time and no brain cycles left to consider his competition.
Admit it – you already think the competition on the Republican side has narrowed to Trump versus Trump. If he stumbles, he loses. If he doesn’t, he wins. But the other candidates and all of their money will not change anything. The presidency is 100% in Trump’s hands to win or lose.
And he hasn’t stumbled (in the 3rd dimension of persuasion) in six months of continuous media attention.
Now keep in mind that one of Trump’s signature moves involves creating situations in which he has two or more paths to win, and no paths to lose. He wins AT THE START by picking his battles.
For example, when Trump warned Iran to return the American prisoners, he won no matter what happened. If Iran released the prisoners, Trump would say he influenced it. They did, and he did. If Iran had delayed, Trump would have used it as yet another reason you need a tough guy to deal with them. He had two paths to winning and no path to losing.
And it is intentional. I have a similar (but far worse) skill set, and I would have made that play as well.
So let’s game out the FOX scenario and see how many ways he can win and how many ways he can lose.
If FOX doesn’t budge, and Trump skips the debate, he will tweet the entire mess like it is Mystery Science Theater 3000.
The next day, the news will interject his tweets with their commentary about each participant. Obviously Trump’s tweets would include his usual eyebrow-raising insults and claims, and draw all attention his way. And unlike the people in the debate, he can “twitter-interrupt†them at any point with his counter-punches and clever insults. The media will insert his tweets in just the right place to make their stories compelling.
Interestingly, FOX might have good ratings in that scenario because people would be watching the combined debate plus The Trump Twitter Show to get it all synced up in real time. And people would want to see how FOX handles the lack of Trump. Empty podium?
At about halftime of the debate you might see Trump say it is too boring to watch and sign off for the night. That gives you a data point to see if viewership drops off around then. And it probably would, no matter what he tweets, simply because the novelty of him NOT being there will wear off. Then all you have is a real debate about the real issues. No one wants that. We have better things to do.
Now suppose Trump changes his mind and decides to join the debate even while Megyn Kelly remains. One of two things can happen. Either she asks questions that sound biased, and Trump rips her and FOX News apart on live television – and his poll number go up, or she asks only softball questions and Trump appears to have won that way.
You might be thinking that the real world is messier than that, and Trump is inviting a big risk. For example, Megyn Kelly might get in a zinger. But Trump dodges those with ease. Maybe the public will start siding with a biased TV host, but that seems unlikely. The media is unpopular in general.
Or perhaps a FOX competitor will offer Trump a show of his own for two hours, at the same time, just to be dicks to FOX. Anything can happen, but all paths seem to favor Trump.
Now let’s say you are Donald Trump, the scariest Republican that any Democrat has seen in ages. What is the one best thing he can do to separate himself from the Republican machine and show that he can be a deal-maker for everyone? Answer: Punch FOX News in the mouth. Right in front of you.
Democrats are watching. Trump is framing himself as an enemy of their enemy. (Democrats hate FOX News.)
Trump’s setup here is pure genius. He doesn’t know how it will end, but he is making sure he goes where the odds are deeply in his favor.
That’s a system, not a goal. Once you see the world that way, it makes a lot more sense. Coincidentally, I wrote a book on systems being better than goals.
—
People keep asking me to demonstrate my lack of bias by pointing out some of Trump’s mistakes. The problem is that Trump has a skill set that absorbs mistakes and turns them into whatever he wants them to be. That’s his system.
Smart people here realize a Trump or Cruz either one is a huge win
Best we’ve done since 1984
For different reasons both are stellar
I see Trump as capable and canny and outsider and good on borders and Islam and fiscal....I like his candor
I see Cruz as outsider and steel trap mind and my kind of social issues ideologue
I think Trump could pull a major cross section we’re not used to with blacks in particular who polls show like him and union whites in the Midwest and I know Cruz could pull the base out of the house
The fighting is silly but entertaining
Persians have never been amused.
Why is that?
You sound pretty liberal. Silencing discussion is not a conservative trait.
I like Cruz more than I like Trump, but Trump brings the bulldozer to the game that is sorely needed. We conservatives have been complaining about the biased debate moderators for years and now, when we finally have a candidate who is fighting back, the slack-jawed among us cry foul.
The reality is that Kelly is coming in to the debate with the mission of taking out a candidate. In what universe is this something that should be praised? You are simply throwing everything you can at the wall trying to get something to stick, because your candidate is not doing as well as Trump.
Nobody is trying to silence him, but he gets more air time than just about all the other candidates combined. When he says something substantive, by all means it should be reported. But stop covering it every time he babbles or whines or hiccups. The man can afford to pay for that coverage.
What's your evidence for that?
Are you suggesting that the current front runner of this election, who decided not to take the bait and show up at yet another debate, is NOT news?
Interesting perspective.
It’s tin foil? Ok, let’s play this out. Say they succeed in getting Trump out of the way. Are you suggesting that the GOPe and the libs running wild, are going to go all in for Ted?
If you believe that, I’d say your tin foil is a bit snug.
Your education is not my responsibility, but for an example, you might want to look at her recent guests, one of which was Michael Moore. She’s been attacking him every chance she gets in case you haven’t noticed.
Right — Fox has conservatives and liberals on, unlike the other networks, who mostly only have liberals.
Moore ambushed Megyn by flattering her. She ws trying to ask him serious questions, but never got there because he kept telling her how great she was. (Of course, I don’t think he really believes that, but it’s useful to say at the moment.)
Baloney.
Quit talking about your brains
Here's a montage of the venom from MK. In case you have a hard time grasping things (which seems pretty obvious at this point), the media is supposed to be non-biased. The debate moderators even more so. Don't let your hatred of Trump distort the big picture and this reality.
She has been tough on all the candidates. That’s what you’re supposed to do.
I don’t always like what Megyn has to say, and I wish she’d have a lot less of Howie Kurtz and Chris Stirewalt, but to say that she’s been especially tough on Trump is just not correct.
The narrow vision of some people continues to amaze me, even if it no longer surprises me.
This is what’s meant by a cult of personality.
The debates are supposed to be about the candidates and their views. Kelly and Fox have made it about them. Not my fault you're too obstinate to see this reality. For the record, Trump isn't even my preferred candidate,l I'm just sick and tired of the Reps rolling over and accepting the media narrative. Trump has shown courage and because of this is in the drivers seat. We need a bulldozer in Washington and not another namby-pamby nominee.
Wonderful post!
You got that right!!
I cannot work out what this question had to do with my post, which was about why his move was a purposeful and skillful choice, not a losing strategy as you claimed. Post 7 upthread gives good detail on your question, however; and also, I still have several friends who are undecided. Not everyone really cares to dig into the process, and will try to decide within a week or so of the general election in November.
Good job!!
Most cogent analysis yet. It’s how deal makers work. Look at it in terms of outcomes that support a larger strategy.
Cruz isn’t doing that.
I made a noob mistake, replying to the wrong poster. I’m glad you pointed it out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.