I highly recommend Scott Adams’ blog to people in here.
His writings go a long ways to explaining Trump’s approach, but more important, they make Trump’s sometimes outrageous statements easier to digest. And by “digest” I mean to understand why he’s making them in the first place.
One example: Trump goes for the black vote and then he says to those who are skeptical that he’ll get any at all that he’ll get 95% of the black vote. Outrageous, yes, but it got their attention. They have to cover it because it sounds like such an idiotic statement, and coming from a supposed right wing presidential candidate to boot.
Then, later on, Trump will get to say well maybe not 95% but at least half. And with his numbers rising due to the initial exposure plus his outreach efforts, pretty soon 50% doesn’t sound outrageous, and then blacks decide maybe there’s something to this guy after all, etc.
As I said at the outset, Adams has done a good job of explaining the reasons for Trump’s bombast. I’ve found that referring to him when I discuss Trump with skeptical voters is an excellent way to get them to reconsider his approach and see it in a more favorable light themselves.
By the way, Adams has stated that he thinks Trump will win in a landslide due mainly to his skills of persuasion.
One example: Trump goes for the black vote and then he says to those who are skeptical that he’ll get any at all that he’ll get 95% of the black vote. Outrageous, yes, but it got their attention. They have to cover it because it sounds like such an idiotic statement, and coming from a supposed right wing presidential candidate to boot.
- - - - -
But it didn’t get all of your attention, because you missed the part where Donald Trump said “after four years” of delivering on his promises he would get 95% of the black vote.
I like Scott Adams’s power of persuasion schtick when he’s explaining how Trump manipulates the press, or outsmarts his opponents.
But it’s a little condescending at times when he suggests that Trump uses his power of persuasion to win support - my support? Trump won my support by being a champion of the right policies and ideas.
He didn’t need tricks like to choosing linguistic kill shots, simple action words or any other mind meld techniques to persuade me. I assume that’s true of anyone with a respecgtable IQ including virtually everyone here on FR.
I enjoy reading his blogs, and it’s flattering to know Adams admires Trump’s persuasion skills, but the compliment is a bit back handed.
It reminds me of similar backhanded compliments paid to RR 30 years ago - that he was the great communicator. That always bothered me - I remember my dad saying “you see what they’re doing there, calling him the great communicator?
“They’re saying he’s a slick salesman, that he’s so good, he could sell ice to an Eskimo. They may as well be saying that that’s ALL he’s selling - ice. Frozen water. Something Eskimos already have... And that we who love him are the Eskimos stupidly buying ice because he’s so persuasive”.
My dad’s point was that if they really admired Reagan and had any respect for his supporters, they would have called him a great statesman and spoke about his wonderful accomplishments. They wouldn’t call him the great communicator.
For Scott Adams to suggest that we who support Donald Trump do so because of he is a master at persuasion is a complement neither to Trump nor to his supporters.
Norseman - he DOES?? Thinks he’ll win by a landslide? Boy, I needed that. It’s downright tiring to be on the receiving end of that Clinton-shxxt day after day. And then I’m here in California, Land of Liberal Bean-Brains. I’m off to read Scott Adams.
I worked in construction after college, and Trump reminds me of a job boss. Loud, funny, NOT PC, forthright. Also, his mom was from the Hebrides - first place the Vikings settled. So he’s just a Viking warrior - NYC contractor. I find him wonderfully refreshing, frankly.