For example, when Trump says he is worth $10 billion, which causes his critics to say he is worth far less (but still billions) he is making all of us “think past the sale.” The sale he wants to make is “Remember that Donald Trump is a successful business person managing a vast empire mostly of his own making.” The exact amount of his wealth is irrelevant.There's a lot more at the link and it's all worth your time.
When a car salesperson trained in persuasion asks if you prefer the red Honda Civic or the Blue one, that is a trick called making you “think past the sale” and the idea is to make you engage on the question of color as if you have already decided to buy the car. That is Persuasion 101 and I have seen no one in the media point it out when Trump does it.
The $10 billion estimate Trump uses for his own net worth is also an “anchor” in your mind. That’s another classic negotiation/persuasion method. I remember the $10 billion estimate because it is big and round and a bit outrageous. And he keeps repeating it because repetition is persuasion too.
I don’t remember the smaller estimates of Trump’s wealth that critics provided. But I certainly remember the $10 billion estimate from Trump himself. Thanks to this disparity in my memory, my mind automatically floats toward Trump’s anchor of $10 billion being my reality. That is classic persuasion. And I would be amazed if any of this is an accident. Remember, Trump literally wrote the book on this stuff.
Monday, August 17, 2015
The smartest take on Trump you'll read all day
Scott Adams, the mind behind Dilbert, explains Trump's Jedi Mind Tricks. Classy and yuge:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Looks like Adams (I mean Dogbert) has been successful in creating artificial stupidity.....I'm thinking that with his business bankruptcies and disastrous personal life, smart people of both parties and all political persuasions have disdained Trump since the 1980s!
DNRC is, of course, in subjection at this point. "Out, out, you demons of stupidity!"
the current president ran with far less political accomplishment, promising such things as rainbows every day and a unicorn in every yard.
trump is way more real by comparison.
Don't be so sure, Bubba. Something is happening.
thinking more on this, and if this was the dem primary, trump would be polling just as highly.
i work a union shop, primarily hispanic (85%) (of some stripe or another), the lock-stock-barrel traditional blue-collar democrat voter, and trump is popular (but not among those who speak english with a mexican accent. among these, he WAS a favorite, until he made his 'they're all rapists' remarks.)
trump's popularity is a symptom of a larger disconnect; he's not the disease.
trump's popularity is a symptom of a larger disconnect; he's not the disease.
I agree. I don't think the professional Republicans understand how pissed off the voters really are.
Not denying that something is happening--I just don't see how thinking people would dare to risk themselves to Trump. Now not that others are much better--I just read through a plan to replace Obamacare and thought "what the ****?", it was so darned complicated.
The guy is a loser who just happens to have a lot of money and the ability to trick inDUHviduals, to quote Dogbert.
Anyone who has managed to stay in the public eye for nearly 30 years is not a loser, Bubba. And if your goal is to win hearts and minds, calling people In-DUH-viduals isn't the way to do it. Yes, I know that Scott Adams used that term in the Dilbert strips of the 1990s, and yes, some of Trump's supporters aren't thinking through the contradictions of his life and career. Those things should matter, but at this moment they are secondary to the zeitgeist.
If keeping rich and keeping in the public eye amounts to something worthwhile, well, I guess we can start promoting Kim Kardashian or Paris Hilton for President, too, or perhaps (going back a touch further) Theresa Cabarrus.
So I'm going to simply disagree with you; you leave a trail of broken hearts and banktruptcies behind, you are a loser, especially if you (like Trump) aren't even in the least apologetic about it. Trading in Obama for Trump would be like exchanging a late 1970s Chevette for a Yugo.
If keeping rich and keeping in the public eye amounts to something worthwhile, well, I guess we can start promoting Kim Kardashian or Paris Hilton for President, too, or perhaps (going back a touch further) Theresa Cabarrus.
None of those people have built skyscrapers or had anywhere near the impact that the Donald has had, for good or ill. He may be a malign influence, but he's not a loser. He's been winning his whole life. And we dismiss him at our peril.
Not Cabarrus? The one whose affections brought Tallien to reduce his cruelty in the Reign of Terror and in the end helped bring about the Thermidorian revolt? Sorry, that's an achievement before which Trump's biggest assertions (let alone reality) pale. And Miss Hilton has a share in some skyscrapers, too, if I remember correctly. Ones that haven't gone bankrupt due to her mismanagement.
My take on Trump is that he started out a multi-millionaire and became a billionaire through inflation, notoriety, intimidation, and some shrewdness. Yes, we dismiss him at our peril, but that doesn't change the fact that guys like Trump are the problem, not the solution, in DC.
Not Cabarrus? The one whose affections brought Tallien to reduce his cruelty in the Reign of Terror and in the end helped bring about the Thermidorian revolt? Sorry, that's an achievement before which Trump's biggest assertions (let alone reality) pale.
The 18th Century is over, dude.
Yes, we dismiss him at our peril, but that doesn't change the fact that guys like Trump are the problem, not the solution, in DC.
Right. But you aren't going to persuade anyone with references to Theresa Cabarrus. If you mention her surname, most people are going to assume you mean an Italian restaurant chain.
Trump is connecting with people on a visceral level. And to take this back to the point of the original post, he's doing it because he knows how to sell at that level. References to Tallien and Thermidor are at a level of abstraction that defeat your messaging.
*Sigh*
I would still insist that there's a lot less going on than we want to believe with Trump. He's getting 24-7 media coverage, which is largely why he's dominating the polls. Take any other candidate - hell, even Jim Gilmore - and give them the same media domination - and they'd have the same (or likely better) numbers. If you don't believe that, then explain why Carson and Fiorina have jumped in the last couple of weeks. Have they tapped into some voter angst? Do they reflect some yuge meta commentary on the direction of the GOP? No. They both were perceived as doing well in the debates and gained a lot more media exposure. That's it.
It'll be interesting to go back and re-read all of this even a few months from now - we'll have that collective amnesia voters always seem to have about these sorts of things, shrug our shoulders and say "oh, that's right. Trump was considered the frontrunner at one point."
Honestly, everyone should just check out of the political process until about October/November. We won't even recognize the playing field by then, and God willing, The Donald will be well on his way to becoming the political footnote to this campaign he's destined to be.
FR,
Maybe. I hope you're right. Where it gets interesting is if the economy starts heading south.
Honestly, everyone should just check out of the political process until about October/November.
Well, maybe a few months of exhaustive coverage of the Irondale Marching Knights is in order.
Post a Comment