Thanks to timely assists from Wikileaks, Trump has successfully framed Hillary clinton as a crooked politician. Meanwhile, Clinton has successfully framed Trump as a dangerous monster. If the mainstream polls are accurate, voters prefer the crook to the monster. That makes sense because a crook might steal your wallet but the monster could kill you. As of today, Clinton has the superior persuasion strategy. Crook beats monster.
I agree with the persuasion assessment, though I don’t believe the polls (this is a change election). With “Crooked Hillary,” Donald is arguing based on morals, ie, you should oppose crookedness. But he is doing this in a time of r, when morals will be degraded due to weakened, easily triggerable amygdalae. The sad truth is the moral people were already behind Donald. He already has all of the moral deplorables. Now he needs to bring in a few of the immoral triggerables.
For that, he needs to make it about their survival. That can be done easily, with just a small tweak of his Crooked Hillary meme, mixing it with the fact that we now have $20 trillion in debt and every crooked Establishment politician doubles the national debt during their tenure.
In short, Donald now needs to add a dash of Apocalypse to his recipe. Hillary is crooked, but where does her crookedness lead? What happens as she sells out our nation, increasing debt to $40 Trillion, and handing that money to her crooked cronies in return for cash handouts to her corrupt foundation and six figure paychecks for twenty minute speeches?
If Hillary wins, the government collapses. The economic system collapses. The EBT system collapses. Social Security goes away. Healthcare collapses. Law and Order disappears as the Fedguv machine collapses and the savages go ape-shit over losing their freebies. Wars begin when we can’t pay back our national debt. Companies collapse as the banking system they need goes under. Too big to fail transitions to TOO BIG TO SAVE. And all of that will probably sweep all across the globe.
It all comes down, and the United States is over. Apocalypse. The mother of all Apocalypses, created by an all powerful, evil cabal of establishment hacks. The kind of Apocalypse which only a Monster could have any chance of fixing before ITZ goes down. The kind of Apocalypse which we need a Monster to prevent.
Who do we want to send into the corrupt swamp in DC that is plunging us toward Apocalypse? A crooked fellow traveler the Establishment loves, who will enrich herself by making Apocalypse happen? Or a Monster who terrifies all of them? Only a Monster could take out the corrupt establishment and save everyone.
Monster is not all bad. Monster is scary, but Monster is also strong. Who doesn’t want a monster for a pet, if it is loyal to you? Who wouldn’t want a Monster for a friend, if big bad enemies were threatening? When something needs to be destroyed, who wouldn’t want a Monster? A Monster who is blindly loyal to Americans is a good thing, when America is under threat.
Plus, if you play it right, Apocalypse can be both funny and scary at the same time. Nothing today is as ridiculous as reality. People know that on a very deep level. They would be entertained, and imbued with the message. The battle would appear fun, even as it became real in people’s minds and in need of remediation.
The time is right for Donald. But his present base of support is very firmly behind him. Now he needs to start scaring the triggerables into fearing what will happen if crooked Hillary takes the reins.
Because if Crooked Hillary takes the reins, really bad things are going to happen. Everyone should be afraid.
[…] Is Donald’s Persuasion Strategy Weaker? […]
He may be a [monster/bastard/whiner/etc.], but he’s OUR [monster/bastard/whiner/etc.].
I’ve been putting it on a personal level.
Hillary’s “Stronger Together” idea depends on people like me paying for people she wants to support. But people like me won’t sit still for it, we’re clever and awake and will find a way out. Truth is, we are morally opposed to the idea of Hillary’s system and want it to fail even if we have no personal benefit. We will not be cucks.
And so all that stuff she’s promising, won’t be there. So you can choose hard work under a tough leader, or collapse, scarcity, communism and nobody will be willing to take care of you anyway. Your vote, suckers.
Things could come apart even *before* Hillary takes the reins. Remember that when President Lincoln took office on March 4, 1861, seven states had already seceded. Hillary’s election will be the Democrats’ final victory, proof that a rotting corpse with a (D) after its name defeats anything that productive, taxpaying suckers could ever run against it. And that corpse will prop the door open for millions more third-worlders to come and vote our money into their pockets.
White men probably won’t rise up in revolt, but after Nov. 8 we will all know that it is their country, not ours, and will cease to support or defend it. We shall step aside and let feminists, blacks, Latinos, and LGBTs pay taxes to the government they elected, and be cannon fodder in its wars.
The question is a matter of grouping, and this is where r/K would help Scott Adams. Are more people of the “we want someone to shake up things – and thus want the monster” or are more people of the “better a crook than a monster”. Obviously the K’s in this situation see the shaking of things as needed. The r’s like the status quo.* I’m inclined to think Scott Adams while having a firm understanding of how people thing and are persuaded on a fundamental level, has missed the shift in their filters.
*at other times, say about 1900, the situation of who wanted which shake up was reversed, so you have to look not just at the what of the status quo but the why of changing it.
Agreed.