5 ms·

El Presidente (Señor Teflon Trump) has a unique set of skills that Mr. Zuckerberg probably doesn't have. These have been covered by the hypnotist cartoonist, Sc

El Presidente (Señor Teflon Trump) has a unique set of skills that Mr. Zuckerberg probably doesn't have. These have been covered by the hypnotist cartoonist, Scott Adams: Like many of you, I have been entertained by the unstoppable clown car that is Donald Trump. On the surface, and several layers deep as well, Trump appears to be a narcissistic blow-hard with inadequate credentials to lead a country. The only problem with my analysis is that there is an eerie consistency to his success so far. Is there a method to it? Is there some sort of system at work under the hood? Probably yes. Allow me to describe some of the hypnosis and persuasion methods Mr. Trump has employed on you. (Most of you know I am a trained hypnotist and this topic is a hobby of mine.) [...] - Clown Genius (August 15, 2015), http://blog.dilbert.com/post/126589300371/clown-genius http://blog.dilbert.com/post/126589300371/clown-genius Two posts later was Wizard Wars [1], which discusses some of the hypnosis training that El Presidente went through. [1] http://blog.dilbert.com/post/126916006856/wizard-wars http://blog.dilbert.com/post/126916006856/wizard-wars Milton Erickson (the grand master) -> John Grinder -> Anthony Robbins -> Donald "Teflon" Trump The Clintons [Bill & Hillary] are also friends with Anthony Robbins. I don't know why Hillary didn't learn anything - maybe it's because she was a career politician who spent her formative years interacting with politicians, instead of with real people. Adams pointed out somewhere that Teflon Don's pastor growing up was Norman Vincent Peale, who wrote The Power of Positive Thinking and other books about effective mental habbits. Señor Trump used his persuasion training in his reality T.V. show, in building his twitter audience, and in his presidential campaign. One Saturday morning, when I was going to get the taxi, I heard a blurb on NPR about the screening of the Milton Erickson Foundation's new documentary, Wizard of the Desert [2] [3]. I called one of my "Project Passengers" [4] and let her know that we were going to this screening. Later I had a session with the president of the organization. Dr. Zeig precisely identified how I was sabotaging my efforts... [2] http://www.wizardofthedesertmovie.com/ http://www.wizardofthedesertmovie.com/ (auto-play video, starts with Anthony Robbins) [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_YMCHDzLm4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_YMCHDzLm4 [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13286085 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13286085 - she is doing very well now, no thanks to the State's efforts. Her family & "art therapy" & "peer support" training were much more helpful with getting her alcohol use under control than was 2 years in minimum security prison.

anotherbrownguy 9y ago
Do you realize that Scott Adams was an avid Trump supporter during the election campaign? You might want to catch up with him.
quadrangle 9y ago
The entire line of thinking that Scott Adams has is basically comparable to being a dedicated pickup-artist. Adams has studied all the tricks of how to manipulate people and rationalizes it to the point of deluding himself. It's like saying that if you're a pickup-artist who successfully seduces your target using all manner of clever and manipulative tactics, well, they were indeed seduced so, you judge that they liked it and had a good time, so it's all good. Adams is obsessed with persuasion to the point of completely ignoring what you persuade people to do or think. Like an avid pickup-artist who treats Casanova as the hero to model, Adams sees that Trump is successful at manipulating people, so he sees that as all the proof needed that Trump is to be admired and treated as the ultimate model to follow. Short version: Adams is a lousy source for actually understanding Trump. Adams is right about some things and wrong about others, and he is among the most extreme victims of confirmation bias I've ever seen. A good understanding of Trump and the aspects Adams talks about is this: https://newrepublic.com/article/124803/donald-trump-not-liar https://newrepublic.com/article/124803/donald-trump-not-liar
- taxicabjesus 9y ago
  > Adams has studied all the tricks of how to manipulate people There is more than "tricks" to effective communication. THIS is Milton Erickson's insight, and this was what my comment was about. 'Tricks' were all Hillary Clinton had in her linguistic arsenal (ex: calling Trump 'dark'). You ignored my whole comment, and just compared El Presidente to a 'pick up artist'. (The premise of that field is the lesson I had to give to one of my female passengers one night, about the 'difference between boys & girls': http://www.taxiwars.org/2016/02/the-difference-between-boys-girls.html http://www.taxiwars.org/2016/02/the-difference-between-boys-... - women get to take their pick of potential suitors, whereas men have to market themselves effectively. Sometimes men resort to using linguistic 'tricks' to get women into bed. Women would be well-served by being able to recognize the language patterns that are sometimes used...) "If the definition of insanity is repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting a different result, then that's exactly what Clinton was doing in this campaign. There was zero evidence from the Republican primary that a traditional campaign would work against Trump. But she ran one anyway. Why?" - https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/09/06/politics/hillary-clinton-memoir/index.html https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/09/06/politics/hillary-clinton-... Your New Republic article is from 2015, which was before El Presidente steam-rolled the republican primary field. Do you have anything newer?

anotherbrownguy 9y ago

Do you realize that Scott Adams was an avid Trump supporter during the election campaign? You might want to catch up with him.

quadrangle 9y ago

The entire line of thinking that Scott Adams has is basically comparable to being a dedicated pickup-artist. Adams has studied all the tricks of how to manipulate people and rationalizes it to the point of deluding himself. It's like saying that if you're a pickup-artist who successfully seduces your target using all manner of clever and manipulative tactics, well, they were indeed seduced so, you judge that they liked it and had a good time, so it's all good. Adams is obsessed with persuasion to the point of completely ignoring what you persuade people to do or think. Like an avid pickup-artist who treats Casanova as the hero to model, Adams sees that Trump is successful at manipulating people, so he sees that as all the proof needed that Trump is to be admired and treated as the ultimate model to follow. Short version: Adams is a lousy source for actually understanding Trump. Adams is right about some things and wrong about others, and he is among the most extreme victims of confirmation bias I've ever seen. A good understanding of Trump and the aspects Adams talks about is this: https://newrepublic.com/article/124803/donald-trump-not-liar https://newrepublic.com/article/124803/donald-trump-not-liar

taxicabjesus 9y ago
> Adams has studied all the tricks of how to manipulate people There is more than "tricks" to effective communication. THIS is Milton Erickson's insight, and this was what my comment was about. 'Tricks' were all Hillary Clinton had in her linguistic arsenal (ex: calling Trump 'dark'). You ignored my whole comment, and just compared El Presidente to a 'pick up artist'. (The premise of that field is the lesson I had to give to one of my female passengers one night, about the 'difference between boys & girls': http://www.taxiwars.org/2016/02/the-difference-between-boys-girls.html http://www.taxiwars.org/2016/02/the-difference-between-boys-... - women get to take their pick of potential suitors, whereas men have to market themselves effectively. Sometimes men resort to using linguistic 'tricks' to get women into bed. Women would be well-served by being able to recognize the language patterns that are sometimes used...) "If the definition of insanity is repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting a different result, then that's exactly what Clinton was doing in this campaign. There was zero evidence from the Republican primary that a traditional campaign would work against Trump. But she ran one anyway. Why?" - https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/09/06/politics/hillary-clinton-memoir/index.html https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/09/06/politics/hillary-clinton-... Your New Republic article is from 2015, which was before El Presidente steam-rolled the republican primary field. Do you have anything newer?