There's better and worse tricks, and then there's real communication. Scott Adams is like Hillary Clinton — both full of mediocre tricks, although there's a big

There's better and worse tricks, and then there's real communication. Scott Adams is like Hillary Clinton — both full of mediocre tricks, although there's a big difference. Adams seems to really believe what he's saying and so comes across more compellingly (despite lacking real substance and intellectual rigor). Clinton seems to be obviously deceptive and bad at hiding it (even as she's deluded herself much of the time). The New Republic article aged better than almost all the other press out there. I referenced it because it's correct and clear. I'm not sure why you brought up Clinton, but let me make this completely explicit: zero of the insights or persepctives on Trump need to describe him in contrast to Clinton, and there's no basis to think that critics of Trump have anything good to say about Clinton necessarily. My point mostly wasn't even about Trump. I'm not saying Trump himself is a pickup-artist and that's it. I'm saying that SCOTT ADAMS has an ideology comparable to that of pickup-artist culture and his (Adams') admiration for Trump is based on seeing Trump as a master pickup-artist who also can be assumed to just have the best of intentions for everyone. Adams and Trump are different types of fools.