4 ms·

They have skills to rise to the top for sure. The problem is those may not be the same skills you would need to govern effectively. Donald Trump is my favorite

• denton-scratch 4y ago
  Trump's a sobering case, isn't he? He's a multiple bankrupt. He has a talent for destruction. It seems to me that he lacks insight; he seems to be a loudmouthed blowhard, just like many people I've met that aren't well-educated, and aren't property magnates. I don't really get how he got people to vote for him; I suspect it's that he appealed specifically to an anti-intellectual constituency - the same constituency that rejected Al Gore for being too intellectual. That is: being clever seems to be unhelpful, if you want to get ahead in US politics.
  • adolph 4y ago
    > I don't really get how he got people to vote for him; I suspect it's that he appealled specifically to an anti-intellectual constituency - the same constituency that rejected Al Gore for being too intellectual. Since it was the same constituency (in the margin) that voted Obama and Trump in, maybe the question is how Obama appealed to that "anti-intellectual" group more successfully than the succeeding candidate.
  • jjk166 4y ago
    Trump (or someone Trump was smart enough to listen to) realized that the same strategies that work for celebrity PR also work for political PR. Dogma in political circles had long been that you want to try to piss off as few people as possible and be palatable to as wide an audience as possible. But in hollywood gossip you want to be constantly involved in some scandal or feud - it doesn't matter what absurd position you take, people will still join your side. It's the exact same mental pathway that makes people very invested in their local sports team - sure you've never met these people and victory has no practical value to you whatsoever, but they are your team, your tribe, so you care. Trump spent years using these tactics to maintain his standing as a C-tier celebrity and eventually applied them to politics where they worked spectacularly. He plays the part of a buffoon, but if you pay attention to his oratory there are numerous clever strategies employed - he always focusses on one opponent at a time; he always gives his opponents simple, diminutive monikers that always use the first name which make him come off as simultaneously informal and superior; technical questions are met with machismo. In general all of his efforts work towards painting himself as an extremely confident individual who is stronger and more virile than his opponents and his policy positions are irrelevant. This might seem like a dumb strategy, but if you consider how a gorilla becomes leader of its troop, it does not make a well reasoned argument that it has the best policies and will improve the economy, it makes itself appear too formidable for any other contender to challenge. Our ape brains have evolved to join the side of the strongest and most virile alpha male. Trump's strategy exploits this pathway. That is not to say that he deliberately developed a strategy based on how apes compete for dominance, but rather he happened to adopt a strategy that just happened to be effective, and he executed it well. Trump's apparent lack of intelligence also served him well as the political establishment not only did not understand how to counter his strategy, but didn't even recognize the strategy until it was too late. They played right into his hands, frequently lampooning his positions and thus inadvertently giving him a far bigger audience. They tried to paint him as divisive and brash, not realizing that's exactly what people wanted. They debated him with traditional political rhetoric which came off as impotent and disingenuous. They pounced on every scandal which desensitized people to outrage. While I personally believe that Corey Lewandowski was the real brains behind the operation and as stated the other contenders made serious blunders, the fact that in a few years a man with the catchphrase "You're fired!" could completely submit half the country's political spectrum to his will and retain that influence after two impeachment attempts and a lost election indicates an exceptional ability to play the game.
    • denton-scratch 4y ago
      Thanks for your long reply. > clever strategies employed Yes, I think he's a clever orator. I assume he gets talking-points from advisors; but he's winging it a lot of the time, and he gets away with it. But he's not "clever" like someone who once finished reading a book. He brags that he doesn't read books, and I believe him. He has a famously short window of attention. Perhaps all of his 'stable genius' is focused on what matters; but what's that? [Edit] The pub around the corner from me sells a draught ale called "Stable Genius".
      • AstralStorm 4y ago
        It's called "clever but not smart". The problem being that in position of so much power, one needs both out in the long term everyone loses.
    • rdtwo 4y ago
      A brilliant explanation of my short comment. If I met you in real life I’d buy you a beer good sir.