Trump: Science, Persuasion and Name Recognition
Posted by
Strongbad (aka Rambler14)
Feb 16 '16, 04:02
|
Donald Trump could have run as a Democrat, taken Bernie Sanders’ entire platform, and be leading the polls on that side.
Ridiculous, you say?
If Donald Trump ran as a Democrat, on a platform of universal healthcare and free college tuition – paid entirely by corporate tax-dodgers and China – he would absolutely be leading on the Democrat side.
Trump couldn’t pick ANY policy and win on ANY team. But if you think picking the RIGHT policies to put yourself in first place is an accident, and not an element of persuasion itself, you are very wrong. Picking your fights is an element of both persuasion and strategy. Trump is good at both.
Why did Trump go all-in this year but not in past elections? It is because he saw a weak field this time. He knows how to pick his battles. That’s a skill.
The bottom line is that having the right policies is a requirement for doing well in a presidential campaign. But all the candidates had the same policy options as Trump. It isn’t luck that Trump picked right.
Back in August of 2015, you could be forgiven for thinking Trump got lucky by picking a hard line on immigration and finding that it worked out for him. But by February 2016 you probably see the pattern to his work. Everything you thought was Trump’s craziness is actually science – specifically the science of persuasion.
The candidate you think is the least science-minded is the only one using science to win.
And none of it is an accident.
|
Responses:
|
