Friday, November 4, 2016

A Dogbertian Persuasion Technique

Most of us who are patriotic, and who have thought this election through, are very much in favor of Trump, of course. The America-haters and the anti-White crowd are of course for Hillary, for the same reasons we're against her. That leaves some good people who aren't that politically aware, and who get their opinions more or less from the Big Media outlets, all of which are Hillary sycophants. Some of those are undecided, and some are for Hillary. How do we persuade such people to support and vote for Trump, at this late date, when we encounter them?

As much as we might like to, yelling at them won't help, nor will a know-it-all attitude that it's all too easy to fall into, when we meet people who just don't get it. The trick is to persuade, not to be antagonistic. Keep in mind that while you and I might be political junkies, most decent people are too busy with work, family, church, etc., to pay a lot of attention to the candidates, let alone political principles.

But they are aware of things like honesty, sobriety, even temperament, and prudence, and they like that sort of thing. The Forces of Evil, in their frantic effort to elect Clinton, have accused Trump of falling short in these categories, which is ludicrous considering the lying, boozing, erratic, and dangerously crazy old lady he's running against.

You should be reading Scott Adams' blog daily (I do) [link], but in case you haven't gotten in the habit yet, today's post, which I'm uncharacteristically reprinting in full (I don't think Scott would mind) explains how to tweak a Clinton supporter of the decent kind, at least, onto the Trump train:

Unhypnotizing a Clinton Supporter

Today I teach you how to unhypnotize a Clinton supporter.
Keep in mind that the strongest form of persuasion is fear. Clinton’s team of persuaders has convinced her followers that Trump is dangerous. If you remove that part of her spell, Trump wins. Here’s how.
1. Trump’s Tough Talk Inspires violence: Ask Clinton supporters if they have seen the Project Veritas video of Clinton operatives talking about paying people to incite violence at Trump rallies. The people on the video have been fired, and we haven’t seen violence at Trump rallies since.
2. Temperament: Ask Clinton supporters if they have seen the video of Clinton ranting “Why aren’t I already fifty points ahead?” She looks either inebriated or deranged. Mention that the people who know Trump personally have reported that he is both smart and sane in person. Even his enemies who know him personally don’t claim he has a temperament problem. If he did, is there any chance we wouldn’t have heard about it by now?
3. Trump might insult foreign leaders into a war: Trump and Putin seem to get along fine. Netanyahu said he could work with Trump. Mexico isn’t likely to start a war over trade, or the wall. Trump says North Korea is China’s problem, which is literally the safest thing you could say. And China’s leaders are adults who know Trump says offensive things now and then. China will pursue its own interests, and none of those interests involve going to war over some words. Likewise, other leaders are adults too. They won’t change their foreign policy over some insults.
5. Trump might start a war: Trump owns buildings and property around the world. As a general rule, people who own a lot of real estate don’t start wars because their own assets are at risk. But Clinton is “sponsored” – via the Clinton Foundation and speaking fees  – by defense companies that profit from war. Likewise, Clinton is sponsored by foreign countries whose interests don’t align with American interests. Clinton supported war in Iraq and Libya, and she threatens Russia, just as the money trail suggests she would. Trump talks mostly about having a strong military to avoid war. He gains nothing by war.
6. Alcohol: Normally alcohol would not be a risk factor in picking a president because usually both candidates are social drinkers. But Trump has never had an alcoholic beverage while Clinton tells us she enjoys social drinking. Having a few social drinks is not a problem unless you plan to drive a car…or make a nuclear launch decision. If we don’t trust a social drinker to operate a motor vehicle, can we trust a social drinker to manage a nuclear arsenal?
If you have ever drunk-texted, or received a text from someone who has, you already know how much “social drinking” can influence decisions.
7. Group Violence versus Crazy Individuals: Have you noticed that when you see election-related violence from a group, it is always Clinton supporters? That happened at Trump’s San Jose rally, and it happened with the homeless woman protecting Trump’s star on the Walk of Fame. When Trump supporters do something violent they are usually acting alone, and crazy. When Clinton supporters get violent it comes in the form of mobs who are NOT crazy. That’s the dangerous kind of violence because they are literally Stronger Together. 
8. Pacing and Leading: When normal politicians change their minds we label it flip-flopping or – more kindly – “evolving” in their thinking. When a Master Persuader does it, you are seeing pacing and leading, which is a major tool of persuasion. Pacing involves matching people – in this case emotionally – and later using that bond to lead them. We see Trump doing this often.
a. Trump paced his base by saying he would deport 11 million undocumented immigrants. Once he had his base on his side emotionally, he led to them to his current policy of deporting only the people who committed crimes while here. Have you heard any Trump supporters complain about it lately?
b. Trump paced his base by saying he would ban all Muslim immigration to stop terrorist infiltration. Once he had them on his side emotionally, he led them first to a ban on specific problem countries, and then again to “extreme vetting,” which is a lot like Clinton’s plan. Trump supporters followed, and you don’t hear them complaining.
c. Early in the primaries Trump paced the racists in the Republican party by not disavowing them as clearly and as loudly as even the racists thought he would. Since then he has led Republicans to think that some form of a “New Deal” for African-Americans might be worth a look. 
d. At the Republican National Convention, Trump used his emotional connection to his supporters to declare he was the strongest voice to protect the LGBTQ community. Republicans stood and cheered. 
Readers of this blog might recall that months ago I predicted that Trump would soften his immigration proposals. That’s because I saw him from the start as a Master Persuader, not a crazy person, and not a common flip-flopper.
In my opinion, Trump might be the safest president we have ever had. He can lead the dark parts of his base toward the light (as Nixon went to China) and he has no incentive for war. Claims about his “temperament” are mostly about his penchant for insults, and that isn’t a mortal danger to anyone.
And there you have your formula for unhypnotizing a Clinton supporter who is mostly worried about Trump being dangerous. 
I used "Dogbertian" in the title, but the actual technique is not nearly as Machiavellian as most of Dogbert's. The Hillary people would consider it unfair, though, because it uses facts and logic.
Quibcag: If you want to feel safe, what better way to do so than to be defended by Freyja, Norse goddess of love and war? The illustration was found at Pinterest.


  1. That's nonsense. One can't 'persuade' lefties of anything, they're congenital idiots. Facts and logic are run off of them as does water off the feathers of ducks. Really, the only way to impact them is to emotionally overload them and give them the vapors.

  2. This is a contest between a sane man and a drunken psycho dyke.

  3. By the way, I've got some new cartoons out:
    Taking on an SJW lefty cartoonist....

  4. Most of us who are patriotic, and who have thought this election through, are very much in favor of Trump, of course. The America-haters and the anti-White crowd are of course for Hillary, for the same reasons we're against her.

    You set the false strawman badly, Ex Army.

    You don't own being patriotic. You don't get to decide who is patriotic just because of a vote for one of two jew minions.

    People who are against both of these criminals who are sycophants of jewish control are not unpatriotic.

    I insist that my stance is far more patriotic than anyone who embraces MORE jewish control.

    Endorsing and voting for either of these scumbags is a vote for more jew control. Its one thing to NOT want Hillary, it is another to ignore that the other guy is simply controlled by the other side of the same faction. Not just ignore it, but to act as if it isn't true.

    I see that you like such control. Personally, I am sick of it and I am not bamboozled by a jew ass-kissing sycophant actor any more than I am a jew ass-kissing sycophantic freakshow murderer.

    Carry on.

    1. No need to be hostile, BuleahMan. You don't know what kind of control I like. You could very well be right about Trump. You and I are both right about Hillary. I don't see how not voting advances anything. Such statistics are universally dismissed as evidence of apathy.

  5. good post.
    however, those hillary voters to whom i have listened are set in concrete to vote for her.
    they quote the media's twisted reporting as true. they just cannot see through it.
    thanks for the post.