Scott Adams On Donald Trump On Game

Scott Adams wrote a couple of short essays on The Trumpening that are basically recitations of core game concepts (some of which are retrofitted from ideas first introduced by Robert Cialdini in his book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion). You will find many of Scott’s points, and Trump’s tactics, explained in depth in the CH archives.

Would Trump use his negotiation and persuasion skills in the campaign? Of course he would. And we expect him to do just that. […]

As I said in my How to Fail book, if you are not familiar with the dozens of methods of persuasion that are science-tested, there’s a good chance someone is using those techniques against you.

For example, when Trump says he is worth $10 billion, which causes his critics to say he is worth far less (but still billions) he is making all of us “think past the sale.” The sale he wants to make is “Remember that Donald Trump is a successful business person managing a vast empire mostly of his own making.” The exact amount of his wealth is irrelevant.

When a car salesperson trained in persuasion asks if you prefer the red Honda Civic or the Blue one, that is a trick called making you “think past the sale” and the idea is to make you engage on the question of color as if you have already decided to buy the car. That is Persuasion 101 and I have seen no one in the media point it out when Trump does it.

“Think past the sale” is the same as the game technique known as “assume the sale“. The results of this form of persuasion/seduction are just as predictable: the customer/woman is groomed to believe he/she has already chosen your product/you.

The $10 billion estimate Trump uses for his own net worth is also an “anchor” in your mind. That’s another classic negotiation/persuasion method. I remember the $10 billion estimate because it is big and round and a bit outrageous. And he keeps repeating it because repetition is persuasion too.

I don’t remember the smaller estimates of Trump’s wealth that critics provided. But I certainly remember the $10 billion estimate from Trump himself. Thanks to this disparity in my memory, my mind automatically floats toward Trump’s anchor of $10 billion being my reality. That is classic persuasion. And I would be amazed if any of this is an accident. Remember, Trump literally wrote the book on this stuff.

Anchoring is another insidiously effective game technique. In seduction, anchoring is most effective when a good feeling or evoked emotion is purposefully coupled with a physical touch, so that the woman associates her positive state with her seducer’s presence.

You might be concerned that exaggerating ones net worth is like lying, and the public will not like a liar. But keep in mind that Trump’s value proposition is that he will “Make America Great.” In other words, he wants to bring the same sort of persuasion to the question of America’s reputation in the world. That concept sounds appealing to me. The nation needs good brand management, whether you think Trump is the right person or not.

In game parlance, “branding” is called “creating an identity”, which means adopting some sexy persona that appeals to women.

Trump also said he thinks Mexico should pay for the fence, which made most people scoff. But if your neighbor’s pit bull keeps escaping and eating your rosebushes, you tell the neighbor to pay for his own fence or you will shoot his dog next time you see it.

Scott Adams definitely reads Chateau Heartiste.

On a recent TV interview, the host (I forget who) tried to label Trump a “whiner.” But instead of denying the label, Trump embraced it and said was the best whiner of all time, and the country needs just that. That’s a psychological trick I call “taking the high ground” and I wrote about it in a recent blog post. The low ground in this case is the unimportant question of whether “whiner” is a fair label for Trump. But Trump cleverly took the high ground, embraced the label, and used it to set an anchor in your mind that he is the loudest voice for change. That’s some clown genius for you.

In game parlance, “taking the high ground” means “Agree&Amplify“. Donald F’ing Trump is a skilled Game practitioner. No wonder the women in his life are so beautiful and adore him so deeply.

When Trump raised his hand at the debate as the only person who would not pledge to back the eventual Republican candidate, he sent a message to the party that the only way they can win is by nominating him. And people like to win. It is in their nature.

Trump is a winner. This is why he bugs cuckservatives so much.

And what about Trump’s habit of bluster and self-complimenting? Every time he opens his mouth he is saying something about the Trump brand being fabulous or amazing or great. The rational part of your brain thinks this guy is an obnoxious, exaggerating braggart. But the subconscious parts of your brain (the parts that make most of your decisions) only remember that something about that guy was fabulous, amazing and great.

Game concept: DHVing (demonstrating higher value).

Now that Trump owns FOX, and I see how well his anchor trick works with the public, I’m going to predict he will be our next president.

I don’t know if we’ll have a President Trumpening (in’shallah), but if we do it’ll be because Trump has TIGHT GAME. And balls.

Now, if you can become president using game, imagine how much game could help you clean up with women!

Here’s Scott’s second essay on Trump’s power of persuasion.

My main point is that intellectual arguments lose to visual arguments and to powerful associations such as “America” and “great.” You think Trump is spouting calorie-free non-policies because he’s an idiot who hasn’t done his homework. The reality (as far as I can tell) is that he’s playing three-dimensional chess with two-dimensional opponents.

Beta spergs take note: you will never logically or intellectually stimulate a woman into bed. You have to learn to speak the language of hotnsexynsteamynsensual romance, which is, in fact, as learnable as any rule of logic inquiry.

***

Scott Walker is a niceguy who for the most part has his head on straight, compared to the rest of the cuckservative field. But he is weak. Listen to him feebly try to reason with some mud invader who wants the US to do nothing less than bend over and take his burrito up the keister.

Commenter “Original” writes,

Trump reframes children of illegal immigrants as: “It’s an issue of our countries policies encouraging this behavior.”

Here’s a more powerful reframe: “Anyone who breaks this country’s immigration laws for their own benefit is a delinquent. Shame on all illegals for breaking the law, but especially shame on all illegals who drag their children into their criminal activity.”

The anointed GOP contenders are weak. This is why they fail. And this is why Trump wins.