• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Donald Trump is an intuitive genius, and if you don't understand this, you will never stop him.

Andy Hong

Lieutenant
Red Shirt
Hi all!
Donald Trump is an intuitive genius, and if you don't understand this, you will never stop him.

To be clear, he's only an intuitive genius in a very narrow area, but unfortunately, it is the only one that matters - he is an intuitive genius at using his common sense, best judgment, intuition and instincts to target the common sense, best judgment, intuition and instincts (intuitive thought process) of the American population. And he is superior at this than any known current US politician or media person.

He's also not a knowledgeable genius or a slow, deep, rational/logical thinking genius, because he doesn't do research or knowledge or focusing and thinking deeply about stuff.

Other things:
1: Attempts to link Trump and Russia hit a problem because unfortunately, Russia could only play a supporting role, it was Trump who did the heavy lifting to make and keep himself popular. (Steve Bannon must have watched too much SNL and thought he was the power behind the throne, only to find out too late Trump is the power on the throne, because he has all the political popularity (30-50% US population, 60-80% of Republican base).
2: He seems to have used 6 methods to make himself popular. The 4 minor ones are: confidence, name recognition, verbal communication skills and non-verbal communication skills (yes he has a tiny vocabulary, but it turns out that makes his message easier to digest for those with higher reading levels/possible to digest with those with lower reading levels, and repeating stuff (like "no collusion" 10 times in 2 minutes will work if people have their TV's on in the background and they don't pay enough attention, the only bit they'll remember is "no collusion" but they won't know where they got that from. The 2 main ones are; he is an intuitive genius at intuiting up statements that get Trump attention, make Trump look good, will be listened to by everyone and will feel great according to the common sense of enough listeners; and he built up a massive Positive Personal Reputation and Popularity Index. The former by building a reputation as a; successful billionaire businessman, funny and interesting celebrity entertainer; and a crude, rude, tell it like it is honest straight shooter non politician (this last one is important - it allows crude and rude behaviour to be "reframed" by the common sense, best judgment, intutiion and instincts of Trump supporters as a positive).
3: Trump doesn't lie as much as you'd think. Don't get me wrong - he does lie, but most of the time, just because his statement is wrong, misleading, inaccurate and untrue, that doesn't mean it's a lie, it just means it's untrue. As Kellyanne Conway says, if Trump doesn't think or know he's lying, it's not lying. Which is true (if ludicrious). But Kellyanne being Kellyanne, she omitted something. Trump isn't lying, because Trump usually doesn't bother to check, think or remember what is true before he says or does anything. Take the London Embassy. Trump was probably aware someone had decided to move it, the old building was being sold, and the new one was in a different location. First he decided he didn't want to go (without admitting it was because he'd get booed by thousands of people), then he common sensed out of thin air it was a stupid embassy, then he took what he knew and common sensed up 3 statements largely out of thin air - that the decision had been taken by Obama and it was a stupid decision, that the old building was sold for peanuts, and the new building was in a bad area. All untrue, but Donald never bothered to check how true the statements were, only intuiting that the statement would get Trump attention, make Trump look good, and feel great to the common sense and instincts of enough listeners (so it would work).
4: Trump's primary aims have not changed - get Trump attention, make Trump look good, so you like him and tell him how great he is.
5: You've elected a President who almost can't use his rational thought process or do research or knowledge. Trump seems almost completely dependent on his intuitive thought process. But this means he just common senses his way to his decisions with little to no data or deep thought (I think he dislikes the Iran Nuclear Deal for one of 3 shallow reasons: 1: He common sensed it off the top of his head in seconds "I Donald J Trump fell this is a bad deal" end of thought process. 2: He's using the Republican shorthand "If Obama was for this, we should be against it". 3: He watched a John Bolton interview on Fox News which said it was a bad deal, and he immediately common sensed that it was a bad deal.
6: Trump common sensing everything with no long, medium or short term planning or trying to remember what he did previously is why he's so erratic - he's common sensing it all the time, mainly for "will this get Trump attention, make Trump look good and feel great to enough listeners"? Which is why he agrees to a Democratic party plan, then a Republican one, then later rejects both because now his common sense is telling him it's a stupid plan rather than feeling before that it was a great one.
7: Oh, and a major reason why Trump makes lies or untrue statements, is because Trump has developed or progressed to the point that he statement no longer have to be true in order to work. The truthiness of his statements no longer have any effect on how likely you will listen to them (since they get reported by all media) and have no apparent effect on how likely the common sense of the listeners will feel these are great statements.
8: Trump means everything he says. But it is not necessary for him to believe anything he says. Also, he never makes it clear in what way he means it (serious, joking or something in between). Probably because he's hoping you just go and common sense that the statement is a great statement, and then you can use your common sense/intuition to fill in the gaps and common sense if Trump meant it in a serious, joking or in between way, so he doesn't have to bother. Similarly, Trump supporters common sense that his statement is great, then they have to common sense if it was true, true enough or false but acceptable. (for negative stories about Trump, this gets reversed to is the story "false, false enough or true but it doesn't matter).
9 I do wonder if Trump has full blown Hubris Syndrome (which is odd, because you're supposed to only get that after too many years in power, and he seems to have it full blown before he took office) OR he has the worst case of Neurotypical Syndrome I have ever seen (not just over-dependent on his intuitive thought process, but almost COMPLETELY dependent on it, to the near complete exclusion of data or deep thought.
 
Trump is pretty-to-very good at two important things:

-Appealing to angry and/or disaffected independents, conservatives and those generally not very involved in politics, people really dissatisfied with established politicians and consensuses about ideas and policies. Opponents saying "He's breaking precedents!!!1!!!1!" is pretty tone-deaf to that many don't mind or like that.

-Talking out of both sides of his mouth, using pretty inconsistent claims, positions and statements so that people who like him really like him while many others (especially independents) are indifferent and even those who hate him they are somewhat fractured among themselves. It's easy for a lot of people to dislike him without thinking the alternatives are better.

I think genius or even calling his approach definitely working is taking it too far as there is a lot of dislike and distrust to him and his policies and Democrats have been pretty effective in demonizing and stalling him on the major issue of immigration (and somewhat on health care) but even stalled and not-very-successful/unsuccessful may be successful enough if he continues to point out the Democrats and establishment Republicans also failed/failed worse before.

The State of the Union especially he made himself seem pretty reasonable & centrist and the Democrats like the Party of No (to Everything) (Kennedy's response amplified the latter message).
 
I'm not sure whether the word "genius" applies, perhaps it would be more accurate to say he makes use of a certain skill set many possess but he found himself i the right place at the right time for that skill set to carry maximum impact in his case. He's a classic sociopath and such people do often prosper in certain environments regardless of their classic intellect.

Nonetheless the analysis you have made (I'm assuming you made it yourself) certainly holds some water for me, it's over simplistic to say (as many do) he got into power because he's a nazi and appeals to nazis. More realistically he is very good at saying and doing whatever is required to impress, persuade, seduce, intimidate whoever happens to be in front of him at the time and whilst the opportunistic nature of that shows in his erratic pronouncements the majority of people tend to focus on (and define him by) the aspects that appeal to them. They don't look at the whole narrative or how things make no sense, they hear the specific message that was intended for them and form their opinions based on the smallest data set possible. Trump gets that, although whether he could put it into words is another matter. As you say, intuitive.

He is almost purpose built for modern charisma politics and that shows, but I think his track record will be a more telling testament next time around provided his opponents have the savvy to draw attention to it in ways that are readily accessible and digestible to those demographics to which they are relevant.
 
Last edited:
Trump appealed to the Rust Belt and that's how he won. If those states went for Hillary, he would've lost. Hillary Clinton's problem was that she took the Rust Belt for granted. I can understand why because those states hadn't voted Republican for President since the '80s, but Democrats have to learn they can't take The Blue Wall for granted. Trump also campaigned in states that no one thought he could flip. The next Democratic Candidate has to do the same.

I think if the Democrats run Bernie Sanders in 2020 or someone else who can appeal to the Rust Belt -- and Donald Trump fails to deliver on his promises to them -- we'll have another President in three years. Especially if the Democratic Candidate competes everywhere.
 
Last edited:
Hi all!
Donald Trump is an intuitive genius, and if you don't understand this, you will never stop him.

To be clear, he's only an intuitive genius in a very narrow area, but unfortunately, it is the only one that matters - he is an intuitive genius at using his common sense, best judgment, intuition and instincts to target the common sense, best judgment, intuition and instincts (intuitive thought process) of the American population. And he is superior at this than any known current US politician or media person.

He's also not a knowledgeable genius or a slow, deep, rational/logical thinking genius, because he doesn't do research or knowledge or focusing and thinking deeply about stuff.

Other things:
1: Attempts to link Trump and Russia hit a problem because unfortunately, Russia could only play a supporting role, it was Trump who did the heavy lifting to make and keep himself popular. (Steve Bannon must have watched too much SNL and thought he was the power behind the throne, only to find out too late Trump is the power on the throne, because he has all the political popularity (30-50% US population, 60-80% of Republican base).
2: He seems to have used 6 methods to make himself popular. The 4 minor ones are: confidence, name recognition, verbal communication skills and non-verbal communication skills (yes he has a tiny vocabulary, but it turns out that makes his message easier to digest for those with higher reading levels/possible to digest with those with lower reading levels, and repeating stuff (like "no collusion" 10 times in 2 minutes will work if people have their TV's on in the background and they don't pay enough attention, the only bit they'll remember is "no collusion" but they won't know where they got that from. The 2 main ones are; he is an intuitive genius at intuiting up statements that get Trump attention, make Trump look good, will be listened to by everyone and will feel great according to the common sense of enough listeners; and he built up a massive Positive Personal Reputation and Popularity Index. The former by building a reputation as a; successful billionaire businessman, funny and interesting celebrity entertainer; and a crude, rude, tell it like it is honest straight shooter non politician (this last one is important - it allows crude and rude behaviour to be "reframed" by the common sense, best judgment, intutiion and instincts of Trump supporters as a positive).
3: Trump doesn't lie as much as you'd think. Don't get me wrong - he does lie, but most of the time, just because his statement is wrong, misleading, inaccurate and untrue, that doesn't mean it's a lie, it just means it's untrue. As Kellyanne Conway says, if Trump doesn't think or know he's lying, it's not lying. Which is true (if ludicrious). But Kellyanne being Kellyanne, she omitted something. Trump isn't lying, because Trump usually doesn't bother to check, think or remember what is true before he says or does anything. Take the London Embassy. Trump was probably aware someone had decided to move it, the old building was being sold, and the new one was in a different location. First he decided he didn't want to go (without admitting it was because he'd get booed by thousands of people), then he common sensed out of thin air it was a stupid embassy, then he took what he knew and common sensed up 3 statements largely out of thin air - that the decision had been taken by Obama and it was a stupid decision, that the old building was sold for peanuts, and the new building was in a bad area. All untrue, but Donald never bothered to check how true the statements were, only intuiting that the statement would get Trump attention, make Trump look good, and feel great to the common sense and instincts of enough listeners (so it would work).
4: Trump's primary aims have not changed - get Trump attention, make Trump look good, so you like him and tell him how great he is.
5: You've elected a President who almost can't use his rational thought process or do research or knowledge. Trump seems almost completely dependent on his intuitive thought process. But this means he just common senses his way to his decisions with little to no data or deep thought (I think he dislikes the Iran Nuclear Deal for one of 3 shallow reasons: 1: He common sensed it off the top of his head in seconds "I Donald J Trump fell this is a bad deal" end of thought process. 2: He's using the Republican shorthand "If Obama was for this, we should be against it". 3: He watched a John Bolton interview on Fox News which said it was a bad deal, and he immediately common sensed that it was a bad deal.
6: Trump common sensing everything with no long, medium or short term planning or trying to remember what he did previously is why he's so erratic - he's common sensing it all the time, mainly for "will this get Trump attention, make Trump look good and feel great to enough listeners"? Which is why he agrees to a Democratic party plan, then a Republican one, then later rejects both because now his common sense is telling him it's a stupid plan rather than feeling before that it was a great one.
7: Oh, and a major reason why Trump makes lies or untrue statements, is because Trump has developed or progressed to the point that he statement no longer have to be true in order to work. The truthiness of his statements no longer have any effect on how likely you will listen to them (since they get reported by all media) and have no apparent effect on how likely the common sense of the listeners will feel these are great statements.
8: Trump means everything he says. But it is not necessary for him to believe anything he says. Also, he never makes it clear in what way he means it (serious, joking or something in between). Probably because he's hoping you just go and common sense that the statement is a great statement, and then you can use your common sense/intuition to fill in the gaps and common sense if Trump meant it in a serious, joking or in between way, so he doesn't have to bother. Similarly, Trump supporters common sense that his statement is great, then they have to common sense if it was true, true enough or false but acceptable. (for negative stories about Trump, this gets reversed to is the story "false, false enough or true but it doesn't matter).
9 I do wonder if Trump has full blown Hubris Syndrome (which is odd, because you're supposed to only get that after too many years in power, and he seems to have it full blown before he took office) OR he has the worst case of Neurotypical Syndrome I have ever seen (not just over-dependent on his intuitive thought process, but almost COMPLETELY dependent on it, to the near complete exclusion of data or deep thought.

Donald Trump is a narcissist, who only cares what happens to you if it directly affects what happens to him. As soon as your influence is no longer necessary, you're useless, and thus are tossed aside. There is no genius to his method, only an inability to recognize that he is the cause of harm, and not the solution.
 
A Trump lead party appealed to over 60 million voters. These people had different reasons for voting for him and a right to have him as their President. Such is the system.

I don't understand why it is necessary to profile Tump voters negatively.
 
Trump is pretty-to-very good at two important things:

-Appealing to angry and/or disaffected independents, conservatives and those generally not very involved in politics, people really dissatisfied with established politicians and consensuses about ideas and policies. Opponents saying "He's breaking precedents!!!1!!!1!" is pretty tone-deaf to that many don't mind or like that.

And yet almost half the country stayed home on election day. There's a lot of apathy out there. What might turn those people around? There's a fascinating scenario right there...

-Talking out of both sides of his mouth, using pretty inconsistent claims, positions and statements

What, no other presidents or politicians ever did that to any extent? No waaaaaaaaaaaaay! (sorry for the sarcasm, appeasing numerous disparate audiences is part of the job and certainly was long before the election ever took place.)
 
I think people get their hopes up too much with Impeachment. If the Democrats win the House and Senate in 2018, they'll most likely vote to impeach him after the Mueller Probe runs its course, the same as when the Republicans voted to impeach Bill Clinton. But, just like 20 years ago, Impeachment doesn't mean Removal. It would take two-thirds of the Senate to vote to remove him from Office, which won't happen. I'd be very surprised if it did.

So, basically, he's in Office until January 20, 2021 (or January 20, 2025). I think surviving Impeachment will make him even worse. If it happens. He'll say, "You Snowflakes tried to impeach me and look at who's still President, folks!"
 
A Trump lead party appealed to over 60 million voters. These people had different reasons for voting for him and a right to have him as their President. Such is the system.

I don't understand why it is necessary to profile Tump voters negatively.
Who was profiling Trump supporters negatively in this thread so far or denying their right to vote for him (thanks for that stunning revelation, btw), or is that just a stock defensive response whenever Trump's name is brought up?
 
What, no other presidents or politicians ever did that to any extent? No waaaaaaaaaaaaay! (sorry for the sarcasm, appeasing numerous disparate audiences is part of the job and certainly was long before the election ever took place.)
Of course politicians speak out of both sides of their mouths, I agree. Democrats too ;)
 
A Trump lead party appealed to over 60 million voters. These people had different reasons for voting for him and a right to have him as their President. Such is the system.

I don't understand why it is necessary to profile Tump voters negatively.
One of my friends voted for Trump, because he believed Trump would make the economy strong again. He decided, from what I've been told, that the other problems Trump had were personal character issues, and that he figured Congress would keep Trump in line on policy. Clearly, that isn't what has happened, but yeah, my friend didn't vote for Trump in order to have people in DACA kicked out of the country. It was a nasty surprise for him, and now he's against Trump because he feels he was conned. I believe he was also. It's not the Trump voters I'm against, because people can be taught to vote against their own interests, it's Trump himself, and the authoritarian system that makes it so our choices are so limited as to be nearly worthless.**

**That notwithstanding, Hillary would have been preferred if for no other reason than she was clearly a more competent choice.
 
One of my friends voted for Trump, because he believed Trump would make the economy strong again. He decided, from what I've been told, that the other problems Trump had were personal character issues, and that he figured Congress would keep Trump in line on policy. Clearly, that isn't what has happened, but yeah, my friend didn't vote for Trump in order to have people in DACA kicked out of the country. It was a nasty surprise for him, and now he's against Trump because he feels he was conned. I believe he was also. It's not the Trump voters I'm against, because people can be taught to vote against their own interests, it's Trump himself, and the authoritarian system that makes it so our choices are so limited as to be nearly worthless.**

**That notwithstanding, Hillary would have been preferred if for no other reason than she was clearly a more competent choice.
Well I'm actually cautious to discuss Trump with the honesty your thread deserves given the climate. It's just the way it is that anyone who may have a less than condemning perspective is ...

Hillary didn't win the election because she didn't see it as being a competition. She was outplayed.
 
A Trump lead party appealed to over 60 million voters. These people had different reasons for voting for him and a right to have him as their President. Such is the system.

I don't understand why it is necessary to profile Tump voters negatively.

No one had?
 
Well I'm actually cautious to discuss Trump with the honesty your thread deserves given the climate. It's just the way it is that anyone who may have a less than condemning perspective is ...

Hillary didn't win the election because she didn't see it as being a competition. She was outplayed.
Well, I'm sure she saw it as a competition, but she may have made the same mistake a lot of non-voting Americans did, in that they felt it was a foregone conclusion that someone like Trump wouldn't win.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top