Is Trump a Brilliant Asymmetric Fighter?

So we keep hearing. Supposedly Hillary's in trouble for her boring, conventional tactics like having actual coherent policies and telling the truth rather than making wild accusations without any actual proof.

The funny thing is, though, is so far Trump's brilliant political strategy, his Masterly Persuasive plan is to: rehash a bunch of fake GOP scandals from the 90s that didn't work then.

He's been talking about Vince Foster. He's talked about Monica Lewinsky-he had her in an ad, though not with her blessing. However, he was able to get one 90s era female accuser to play ball with him: Kathleen Wiley who he just happened to give $1 million dollars to. Surely that has nothing to do with it.

http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/05/donald-trump-paid-kathleen-wiley-to.html

The idea that this is brilliant and asymmetrical is dubious. Certainly paying people for dirt on the Clintons is not new. It was the 90s business model. David Brock himself before his redemption talks about how he went to Arkansas in 1993 and paid state troopers for stories about Bill Clinton's sex life.

Thank God we now have Brock on our side.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/is-rush-limbaugh-in-trouble-talk-radio-213914

So far Trump's main strategy seems to relitigate the same stuff that failed in the 90s.

"MSNBC Panel Calls Out Trump For Pushing The "Crazy Vortex" Of Alex Jones, Matt Drudge, Conspiracy Theories."

https://mediamatters.org/video/2016/05/24/msnbc-panel-calls-out-trump-pushing-crazy-vortex-alex-jones-matt-drudge-conspiracy-theories/210566

How is dishing out the conspiracy theories of Alex Jones, Matt Drudge, etc. some brilliant asymmetric strategy?

It's rather a failed strategy that has been tried before. Who better than Hillary Clinton to deal with it? 

"But the partisan operatives, eager and unscrupulous as they are, know very well that Hillary Clinton too has seen all of this before. With the exception of her husband, there is no living public figure in this country who has survived such harsh scrutiny for so long. She has endured far worse attacks than those she is likely to encounter in 2016. When Bill Clinton was still president, she became a primary target of independent counsel Kenneth Starr, his hardshelled deputy prosecutors and scores of FBI agents, who spent five years and over $50 million attempting to prove, among other things, that the then-First Lady had not testified with perfect accuracy about a minor Arkansas real-estate transaction—a deal that had occurred years before her husband’s inauguration."

"Having created the ballyhooed Whitewater “scandal,” most of the nation’s news organizations, including three or four television networks and the two most important daily newspapers, cheered Starr on, spending millions more in their own zeal to get Hillary. There was no accusation too obscure or dubious to make headlines, in publications that routinely anticipated her imminent criminal indictment. Editors of The New York Times, America’s newspaper of record, employed not one but two op-ed columnists, William Safire and Maureen Dowd, whose only seeming purpose in life was to bring her down. Safire warned repeatedly that she would go to prison, promising to “eat crow” if his direst predictions proved wrong. (While the old Nixon hand has since passed away, Dowd still pursues the same old obsession in the same space, as she devolves into self-parody.) "

https://user-assets-unbounce-com.s3.amazonaws.com/ce338798-70f0-11e4-aecd-22000a91c258/2d43ae19-ffa8-4de6-8487-628229991890/huntingofhillary-pdf-01-06-16.original.pdf?

Gene Lyons, the author of the above link literally wrote the book on the hunting of Hilary Clinton. Nothing Trump has done or will do breaks new ground. 

And actually I think she's been handling it well. She's hit him on his tax returns which is a current issue not simply backward looking. She says we need to see them to have any hope of assessing if he's the huge success he claims to be or did he basically get lucky with his Daddy's money?

Fred Trump gave him $40 million in 1974 which is $200 million today. No wonder Trump sued Timothy O'Leary:

"In 2004, while I was trying to assess Trump’s wealth, he told me that he was worth $4 billion to $5 billion before lowering the figure later that day to $1.7 billion. My sources -- individuals who worked with Trump and had a good sense of his finances -- thought he was worth $150 million to $250 million. Trump sued me for publishing that figure as part of a range of assessments of his wealth, saying it had damaged his reputation and business. Among the documents discussed during the litigation was a Deutsche Bank assessment from 2005 that put Trump’s net worth at about $788 million; at the time, Forbes had pegged Trump at $2.7 billion, he was telling bankers and regulators that he was worth $3.6 billion, and he was telling me he was worth $5 billion to $6 billion (a billion or two more than what he had told me the year before)."

http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/05/how-rich-is-donald-trump-ask-timothy.html

She asked the obvious question: how do you lose money running a casino? Like Tom Brown says, it reminds you of the Michael Corleone:

"How do you lose money running a casino? I'm reminded of the scene in the Godfather where Michael Corleone visits Moe Green in Vegas."

Michael Corleone: “Your casino loses money. Maybe we can do better.”
Moe Greene: “You think I’m skimming off the top, Mike?”
Michael Corleone: “You’re unlucky.”

"As I recall things don't end well for Moe."

https://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/05/how-do-you-lose-money-running-casino.html?showComment=1464044169469#c6767327021293033842

So far I see no evidence at all that he's brilliant unconventional fighter. Sure, no one has talked about the 90s scandals in awhile: but this is because they didn't work. Sometimes something is not done conventionally as it's been shown to be a loser.