Et Tu Al sharpton

As I've explained recently, there is only one question I have for anyone who analyses the Presidential race. Do you want to take Hitler 2.0 off the table or don't you?

I'm talking about the effect of what you say or do, not what-you claim is the intention. For this reason if you spend a lot of time talking about Trump's asymmetric, unconventional style, the answer is no. You are too sanguine about Hitler 2.0.

This is what I tried to explain to Greg yesterday. Greg:

"Someone pointing out Trumps MO isn't a propagandist and honestly other than the feeling of being able to say "I told you so" I don't think Adams wants Trump as president. He would be against many of the policies a candidate Trump seems to support but again, candidate Trump has supported many different things."

"Trumps effectiveness is more a comment on us than him. People have to want to be hypnotized. If you think hypnosis is bullshit you won't be hypnotized."

https://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/05/scott-adams-has-became-trumps-chief.html?showComment=1464785726472#c6087741491036811188

Of course, Adams' theory is that Trump is a Master Persuader who he thinks will be able to persuade or hypnotize most people as he predicts a Trump landslide. But Greg makes my point when he admits that if you think the hypnosis theory is bullshit you won't be hypnotized.

Right. This is why I'm saying that Adams constant selling of his MP hypothesis on net makes Hitler 2.0 more likely.

Then Greg said this:

"However, I do also think that there's such a thing as a self-fulfilling prophecy. For instance, IMO, if everyone keeps saying 'Nobody likes Hillary. I wish it were different but it's the truth' it makes it more likely to come to pass that people decide they don't like her. "

"You are simply describing persuasion techniques. There is no doubt that the politics of power involves using persuasion techniques. The political right in this country (the left at times as well) has used persuasion techniques ever since they started trying to overturn all the New Deal and then Great Society (see Kevin Kruses books about the Eisenhower era). Propaganda is part of persuasion. Churches are part of persuasion and they are used by the right to help disseminate their ideas."

"Persuasion can certainly cross the line into immoral and unethical behavior (Jim Jones and the Waco whackos for example) but knowing how to push peoples buttons is a good thing to know if you are trying to be in a position of authority."

"You aren't suggesting that Scott Adams should stop saying what he believes to be true are you?"

Well this kind of touches on my point. Greg has already admitted that those who believe Adam's hypnosis theory end up 'hypnotized' by Trump. So if Adams stopped saying 'what he believes to be true' you'd have less people potentially so 'hypnotized.'

If it contributes to a narrative that makes a Hitler 2.0 Presidency more likely, maybe he should.

I mean that's his choice-though this may change once Trump is in charge as should be clear from his press conference yesterday-but if someone has a conscience maybe they focus on other things they believe are true.

There is such a thing as framing. I may believe 10 different things. However I emphasize 5 of those things more than others.

All I know is that maybe the press really believed it was true in 2000 that Gore was this unlikable smarty pants but it was also true that W's budget and tax plans were full of lies and that he had wasn't ready for the job.

The media decided to focus more on Gore the unlikable smarty pants than W and his dishonest budget and his lack of competence to be POTU.

The irony is that soon many of us won't be allowed to say what we believe to be true if there is a Trump Presidency. So if Adams stopping saying one thing he believes to be true actually preserves a world in which we can all say what we believe to be true in the future, maybe he ought to consider it.

Al Sharpton says if there's a Trump Presidency he may just have to 'get out of here.' This sounds like he doesn't want Hitler 2.0. If so, he has a funny way of showing it:

"Hillary Clinton needs to steel herself for asymmetrical, unconventional campaign warfare against Donald Trump, the Rev. Al Sharpton said Wednesday, days after telling The New York Times that the Democratic front-runner is going into a "street fight with a guy with a razor and a broken Coca-Cola bottle."

"You can't come in with gloves waiting on the referee to fight Donald Trump. You've got to fight the kind of fight he's fighting. He showed that yesterday," Sharpton said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," in reference to Trump's news conference about donations to veterans groups that degenerated into attacks on the media."

"Asked how the need to face Trump should alter Clinton's approach, Sharpton was blunt."

"It means that she's either got to toughen up or have tougher surrogates that can resonate with her base," Sharpton said. "Otherwise she looks like she's out of touch only because you're in a ring and the fight's out in the alley."

The native New Yorker explained that he has "known and dealt with" the city's press "all my life," adding, "Trump is a bully."

"You deal with a bully by calling a bully's shot. You don't try to explain. You're in the schoolyard in New York — Trump and I both grew up in New York — you're in a schoolyard in New York and a bully talks about your family. You don't come back and explain to him, well, let me tell you what parenting class — you come back and call his bluff," Sharpton said. "And you're lecturing to him about parenting rather than dealing with I'm calling your bluff."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/al-sharpton-hillary-clinton-223767#ixzz4AKgXc93R

In what way is she 'lecturing on parenting?' Though I think that in some ways this might actually appeal to the voters she needs to get-the independent and Republican women who normally would consider voting Republican. Many of these women want to see a responsible adult-even a responsible mother-running things rather than a street bully.

As Reverend Al is likening this to a boxing match that is morphing into a street fight, he is acting like a guy who allegedly is on Hillary's side-as he's against Trump-and yet in the middle of the fight throws a chair that hits Hillary smack in the face just as she's throwing another punch.

With friends like these. And Reverend Al can't feign ignorance. He would never do something like this if it were Obama.

To Greg's question: do you not say something you believe to be true, with President Obama, Reverend Al always saved criticism for Obama for when they spoke privately.

Again, here''s how I look at it.

1. People like Reverend Al that spend the day oohing and aahing over Trump's unconventional, asymmetric warfare are helping Trump.

2. People who call Hillary weak for unlikable are helping Trump.

I'm sorry but in November we face a binary choice. Do you want Hitler 2.0 or don't you? Hitler 2.0 or Hillary Clinton. Those who say something other than Hillary Clinton are making their choice clear.