User Panel
Posted: 5/26/2016 4:20:16 PM EDT
Well done article by Gutfeld.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/05/26/man-who-sold-right-part-three-donald-trump-and-assimilation-behavior.html?intcmp=hpbt2 How could Donald Trump, a man who’s given tons of cash to liberals, be so beloved by outspoken conservatives who previously prided themselves on despising Republicans for being RINOS and “squishies”?
It helps that Trump studied the landscape of the true believers and then, in a deliberate pivot, indulged their “beliefs.” I put “beliefs” in quotes because, frankly, I am not sure what anyone believes any more. Pick a topic, and Trump has been on both sides. See guns. Immigration. Taxes. His ideology is a non-ideology of free-flowing, ever-changing dispositions. He’s a political mood ring. And there is the genius of Trump: His principle is the replacement of principles with an amorphous, pragmatic, deal-making continuum. His ideology is a non-ideology of free-flowing, ever-changing dispositions. He’s a political mood ring. As a non-ideologue, I’m open to this new kind of animal, and without any hint of hypocrisy. What I find troubling are those strident ideologues who now embrace Trump – a centrist of fluid belief – after castigating other hardworking conservatives for not being rigid enough. Maybe I’ll forgive it, but I won’t forget. In his classic book, “Influence,” Robert Cialdini describes a trick played by killer female fireflies. Male fireflies do what they can to avoid them, because, as I just said, they are deadly. But these females have figured out a way to trap these hapless males. They hacked the courtship code that fireflies use to let each other know they’re ready to mate. The killer females mimic the flashing signals, which attract the males into their deathly grasp. They die. Cialdini explains that this copying of triggers so you can trick creatures into doing what you desire also happens among humans – especially in sales, all the time. Mimic the triggers, and people come running. But I know now that it also happens in politics. Trump, through a decade of observing conservative commentary and listening to talk radio, learned the triggers – and now he expertly mimics the signals that draw the fireflies of the right to his light. I think he actually believes what he says, but what he says can change, depending on circumstance. Meaning: It’s what he says that drives belief, not the reverse. Who reacts to his triggers? The needy media, hungry for both ratings and popularity. (Note: These are two different things. You can have high ratings but still “feel” unpopular.) They flock to him, for in this exchange they find fame, ratings, love from a famous person and a path to better living. Yet he expends very little. He blinked the code, and they came running. He learned to exploit the desires and insecurities of the right – primarily those on their way up, or down. And the results are confusing, for it’s so strange to see hardcore conservatives now perfectly fine with very un-conservative ideas (no entitlement reform, pro-eminent domain, promises of trade wars and tariffs). But it’s not a new thing. You see it among politicians when they engage in the shameless ploy of logrolling – that exchange of favors that makes conservatives act liberal, and liberals act conservative. It’s a seemingly bizarre vote done as a favor. Trump has effectively logrolled the media. Right wing mouthpieces ignored Trump when he dissed war heroes. They dismissed his insane JFK conspiracies. They happily ignore his contradictions on taxes, abortion and foreign policy. But this is their indebtedness, their reciprocity in full flower. And this leads me to my final point, as explained by Cialdini, and others: The world exists on favors. On trust. If I do something for you, you reciprocate. It’s pretty much the evolutionary engine for civilization. But in this process, there are those who master such moves and use them to exploit those who, frankly, are willing to be exploited. Don’t blame Trump. Blame those who dropped like flies before him. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
Well done article by Gutfeld. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/05/26/man-who-sold-right-part-three-donald-trump-and-assimilation-behavior.html?intcmp=hpbt2 How could Donald Trump, a man who’s given tons of cash to liberals, be so beloved by outspoken conservatives who previously prided themselves on despising Republicans for being RINOS and “squishies”?
It helps that Trump studied the landscape of the true believers and then, in a deliberate pivot, indulged their “beliefs.” I put “beliefs” in quotes because, frankly, I am not sure what anyone believes any more. Pick a topic, and Trump has been on both sides. See guns. Immigration. Taxes. His ideology is a non-ideology of free-flowing, ever-changing dispositions. He’s a political mood ring. And there is the genius of Trump: His principle is the replacement of principles with an amorphous, pragmatic, deal-making continuum. His ideology is a non-ideology of free-flowing, ever-changing dispositions. He’s a political mood ring. As a non-ideologue, I’m open to this new kind of animal, and without any hint of hypocrisy. What I find troubling are those strident ideologues who now embrace Trump – a centrist of fluid belief – after castigating other hardworking conservatives for not being rigid enough. Maybe I’ll forgive it, but I won’t forget. In his classic book, “Influence,” Robert Cialdini describes a trick played by killer female fireflies. Male fireflies do what they can to avoid them, because, as I just said, they are deadly. But these females have figured out a way to trap these hapless males. They hacked the courtship code that fireflies use to let each other know they’re ready to mate. The killer females mimic the flashing signals, which attract the males into their deathly grasp. They die. Cialdini explains that this copying of triggers so you can trick creatures into doing what you desire also happens among humans – especially in sales, all the time. Mimic the triggers, and people come running. But I know now that it also happens in politics. Trump, through a decade of observing conservative commentary and listening to talk radio, learned the triggers – and now he expertly mimics the signals that draw the fireflies of the right to his light. I think he actually believes what he says, but what he says can change, depending on circumstance. Meaning: It’s what he says that drives belief, not the reverse. Who reacts to his triggers? The needy media, hungry for both ratings and popularity. (Note: These are two different things. You can have high ratings but still “feel” unpopular.) They flock to him, for in this exchange they find fame, ratings, love from a famous person and a path to better living. Yet he expends very little. He blinked the code, and they came running. He learned to exploit the desires and insecurities of the right – primarily those on their way up, or down. And the results are confusing, for it’s so strange to see hardcore conservatives now perfectly fine with very un-conservative ideas (no entitlement reform, pro-eminent domain, promises of trade wars and tariffs). But it’s not a new thing. You see it among politicians when they engage in the shameless ploy of logrolling – that exchange of favors that makes conservatives act liberal, and liberals act conservative. It’s a seemingly bizarre vote done as a favor. Trump has effectively logrolled the media. Right wing mouthpieces ignored Trump when he dissed war heroes. They dismissed his insane JFK conspiracies. They happily ignore his contradictions on taxes, abortion and foreign policy. But this is their indebtedness, their reciprocity in full flower. And this leads me to my final point, as explained by Cialdini, and others: The world exists on favors. On trust. If I do something for you, you reciprocate. It’s pretty much the evolutionary engine for civilization. But in this process, there are those who master such moves and use them to exploit those who, frankly, are willing to be exploited. Don’t blame Trump. Blame those who dropped like flies before him. View Quote View Quote "Red Eye" and "The Five" have to be the two worst shows on Fox news. I'm actually surprised he's not a bad writer |
|
|
I think he misses the mark. The conservatives who were being attacked as cucks or squishies were being attacked because they were attacking Trump from the left. If you want to attack Trump as not being a genuine conservative, fine, although I would point out that on issues such as guns his changes are years or even decades old by now. But it was very galling to hear so-called conservatives sound like Salon writers in accusing Trump of being a racist, war on womyn, etc. That's the people who got the cuck label, and deservedly so.
|
|
|
Quoted: "Red Eye" and "The Five" have to be the two worst shows on Fox news. I'm actually surprised he's not a bad writer View Quote When Gutfeld was on Red Eye I'd either stay up until 2 to watch it, or DVR it, every night and I started watching it the first week it came on the air because I'd happened to be up at 2 and was flipping channels. Since he left...I think I've seen it maybe 3 times, as much as I liked Tom Shillue as a guest he just isn't that good as a host. To me the Greg Gutfeld show is the real Red Eye, but it's only on once a week. It's sort of a Top Gear thing really now. |
|
|
Quoted:
When Gutfeld was on Red Eye I'd either stay up until 2 to watch it, or DVR it, every night and I started watching it the first week it came on the air because I'd happened to be up at 2 and was flipping channels. Since he left...I think I've seen it maybe 3 times, as much as I liked Tom Shillue as a guest he just isn't that good as a host. To me the Greg Gutfeld show is the real Red Eye, but it's only on once a week. It's sort of a Top Gear thing really now. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
"Red Eye" and "The Five" have to be the two worst shows on Fox news. I'm actually surprised he's not a bad writer When Gutfeld was on Red Eye I'd either stay up until 2 to watch it, or DVR it, every night and I started watching it the first week it came on the air because I'd happened to be up at 2 and was flipping channels. Since he left...I think I've seen it maybe 3 times, as much as I liked Tom Shillue as a guest he just isn't that good as a host. To me the Greg Gutfeld show is the real Red Eye, but it's only on once a week. It's sort of a Top Gear thing really now. I started watching Red Eye in 2008 when I was in Korea because it came on at 5pm. Got hooked on it there and kept watching. I agree, Red Eye isn't what it used to be. I liked Tom Shillue as a guest a lot as well, and I don't think he was a bad choice for host either actually. But it's not as good as when Gutfeld was running it. I still try to catch clips of the show posted on the Fox website. |
|
Quoted: I started watching Red Eye in 2008 when I was in Korea because it came on at 5pm. Got hooked on it there and kept watching. I agree, Red Eye isn't what it used to be. I liked Tom Shillue as a guest a lot as well, and I don't think he was a bad choice for host either actually. But it's not as good as when Gutfeld was running it. I still try to catch clips of the show posted on the Fox website. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: "Red Eye" and "The Five" have to be the two worst shows on Fox news. I'm actually surprised he's not a bad writer When Gutfeld was on Red Eye I'd either stay up until 2 to watch it, or DVR it, every night and I started watching it the first week it came on the air because I'd happened to be up at 2 and was flipping channels. Since he left...I think I've seen it maybe 3 times, as much as I liked Tom Shillue as a guest he just isn't that good as a host. To me the Greg Gutfeld show is the real Red Eye, but it's only on once a week. It's sort of a Top Gear thing really now. I started watching Red Eye in 2008 when I was in Korea because it came on at 5pm. Got hooked on it there and kept watching. I agree, Red Eye isn't what it used to be. I liked Tom Shillue as a guest a lot as well, and I don't think he was a bad choice for host either actually. But it's not as good as when Gutfeld was running it. I still try to catch clips of the show posted on the Fox website. When Gutfeld left on one hand I was hoping TV's Andy Levy would take over the show (since he amuses the hell out of me) but on the other when he'd fill in when Greg was off he didn't do that great as a host. I really wish they could have had Greg Proops take over as host, because he was not only high-larious when he was a guest but when he covered for Greg a few times as host the quality (and funny) stayed constant. Plus the man had the best hairdo on TV in...ever. ETA: Did you ever see the really early episodes when Rachel Sklar was on every night? When she left I was so damn happy, she annoyed the shit out of me. |
|
Quoted:
When Gutfeld left on one hand I was hoping TV's Andy Levy would take over the show (since he amuses the hell out of me) but on the other when he'd fill in when Greg was off he didn't do that great as a host. I really wish they could have had Greg Proops take over as host, because he was not only high-larious when he was a guest but when he covered for Greg a few times as host the quality (and funny) stayed constant. Plus the man had the best hairdo on TV in...ever. ETA: Did you ever see the really early episodes when Rachel Sklar was on every night? When she left I was so damn happy, she annoyed the shit out of me. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Red Eye" and "The Five" have to be the two worst shows on Fox news. I'm actually surprised he's not a bad writer When Gutfeld was on Red Eye I'd either stay up until 2 to watch it, or DVR it, every night and I started watching it the first week it came on the air because I'd happened to be up at 2 and was flipping channels. Since he left...I think I've seen it maybe 3 times, as much as I liked Tom Shillue as a guest he just isn't that good as a host. To me the Greg Gutfeld show is the real Red Eye, but it's only on once a week. It's sort of a Top Gear thing really now. I started watching Red Eye in 2008 when I was in Korea because it came on at 5pm. Got hooked on it there and kept watching. I agree, Red Eye isn't what it used to be. I liked Tom Shillue as a guest a lot as well, and I don't think he was a bad choice for host either actually. But it's not as good as when Gutfeld was running it. I still try to catch clips of the show posted on the Fox website. When Gutfeld left on one hand I was hoping TV's Andy Levy would take over the show (since he amuses the hell out of me) but on the other when he'd fill in when Greg was off he didn't do that great as a host. I really wish they could have had Greg Proops take over as host, because he was not only high-larious when he was a guest but when he covered for Greg a few times as host the quality (and funny) stayed constant. Plus the man had the best hairdo on TV in...ever. ETA: Did you ever see the really early episodes when Rachel Sklar was on every night? When she left I was so damn happy, she annoyed the shit out of me. lol to be honest I had no idea it was so popular. I kind of always wondered who watched it. |
|
Quoted: lol to be honest I had no idea it was so popular. I kind of always wondered who watched it. View Quote Insomniacs and/or people deployed when it was on at a less ridiculous hour for the most part, at least early on. After people started talking about it I'm sure lots more people watched it...after DVRing it, at a less ridiculous hour. |
|
Why I wouldn't vote for him
Something terrible is coming down the pike. Yes, Hillary is bad....but to think Trump isn't is naive. |
|
Quoted:
Why I wouldn't vote for him Something terrible is coming down the pike. Yes, Hillary is bad....but to think Trump isn't is naive. View Quote One is a know the other isn't, I'll roll the dice with trump because I know exactly what I'll get with Clinton. Sometimes the devil you don't know is better than the one you do, and I'm not a trumpeter |
|
Quoted:
One is a know the other isn't, I'll roll the dice with trump because I know exactly what I'll get with Clinton. Sometimes the devil you don't know is better than the one you do, and I'm not a trumpeter View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Why I wouldn't vote for him Something terrible is coming down the pike. Yes, Hillary is bad....but to think Trump isn't is naive. One is a know the other isn't, I'll roll the dice with trump because I know exactly what I'll get with Clinton. Sometimes the devil you don't know is better than the one you do, and I'm not a trumpeter There's a rationale for looking at it the other way. The American voter royally screwed the pooch this election. |
|
Quoted:
lol to be honest I had no idea it was so popular. I kind of always wondered who watched it. View Quote I've actually heard that back when it was in its prime, Red Eye was sometimes getting better ratings than some of the prime time shows on liberal networks. Full disclaimer, I don't know if that's true or not. |
|
Quoted:
There's a rationale for looking at it the other way. The American voter GOPe royally screwed the pooch this election and should only blame themselves. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why I wouldn't vote for him Something terrible is coming down the pike. Yes, Hillary is bad....but to think Trump isn't is naive. One is a know the other isn't, I'll roll the dice with trump because I know exactly what I'll get with Clinton. Sometimes the devil you don't know is better than the one you do, and I'm not a trumpeter There's a rationale for looking at it the other way. The American voter GOPe royally screwed the pooch this election and should only blame themselves. |
|
If people would stop boosting Gutfield up to his office chair we wouldn't have to read drivel like this.
|
|
Quoted:
When Gutfeld left on one hand I was hoping TV's Andy Levy would take over the show (since he amuses the hell out of me) but on the other when he'd fill in when Greg was off he didn't do that great as a host. I really wish they could have had Greg Proops take over as host, because he was not only high-larious when he was a guest but when he covered for Greg a few times as host the quality (and funny) stayed constant. Plus the man had the best hairdo on TV in...ever. ETA: Did you ever see the really early episodes when Rachel Sklar was on every night? When she left I was so damn happy, she annoyed the shit out of me. View Quote Don't remember Rachel Sklar. I didn't start watching it until late 2008. I used to sometimes find Bill Schulz annoying, but I sort of missed him once he was gone. He could be funny, but Greg mercilessly insulting him was even better. I agree about Andy. I like him, and even kind of liked when he would occasionally host, but I don't think he could pull it off full time. Back then my favorite regular guests were probably Jim Norton and Tom Shillue. Gavin McInnes was awesome too. Dan Soder could be pretty funny. I'm starting to think a "Classic Red Eye clips" thread might be in order soon now that I'm thinking back on it. |
|
Quoted: "Red Eye" and "The Five" have to be the two worst shows on Fox news. I'm actually surprised he's not a bad writer View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Well done article by Gutfeld. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/05/26/man-who-sold-right-part-three-donald-trump-and-assimilation-behavior.html?intcmp=hpbt2 How could Donald Trump, a man who’s given tons of cash to liberals, be so beloved by outspoken conservatives who previously prided themselves on despising Republicans for being RINOS and "squishies”? It helps that Trump studied the landscape of the true believers and then, in a deliberate pivot, indulged their "beliefs.” I put "beliefs” in quotes because, frankly, I am not sure what anyone believes any more. Pick a topic, and Trump has been on both sides. See guns. Immigration. Taxes. His ideology is a non-ideology of free-flowing, ever-changing dispositions. He’s a political mood ring. And there is the genius of Trump: His principle is the replacement of principles with an amorphous, pragmatic, deal-making continuum. His ideology is a non-ideology of free-flowing, ever-changing dispositions. He’s a political mood ring. As a non-ideologue, I’m open to this new kind of animal, and without any hint of hypocrisy. What I find troubling are those strident ideologues who now embrace Trump – a centrist of fluid belief – after castigating other hardworking conservatives for not being rigid enough. Maybe I’ll forgive it, but I won’t forget. In his classic book, "Influence,” Robert Cialdini describes a trick played by killer female fireflies. Male fireflies do what they can to avoid them, because, as I just said, they are deadly. But these females have figured out a way to trap these hapless males. They hacked the courtship code that fireflies use to let each other know they’re ready to mate. The killer females mimic the flashing signals, which attract the males into their deathly grasp. They die. Cialdini explains that this copying of triggers so you can trick creatures into doing what you desire also happens among humans – especially in sales, all the time. Mimic the triggers, and people come running. But I know now that it also happens in politics. Trump, through a decade of observing conservative commentary and listening to talk radio, learned the triggers – and now he expertly mimics the signals that draw the fireflies of the right to his light. I think he actually believes what he says, but what he says can change, depending on circumstance. Meaning: It’s what he says that drives belief, not the reverse. Who reacts to his triggers? The needy media, hungry for both ratings and popularity. (Note: These are two different things. You can have high ratings but still "feel” unpopular.) They flock to him, for in this exchange they find fame, ratings, love from a famous person and a path to better living. Yet he expends very little. He blinked the code, and they came running. He learned to exploit the desires and insecurities of the right – primarily those on their way up, or down. And the results are confusing, for it’s so strange to see hardcore conservatives now perfectly fine with very un-conservative ideas (no entitlement reform, pro-eminent domain, promises of trade wars and tariffs). But it’s not a new thing. You see it among politicians when they engage in the shameless ploy of logrolling – that exchange of favors that makes conservatives act liberal, and liberals act conservative. It’s a seemingly bizarre vote done as a favor. Trump has effectively logrolled the media. Right wing mouthpieces ignored Trump when he dissed war heroes. They dismissed his insane JFK conspiracies. They happily ignore his contradictions on taxes, abortion and foreign policy. But this is their indebtedness, their reciprocity in full flower. And this leads me to my final point, as explained by Cialdini, and others: The world exists on favors. On trust. If I do something for you, you reciprocate. It’s pretty much the evolutionary engine for civilization. But in this process, there are those who master such moves and use them to exploit those who, frankly, are willing to be exploited. Don’t blame Trump. Blame those who dropped like flies before him. "Red Eye" and "The Five" have to be the two worst shows on Fox news. I'm actually surprised he's not a bad writer |
|
Not sure if it was his start, but he did work at Men's Health I believe at some point prior to Fox.
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.