Is Trump Making Gaffs? Or Being Brilliant?

[longknife]

I read this guy's blog because he often talks about the Los Angeles I grew up in. I've never paid attention to his political views until this blog post. He made a posit I never thought of but find quite realistic.

And that is when I had my epiphany. These are not gaffes or slips of the tongue. Trump is deliberately using language that can be construed in the worse possible way in order to generate publicity. With decades of experience at being a celebrity, he has taken to heart the publicist adage that there is no such thing as bad publicity. And in terms of generating publicity, he’s been an outstanding success if you count it by minutes of airtime or lines of copy in print. Certainly there would have been zero media coverage discussing poor decisions by the Obama administration leading to the creation of ISIS without Trump. Getting those issues out there and forcing a hostile media to talk about issues they don’t want to discuss is also a success.

How much is Clinton spending in ads? And her so-called organization that can only get a measly couple of hundred people to her rallies?


Meanwhile, with little organization and almost nothing spent on campaign ads, Trump draws thousands and gets twice or three times the air time of his opponent.


Check out the blog for yourselves @ Back in the Presidential Prediction Business

 

[The Great Goose]

I agree.

 

[tigerred59]

Trump is being brilliant, almost to the point of nasty.....after Hillary released her taxes, you'd think the topic would be all about Trump's taxes being released....instead, he says stupid shit and that's all the media talks about....Brilliant deflective move......

 

[TheOldSchool]

I read this guy's blog because he often talks about the Los Angeles I grew up in. I've never paid attention to his political views until this blog post. He made a posit I never thought of but find quite realistic.

And that is when I had my epiphany. These are not gaffes or slips of the tongue. Trump is deliberately using language that can be construed in the worse possible way in order to generate publicity. With decades of experience at being a celebrity, he has taken to heart the publicist adage that there is no such thing as bad publicity. And in terms of generating publicity, he’s been an outstanding success if you count it by minutes of airtime or lines of copy in print. Certainly there would have been zero media coverage discussing poor decisions by the Obama administration leading to the creation of ISIS without Trump. Getting those issues out there and forcing a hostile media to talk about issues they don’t want to discuss is also a success.

How much is Clinton spending in ads? And her so-called organization that can only get a measly couple of hundred people to her rallies?


Meanwhile, with little organization and almost nothing spent on campaign ads, Trump draws thousands and gets twice or three times the air time of his opponent.


Check out the blog for yourselves @ Back in the Presidential Prediction Business

Yes Trump should keep it up and change nothing

 

[norwegen]

Some people are in the habit of making gaffs and then calling them brilliant.

Tigerred does it all the time.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

I read this guy's blog because he often talks about the Los Angeles I grew up in. I've never paid attention to his political views until this blog post. He made a posit I never thought of but find quite realistic.

And that is when I had my epiphany. These are not gaffes or slips of the tongue. Trump is deliberately using language that can be construed in the worse possible way in order to generate publicity. With decades of experience at being a celebrity, he has taken to heart the publicist adage that there is no such thing as bad publicity. And in terms of generating publicity, he’s been an outstanding success if you count it by minutes of airtime or lines of copy in print. Certainly there would have been zero media coverage discussing poor decisions by the Obama administration leading to the creation of ISIS without Trump. Getting those issues out there and forcing a hostile media to talk about issues they don’t want to discuss is also a success.

How much is Clinton spending in ads? And her so-called organization that can only get a measly couple of hundred people to her rallies?


Meanwhile, with little organization and almost nothing spent on campaign ads, Trump draws thousands and gets twice or three times the air time of his opponent.


Check out the blog for yourselves @ Back in the Presidential Prediction Business

I understand the angle, but reject the idea. In politics, there is such a thing as bad publicity. Ask Anthony "I'll show you my" Weiner. Trump has plenty of name recognition. It's time for him to start acting presidential.

He is following the same formula which won him the nomination, but he has to win more votes than just disgruntled conservatives.

The big orange clown and the pant suit bull dyke better watch out, because if Johnson makes the debate stage and the election end up in the hands of the House, I could see a grand compromise for Johnson getting the job. I think it would be grand.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I suppose if you consider tanking in the polls a brilliant outcome.

 

[Syriusly]

I read this guy's blog because he often talks about the Los Angeles I grew up in. I've never paid attention to his political views until this blog post. He made a posit I never thought of but find quite realistic.

And that is when I had my epiphany. These are not gaffes or slips of the tongue. Trump is deliberately using language that can be construed in the worse possible way in order to generate publicity. With decades of experience at being a celebrity, he has taken to heart the publicist adage that there is no such thing as bad publicity. And in terms of generating publicity, he’s been an outstanding success if you count it by minutes of airtime or lines of copy in print. Certainly there would have been zero media coverage discussing poor decisions by the Obama administration leading to the creation of ISIS without Trump. Getting those issues out there and forcing a hostile media to talk about issues they don’t want to discuss is also a success.

How much is Clinton spending in ads? And her so-called organization that can only get a measly couple of hundred people to her rallies?


Meanwhile, with little organization and almost nothing spent on campaign ads, Trump draws thousands and gets twice or three times the air time of his opponent.


Check out the blog for yourselves @ Back in the Presidential Prediction Business

I think that Trump is deliberately appealing to his followers.

He makes passive aggressive statements that his followers hear as being anti-black- and approve of- then Trump pretends shock when anyone dares say that they are anti-black
He makes passive aggressive statements that his followers hear as being anti-Mexican- and approve of- then Trump pretends shock when anyone dares say that the comments are anti-Mexican
he makes passivle aggressive statements that his followers hear as being anti-women- and approve of- then Trump pretends shock when anyone dares say that the comments are anti-women.

No- I don't think that they are gaffes or slips of the tongue.

He says exactly what his most bigoted supporters want to hear him say. And then denies it.