Well, ladies and gents, we have a new president elect: none other than "The Donald" himself. Who could have seen that coming...?
Okay, okay, all joking aside, this has been an unprecedented election, to say the least. Regardless of how you feel about the final outcome, I think we can all agree that neither Trump nor Clinton was the ideal presidential candidate in most people's minds. The real question here, then, is how did it get this far? It's not as if these two dropped out of the sky; they were elected in our national primary elections.
Clinton seems to make a little more sense given her political history and what not, but Trump is in a league of his own. In Trump, we have somebody with no formal political history and never having served in the military now taking over the @POTUS handle. It's a real mystery how things got this far...
...or is it? Did Trump just get lucky, or did he successfully pull off one of the greatest tricks in American history? And if the latter is the case, does this mean his attitude and behavior will change post-election with all the competition now in the past?
Let's get into it!
Being originally famous as a real estate mogul, it is no secret that Trump also made quite a name for himself as a reality TV star, namely on hit show The Apprentice. Reality TV is an interesting thing because it isn't really a true reflection of reality.
Before I get into it more, I'm going to pause my thoughts here and let my friend Matthew Patrick (aka MatPat) explain it better in this YouTube video.
Film Theory: How Trump is Winning with Reality TV
(For some odd reason, Blogger isn't letting me embed this video like the one below. Sorry!!!)
(For some odd reason, Blogger isn't letting me embed this video like the one below. Sorry!!!)
I'll summarize the video quickly. Essentially, MatPat theorizes that Donald Trump has been able to get this far in the election using the exact same tactics used by contestants / participants of reality TV shows. The key idea we'll want to keep in mind moving forward is the idea of creating a persona for yourself that people can simply connect you with as time progresses.
The channel might be called "The Film Theorists", but I don't think this is any theory at all. However you feel about him, Trump is no dummy. Clearly, he has established himself as a successful businessman and has carried that work ethic into a successful reality TV career. As the host of The Apprentice, is it really that far off to think that he used his experiences there to learn from the best contestants and apply their tactics? I don't think so.
Think about your own life. Have you ever found yourself behaving or thinking like the people you surround yourself with? It's only natural, for better or worse. In my own life, I have largely become a better speaker and better performer by witnessing the actions of my coworkers.
For better or worse, the American election has pretty much become a "real life" reality TV show. Instead of ratings, you're getting votes. Instead of getting a million bucks or falling in love, the pinnacle of this show is becoming the president. We can discuss this notion until the cows come home, but that's another topic for another day.
Still not convinced Trump was playing upon a persona that doesn't represent his true self? Let's move on.
One excellent read I would recommend to anybody is the marketing book Made to Stick by Chip and Dan Heath. Just like the title sounds, the Heath brothers analyze many case studies to find out, essentially, what makes an idea "sticky". Or, in other words, how do people get an idea to remain in the minds of the general public? They cleverly break down the core concepts of creating sticky ideas using the acronym "SUCCESs". (That last "s" is small on purpose because it doesn't stand for anything!)
Without delving into the concepts of that book, Trump's whole campaign was very centered around the concepts shared by the Heath brothers. I'm not sure whether or not Trump read Made to Stick, but if it comes out that he did, it would not surprise me at all. For example, his "Drain the Swamp" mantra is an excellent example of the SUCCESs formula in action. It's simple, it uses imagery that people are familiar with, and more. Concrete imagery is super important in the SUCCESs model, and Trump's campaign was littered with this.
Okay, so where are you at now? Still want more evidence that Trump was playing a clever game and not just a lucky duck? Alright, we've got more to look at.
Bet you didn't see that heading coming.
A few months ago, the creator of the daily comic strip Dilbert, Scott Adams, appeared on Bill Maher's show to discuss the election, namely discussing Trump's tactics. Take a look at the clip below.
So if you didn't watch it, what Adams contested here is that Trump was using the very same "tools of persuasion" that hypnotists commonly use in their line of work. He specifically uses the example of Trump's name calling. "Crooked Hillary." "Lyin' Ted." Perhaps without the public knowing, he created a confirmation bias that only reaffirmed these names any time one of the candidates behaved in such a manner.
Even more diabolical, Adams notes that Trump blatantly "A-B" tested these names by asking an audience one time if Clinton should be referred to more as "Crooked Hillary" or "Heartless Hillary". The crowd responded more fervently to "Crooked Hillary", and as we all know, that's the name he kept referring to her as for the remainder of the election. (Ironically, Adams shares that Clinton inadvertently helped Trump with her "Love Trumps Hate" campaign, arguing that the first two words, "Love Trumps", conveys the opposite image Hillary was going for.)
Speaking of "Crooked Hillary", we'll delve into one final section that may shed more light on this matter in what I like to refer to as the "hero-villain complex".
Okay, so where the last few sections were a little more founded with outside evidence, this last part is admittedly my brain child. (Don't call my brain baby ugly!)
One of the things we talked about above is that Trump purposefully created this memorable persona. As a part of that persona, he made himself the bad guy. The villain, if you will. He said a lot of controversial things that he surely had to have known wouldn't have made him friends with a lot of people. In the mind of most of the public, he became this villainous character.
Well, maybe that worked to his advantage in the end. After all, if you come out the gate as the villain, the only place you have to go is up. Hillary, on the other hand, was painted as the hero of this story for the longest part of the election. The problem with this, however, is much like how Trump could only stand to go up in popularity, the hero, Hillary, could only go down in popularity.
And that's what happened in these last few days before the election. Scandalous accusations came out about the senator, and a new picture of her was painted at the last minute as being, essentially, a hypocrite. Where she was the hero for the longest time, the media effectively made her a villain in the minds of many people. This recent turn may well have cost Hillary the election.
Inevitably, the only honest-to-goodness answer I can give is that time will tell how things will play out, but we can make an educated guess using the information we've analyzed above. Specifically, I think we can answer that question posed in the title of this post: will Trump act normal now?
I'm going to be optimistic and say yes.
Where Trump crafted this persona and used all these tactics to capture the presidency, he has come to the end and now no longer has to compete for the stage. I was slightly encouraged by his acceptance speech in the fact that he did not take that time to inflate his ego. I must again concede that only time will tell if his words here were hollow.
Regardless of his behavior going forward, he's got a challenge ahead of him. Sure, he won the presidency, but his tactics to do so rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. That was pretty evident by the way social media reacted to his winning. (And obviously, the media as a whole hasn't ever been rooting for him.)
I hope there's a lesson that can be learned here for candidates in future elections. Can you win the presidency by using Trump's tactics? Sure, he just did. But at what cost? In this election, the cost is a lot of cheesed off people, and let's not pretend like that group is a small minority. This election was only won by a narrow margin, so roughly 50% of the nation is not happy right now. My hope is that future candidates will not resort to the same crass tactics used in this election.
But again, only time will tell.
Think about your own life. Have you ever found yourself behaving or thinking like the people you surround yourself with? It's only natural, for better or worse. In my own life, I have largely become a better speaker and better performer by witnessing the actions of my coworkers.
For better or worse, the American election has pretty much become a "real life" reality TV show. Instead of ratings, you're getting votes. Instead of getting a million bucks or falling in love, the pinnacle of this show is becoming the president. We can discuss this notion until the cows come home, but that's another topic for another day.
Still not convinced Trump was playing upon a persona that doesn't represent his true self? Let's move on.
IDEAS THAT STICK
One excellent read I would recommend to anybody is the marketing book Made to Stick by Chip and Dan Heath. Just like the title sounds, the Heath brothers analyze many case studies to find out, essentially, what makes an idea "sticky". Or, in other words, how do people get an idea to remain in the minds of the general public? They cleverly break down the core concepts of creating sticky ideas using the acronym "SUCCESs". (That last "s" is small on purpose because it doesn't stand for anything!)
Without delving into the concepts of that book, Trump's whole campaign was very centered around the concepts shared by the Heath brothers. I'm not sure whether or not Trump read Made to Stick, but if it comes out that he did, it would not surprise me at all. For example, his "Drain the Swamp" mantra is an excellent example of the SUCCESs formula in action. It's simple, it uses imagery that people are familiar with, and more. Concrete imagery is super important in the SUCCESs model, and Trump's campaign was littered with this.
Okay, so where are you at now? Still want more evidence that Trump was playing a clever game and not just a lucky duck? Alright, we've got more to look at.
TRUMP THE HYPNOTIST
Bet you didn't see that heading coming.
A few months ago, the creator of the daily comic strip Dilbert, Scott Adams, appeared on Bill Maher's show to discuss the election, namely discussing Trump's tactics. Take a look at the clip below.
So if you didn't watch it, what Adams contested here is that Trump was using the very same "tools of persuasion" that hypnotists commonly use in their line of work. He specifically uses the example of Trump's name calling. "Crooked Hillary." "Lyin' Ted." Perhaps without the public knowing, he created a confirmation bias that only reaffirmed these names any time one of the candidates behaved in such a manner.
Even more diabolical, Adams notes that Trump blatantly "A-B" tested these names by asking an audience one time if Clinton should be referred to more as "Crooked Hillary" or "Heartless Hillary". The crowd responded more fervently to "Crooked Hillary", and as we all know, that's the name he kept referring to her as for the remainder of the election. (Ironically, Adams shares that Clinton inadvertently helped Trump with her "Love Trumps Hate" campaign, arguing that the first two words, "Love Trumps", conveys the opposite image Hillary was going for.)
Speaking of "Crooked Hillary", we'll delve into one final section that may shed more light on this matter in what I like to refer to as the "hero-villain complex".
THE HERO VS. VILLAIN COMPLEX
Okay, so where the last few sections were a little more founded with outside evidence, this last part is admittedly my brain child. (Don't call my brain baby ugly!)
One of the things we talked about above is that Trump purposefully created this memorable persona. As a part of that persona, he made himself the bad guy. The villain, if you will. He said a lot of controversial things that he surely had to have known wouldn't have made him friends with a lot of people. In the mind of most of the public, he became this villainous character.
Well, maybe that worked to his advantage in the end. After all, if you come out the gate as the villain, the only place you have to go is up. Hillary, on the other hand, was painted as the hero of this story for the longest part of the election. The problem with this, however, is much like how Trump could only stand to go up in popularity, the hero, Hillary, could only go down in popularity.
And that's what happened in these last few days before the election. Scandalous accusations came out about the senator, and a new picture of her was painted at the last minute as being, essentially, a hypocrite. Where she was the hero for the longest time, the media effectively made her a villain in the minds of many people. This recent turn may well have cost Hillary the election.
SO... WHAT'S THIS ALL MEAN?
Inevitably, the only honest-to-goodness answer I can give is that time will tell how things will play out, but we can make an educated guess using the information we've analyzed above. Specifically, I think we can answer that question posed in the title of this post: will Trump act normal now?
I'm going to be optimistic and say yes.
Where Trump crafted this persona and used all these tactics to capture the presidency, he has come to the end and now no longer has to compete for the stage. I was slightly encouraged by his acceptance speech in the fact that he did not take that time to inflate his ego. I must again concede that only time will tell if his words here were hollow.
Regardless of his behavior going forward, he's got a challenge ahead of him. Sure, he won the presidency, but his tactics to do so rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. That was pretty evident by the way social media reacted to his winning. (And obviously, the media as a whole hasn't ever been rooting for him.)
I hope there's a lesson that can be learned here for candidates in future elections. Can you win the presidency by using Trump's tactics? Sure, he just did. But at what cost? In this election, the cost is a lot of cheesed off people, and let's not pretend like that group is a small minority. This election was only won by a narrow margin, so roughly 50% of the nation is not happy right now. My hope is that future candidates will not resort to the same crass tactics used in this election.
But again, only time will tell.
SUMMARY POINTS
- Trump behaved one way during the election; it is uncertain what his behavior / attitude will be post-election
- Trump used a number of clever tactics to win the presidency, including...
- Using his knowledge of reality TV to know what gets the best "ratings" (votes)
- Using similar ideas found in the Heath brothers' book, Made to Stick
- Using the same "tools of persuasion" that hypnotists utilize in their line of work
- Creating a villain persona for himself right out the gate where he could only stand to gain in popularity where Hillary (the hero) could only stand to lose
- Based on his post-election speech, we can have some glimmer of hope that his behavior / attitude as president will not match his behavior / attitude during his candidacy
- Regardless of his post-election behavior, he still ticked off a lot of people, and that is something our candidates should keep in mind in future elections
- Inevitably, only time will tell what his actual behavior / attitude as president will be
Comments
Post a Comment