Trump’s Reality Distortion Field will be Stronger with Trump as President than Candidate

And that distortion field proved dangerous enough for the election.

Then it faced off against what might best be called a media DDoS attack on the voter’s entire sensory network.  The objective of this offensive was to block out any remotely accurate information about the Trump campaign by the distortion field being processed by the, admittedly, already limited mental horsepower of the American voter.

To counter this vast fire power the distortion field had only one Twitter account, a candidate who could barely recite a bullet point list of his priority policies, and a red hat.

Our heroic distortion field – an electromagnetically perfect field of persuasion – literally defeated the entire planet, inflicting such devastation against its enemies that we are tempted to say it would have won even without the hat.

The distortion field now has much more than Twitter, Trump, and a red hat.  It now has control of the White House.  With this control its persuasive powers can only become amplified to even greater degrees.

The Office of the Presidency always brings to its occupant great control of the political conversation in Washington.  It does not guarantee conversation translates into policy, but it does set parameters on what policy is at least discussed.  And what is discussed indicates who is going on the attack.

Consider how this offensive power of the Presidency can synergize with the distortion field.

In the campaign the media attempted to dictate what issues the campaign centered around.   These issues were necessarily small ones blown out of all proportion because the major issues favored Trump.  These small matters did gain a certain amount of traction with the voters because Trump had no political record to indicate he had legitimate qualifications to be President.

A seemingly vanity presidential campaign could – in the absence of evidence in the way of voter experience – plausibly have insignificant issues prove this candidate is unqualified:

  • Trump misspells words on Twitter.
  • If Trump cannot spell, Trump is unfit for the Presidency! (Have the anti-Trump DDoS attack run a loop of this trillions of times, as it did, and you can see how this might have been an attractive strategy.)

With the Presidency at last in his hands, Trump can throw off the entire media in ways he could not as candidate because he can determine what they talk about with announcements and policy offensives they must cover.  He may also outmaneuver them with minor controversies that seem important to the press, but are not to voters, and send them off in wild goose chases.

See how the Twitter script we outline above adjusts with the power of the bully pulpit combined with the field:

  • President Trump misspells Nigeria on Twitter
  • If Trump cannot spell Nigeria, President Trump is not fit for the Presidency! (This loop is less effective if Trump is successful on major issues, more successful if he is otherwise.)
  • Trump, aware that the media is busy with its chew toy, preemptively nukes North Korea and reforms Medicare without the media ever noticing.

If the distortion field was deadly in the campaign it will prove even more formidable in the White House.

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “Trump’s Reality Distortion Field will be Stronger with Trump as President than Candidate”

  1. Just today NPR was reporting that Trump wants to look into voter fraud. Of course, their spin is that he’s lying about it, and it does seem that his claim (that there were 5m fraudulent votes) is wrong. Still, Richman and Earnest found good evidence of millions of illegals voting. This study is not well known. Trump can make it known. Then it’s the classic Trump situation where he had hoodwinked the press into publicizing something they’ve been hiding, by making an outsize claim that they cannot resist attacking. They say, “he lied! He said 5m undocumented friends voted, and it was really only 2m”. And everyone normal says: “WHAT?? Two million illegals voted? DO SOMETHING!” Trump wins that one bigly.

    Like

  2. @Leonard

    Yes.

    And in the process the media’s energy and attention is diverted away from alleged hacking by Russia while making them look like hypocrites for wanting an investigation into the release of Podesta’s emails, but not vote fraud. This diversion is one hard for them to ignore too; they won’t be able to resist the temptation to label this as discrimination against inner city blacks.

    The Richman & Earnest study –

    They came up with vote fraud of 2 million? Do you have a link?

    Also, your thoughts on the debate with Dark Reformation about whether Nazism was Conservative or Lib.

    Your view of the spectacularly departed Adolf is: Right, Left, Center, Shriner, Jew, Freemason, Humanist, Other?

    Like

  3. Have you been reading Scott Adams?

    I never paid any attention to Trump until he announced the Muslim ban. Then, I paid attention.

    I saw him speak and saw rhetorical strategies being used. I then started reading up on the guy, reading his books and watching his speeches.

    You’re quite right: this guy defeated the entire planet. Trump gave a tremendous performance.

    Leonard is quite right about the numbers. It is like when he says he is worth ten billion dollars and the media say he is only worth two.

    I think it might be productive to discuss how Trump could damage the media……

    On Voter Fraud.

    Apparently, he is ordering an investigation.

    Good.

    I will take the liberty of linking to one of my posts. During the election I saved hundreds of posts, and given that the topic came up I decided to write a post on the subject.
    The post lays out a flurry of circumstantial evidence which is intended to ridicule and expose the hollowness and corruption of the Democrats and the MSM:

    https://darkreformation101.wordpress.com/2017/01/27/no-evidence/

    Like

  4. Have you been reading Scott Adams?

    Routinely throughout the election.

    I think it might be productive to discuss how Trump could damage the media……

    I have something in the works, but the current backlog of articles is long. But we will get to it and much more.

    The post lays out a flurry of circumstantial evidence which is intended to ridicule and expose the hollowness and corruption of the Democrats and the MSM:

    This is all correct and is probably missing a volumes more – I myself couldn’t track of every scandal.

    Like

  5. Here is the paper. They find evidence suggesting that some non-citizens voted. The evidence itself is rather weak, but it exists at least. And note that the Cathedral seriously hates this paper and has attacked it; it is quite possible that the problem is simply people mis-clicking a radio button (the survey instrument is online and the sample’s number of non-citizens is small). But, FWIW, the range that they estimate is, IIRC, from 38000 to 2.8 million. (They just estimate percentages. Others have put numbers on it.) My use of 2m was merely a number in that range; I neither endorse it nor reject it.

    I have not seen your debate w/ dr101 so I don’t have the context to call Nazism “Conservative” or “Lib”. Can I pick neither? Adolf — assuming you mean Hitler –of the choices you give, I’d call “Right”, based on his social graph.

    Like

  6. Here is the paper. They find evidence suggesting that some non-citizens voted. The evidence itself is rather weak, but it exists at least. And note that the Cathedral seriously hates this paper and has attacked it; it is quite possible that the problem is simply people mis-clicking a radio button (the survey instrument is online and the sample’s number of non-citizens is small).

    Hmmm.

    Those are large margins of uncertainty. But I’ll take a look at it, see if the the hypothesis is at least plausible for further testing, and I’ll forward my suggestions to the Trump administration via this blog.

    I have not seen your debate w/ dr101 so I don’t have the context to call Nazism “Conservative” or “Lib”. Can I pick neither?

    Read through part of it over coffee and then see if you prefer “neither”.

    Your wisdom is invaluable to any debate.

    Like

Comments are closed.