The first tenet of game is being unapologetic about who you are. Trump has that quality in spades, and if there is a lesson from the Trump campaign to be learned, it's that game translates over to politics just as much as it does to seduction, because they're ultimately both about leadership. Trump has the best game I've ever seen. Rand Paul's game is weak, and he was consequently trashed at last night's debate, running foolishly uphill into the blazing howitzers of the Donald Trump battery. It's too bad, because an alliance between Trump and Paul is exactly what the country needs.
The debate structure was a huge clusterfuck. 10 people on stage just doesn't make for a very good debate, let alone 17, which is why they had to have an undercard and a main event. I suppose that was something that little could be done about, but the moderation was equally as disappointing.
The moderation team seemed to be more interested in engaging in tabloid/clickbait journalism in destroying candidates (with the seeming exceptions of Bush and Rubio - telling) than in allowing them to explain themselves, especially Trump. They asked Trump personal "gotcha!" questions rather than trying to get him to engage in policy prescription. Trump, being the master of frame control that he is, turned the tables each time, and with this came the highlight of the night early on:
I almost jumped for joy when this happened. It is exemplative of the Cuckservative establishment - buy into the left's frame and then try to make them think you're good people, and Trump destroyed it. He at once exploded the "war on women" narrative by refusing to buy into it and dismissing its premise entirely, flipping the script to the truth - neither he, nor the country, has time for PC "social justice" bullshit. It's time to get serious on issues that are not fabrications - like immigration and trade, instead of this stupid PC nonsense. Notice also the underlying logic of the question - that you cannot make disparaging remarks about women, no matter what, especially if it's regarding their appearance. Women are special snowflakes that need constant care. Ironically, it very much shits on the legacy of Second Wave Feminism, wherein women were supposed to be capable of taking it on the chin just as much as men.
There was also a wider range of retardation going on, prompted by the moderators, which again is exemplative of the Cuckservative establishment and at times makes me wonder whether the supposedly right wing Fox News was a leftist plant to make the GOP look retarded (and boy do they love taking the bait).
A large portion of the debate was spent on talking about abortion, which is a stupid waste of political resources. It is not going away (at least anytime soon), period, and there are far more important issues that can be focused on successfully. It makes no sense to focus so much on it and potentially alienate voters that might otherwise be on board with inherently right wing/nationalist stances on immigration and trade. It is basically equivalent to the GOP giving the left a gun to shoot it with, and they always do it, every single time.
Another retarded segment was toward the end when a question was asked about the role of God in the candidate's lives. This is another gun that the GOP gives the left to shoot it with, and again they always do it. No one aside from a small portion of their natural base is going to take them seriously if they continue to do this. Independents, libertarians, anti-establishment types, and others that might feasibly vote Republican if they hit on the right notes (nationalism, civil libertarianism, tough stance on immigration, etc.) think it's a joke, and I do.
A segment about gays was also bothersome. These people are 3.8% of the population but are still yet another loaded gun that the GOP gives to the left. Republicans need to dismiss this stuff, like Trump did with the "war on women."
One more embarassing segment of the evening had the Cuckservatives chomping at the bit to pledge solidarity to Israel. Rand Paul had his one shining moment of brilliance last night when he commented that it was foolish to borrow money America doesn't have to spend on foreign aid, which should be progressively cut, including, eventually, to Israel. This logic appeared to be lost on the rest of the stage though, as all bent over for Israel (Donald Trump is the same, and this is one of his biggest weaknesses). One hallmark of a Cuckservative is that he cares more about Israel's borders and cultural interests than his own country's, and that is what we saw. It is very embarassing that people hoping to be the highest officeholder in the country are so beholden to a foreign nation. What kind of leadership is that? What other nation is so beholden to foreigners? George Washington's amazingly prescient warnings in his farewell address of 1796 were on display once more.
Overall I was disappointed with the moderation team. Their questions were pathetic, and they revealed themselves for the Cucks they were. They seemed more eager to make their own people look bad than making the left look bad, especially if that person's name was Donald Trump. I'd expect this of NBC, but not Fox News (leftist plant?).
In closing, I will write some thoughts about each of the ten people on that stage. I didn't watch the "loser's debate" because I was out day gaming, which is honestly a lot more important.
Donald Trump: Held his own and then some. His smackdown of the loaded feminist bullshit flying from Megyn Kelly's mouth was, again, the highlight of the night, and he proved himself a master of frame control once more all through the night. He does need to be more specific with policy prescriptions going forward, though, and he can easily do that by using material from Time to Get Tough. It's fine to take advantage of anger, but people want to be led out of the woods, and if Trump is not more specific soon people may well start looking elsewhere for answers. If Trump can combine his charisma and game with viable solutions he might just be unstoppable. According to most, he was last night's winner with his stage dominance, but I didn't quite see him as the guy that did the best.
Jeb Bush: The ultimate Cuckservative. His submissive body language and frame were awful, and all he did was qualify himself by his stint in Florida. The only things I care about is that he's not tough on immigration and he apologized for Common Core. Please Jeb, just leave. I know you raised over $100 million, but that is emblematic of the problem. You have no chance of winning a general election unless a black swan hits - your game is terrible and your last name is going to do you in with the broad cross-section of society that wants nothing to do with a Bush. Nobody wants to see Jeb vs. Hillary - not only would it be horrible, but it wouldn't even be entertaining because both have zero charisma.
Scott Walker: Seemed to get the most airtime. The guys at RVF mentioned that he has a punchable face and they were right. I didn't see any selling point to this guy at all and it was disgusting how much time the moderators gave him.
Mike Huckabee: Had the secondary highlight of the night when he said that the military was not a social experiment and that the PC social engineering experiment was dangerous. It highlights my and IWD's recent reflecting on Homer's warnings of weakness and not being able to defend yourself, and this is happening as we continue to deconstruct the military in favor of "equality."
Ben Carson: A nice guy, and I appreciated what he said about race and race baiting (I joked that they had to ask the black guy about this), and had some good jokes, but he does not belong there. No strong policy prescriptions to hear of and his overall game was weak.
Ted Cruz: An absolutely vile individual. I don't trust politicians by defeault but I trust him the least. I fear his lust for power nearly as much as I fear Hillary's.
Marco Rubio: I think he gained the most from the standpoint of actually debating substance. He was the most polished of the night in terms of policy prescriptions (and not just on what he's done, but going forward). Unfortunately, he's still a Cuck, which makes sense given he was groomed by Jeb.
Rand Paul: Aside from his moment on Israel, he was eviscerated, and it was sad to see because I am, again, probably closest to him overall policy wise. Donald Trump has sucked all the life out of his campaign (including me) and he is desperate to get it back, looking like a zombie in the process. He was indeed, acting like a leftist - a sniveling, snarky, arrogant, angry twat desperate for attention. This is not good in any case, but especially not if you're going up against Trump. The best thing for the country now would be, if present trends continue for another month or two, if Rand ended his campaign, worked to make amends with Trump, and emerge as a potential VP pick should Trump win the nomination (which, while still a longshot, looks increasingly likely every day), grooming himself for a run in the future.
Chris Christie: He should have run in 2012. His ship has passed, or sunk, because of "Bridgegate." He made a bit of an impact, but in the wrong way - revealing that he wants to turn social security into a redistribution program and fully supports NSA spying. From an overall standpoint on performance, he may get a post-debate bump, but I wager he is not what people think they need.
John Kasich: If I was an establishment Republican, this is the man I would want to run, not Jeb. Not only is he the seemingly popular governor of an absolutely crucial state, he appears to have done a good job, balancing budgets there and in Washington. While defeating the left and stopping the degeneration of Western civilization is my highest priority, and I don't see him as being the man to push us forward into doing that, he seems to be the most acceptable moderate of the lot. If Trump doesn't win, I'll probably side with this guy, if his stance on immigration is acceptable.
|Observe Trump's body language vs Jeb's.|