All errors should be reported to

Sunday, August 21, 2016

Hillary's secret weapon

Scott Adams, the creator of "Dilbert," revealed that the reason Hillary rose in the polls this summer was not any faltering by Donald Trump but rather by her hiring Robert Cialdini to run her psy ops. The 71-year-old Professor Emeritus of Psychology and Marketing at Arizona State University helped elect Barack Obama president eight years ago.

Trump was winning the battle of persuasion so decisively that Adams predicted a landslide. Now Adams is not do sure because since bringing Cialdini aboard this spring, Hillary upped her game, Adams said in an interview with James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal.

From that interview:
“You saw right after Trump did his convention speech that all of the [Clinton] surrogates used the same word almost instantly. You know, ‘dark’? So somebody with skill had obviously gotten word out to use that word. And if you look at it, it’s the same engineering as Trump’s. It’s a higher level than what you normally see. ‘Dark’ is a Rorschach test. . . . Anything you see Trump do—from getting mad at a baby, to saying something about the Second Amendment and Hillary Clinton, to his immigration plans—they all seem like they could fit into this ‘dark’ label, once you’ve heard it. It was a fresh word you don’t hear in politics . . . and it fits all future confirmation bias. So anything he does in the future, you’re going to say, ‘Yeah, that was a little dark.’ ”
He thinks “dark” was “probably the work of a trained cognitive psychologist, behavioral psychologist—someone who has deep skills. I’ve referred to who I think it is as Godzilla. And I think Godzilla entered the race sometime around June.” I ask for Godzilla’s real name, and Mr. Adams answers: Robert Cialdini, a social psychologist at Arizona State University. Mr. Adams describes Mr. Cialdini’s “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion,” first published in 1984, as “the flagship book” on the subject.
By surrogates, Adams means the entire press corps. Ted Cruz was right when he called the media Hillary's Super PAC.

None of this is new, of course. And Adams (or Taranto) seemed spooked by teh poll numbers. The battle is a long way from over.

We shall see.


"Trump the Press: Don Surber's take on how the pundits blew the 2016 Republican race" is available as a paperback. Please order here.

The Kindle version is available here.

Autographed copies are available for $20 (includes shipping). Email me at


  1. The fact that the media has become the equivalent of a chorus in a Greek play means that we are also able to recognize them as such. The chorus can serve many purposes. To inform, to entertain, or to comment on the events occurring on the stage. They are in the process of becoming a source good solely for entertainment. The audience sees their ridiculous responses and in turn ridicules them. They have become the comedic relief in a tragedy more twisted than anything the original playwrights could have produced.

  2. I'm not spooked. The Iowa State Fair conducted a poll over the past several days and that was not massaged and manipulated by communist pollsters. Trump 56, HRC 44. I was thinking that in the real/non-CNN world, Trump is up about 60:40. The "polls" IMNO are completely meaningless and fraudulent and presented by the liberal media in an effort to warm up the unsuspecting voters to voter fraud this fall and a hillary 'win.' I don't think it will be close enough for them to pull it off. They are going out of their collective mind right now, never have I seen the lamestream communist media so unhinged. Every news item is anti-Trump. They better watch it, folks at the Trump rallies are starting to call them out. They may be getting their comeuppance one of these days.

  3. How many of us would answer a phone call we knew was from a pollster? If we did, how many would tell the truth, how many would lie, and how much would we lie? For me, it's no; but if I did, I would lie, a LOT.

  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. How far down was Reagan in '80 at this time?

  6. Reagan was even, however, Dukakis was ahead of Bush 41 by 16 points.

  7. How can Trump possibly beat Second Foundationer Cialdini?

    Oh, wait ... The Second Foundation isn't real.