{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
11/15/2016 2:47:39 PM
7
I thought this was stupid then and I think it's stupid now. Disagreed with much of this. It's a lot of speculation and assumption that is contradicted by a lot of other information, oversimplifies things and does not stand up to much scrutiny.
English
-
Yet Trump won.
-
No one's disputing that. People are saying that this guy's analysis is 100% speculation, is incorrect on certain parts and goes against what Trump's staff has said about some of his decisions. Obviously, Trump won. But not because he's some evil genius following the Art of War. He won because he played on people's fears and promised gullible and disenfranchised people the world while his opposition shot itself in the foot over and over again by running Hillary against him. People didn't trust Clinton and less of them came out to vote for her than is usual for the Democrats. She took a lot of states for granted, overestimated her following in key areas and ruined her own chances. That's it. No brilliant master plan on Trump's end.
-
Much like Trumps campaign, but that still worked out.
-
I'm not seeing the argument you're trying to make here, but okay.
-
He's saying your arguement is invalid because Trump won the election; his tactic won.
-
If that's what he is (or rather, you are) claiming, then there's reading comprehension which needs work. I never said that Trump's endeavor was unsuccessful. I'm saying that the person in the link is not accurately describing Trump's plan. That's it.
-
You do realize that is exactly what he did though. Hell, look at his campgain in detail, you'll see a noticable difference from the beginning to the end.
