Scott Adams, the creator of the Dilbert cartoon, wrote a blog post about switching his endorsement from Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump, and it’s a great read.
Adams was ready to help make Herstory until Hillary proposed her most recent tax plan, which includes raising estate taxes, which Adams views (correctly) as “robbery by government.” In case you hadn’t heard, Hillary wants to force people with a net worth of over $500 million to give the government SIXTY-FIVE PERCENT of their riches. Well over half, you guys. And worse, as Adams points out, the actual plan would result in increased taxes on lower value estates too. And these estate taxes would be ON TOP OF the income taxes that have already been paid. Adams paints the picture:
In my case, a dollar I earn today will be taxed at about 50% by various government entities, collectively. With Clinton’s plan, my remaining 50 cents will be taxed again at 50% when I die. So the government would take 75% of my earnings from now on.
There’s a good reason Adams opposes the estate tax, and there’s a good reason you should too:
I oppose the estate tax because I was born to modest means and worked 7-days a week for most of my life to be in my current position. (I’m working today, Sunday, as per usual.) And I don’t want to give 75% of my earnings to the government. (Would you?)
How does anyone defend such a proposition? It’s theft, plain and simple.
As you might expect from a hilarious cartoonist, Adams also gives snarky reasons he’s switching his vote. Like this one:
It seems to me that Trump supporters are planning for the world’s biggest party on election night whereas Clinton supporters seem to be preparing for a funeral. I want to be invited to the event that doesn’t involve crying and moving to Canada.
Adams explains Trump’s strategy in a way that even Trump’s top strategists should be taking note of, because it’s perfect:
Trump always takes the extreme position on matters of safety and security for the country, even if those positions are unconstitutional, impractical, evil, or something that the military would refuse to do. Normal people see this as a dangerous situation. Trained persuaders like me see this as something called pacing and leading. Trump “paces” the public – meaning he matches them in their emotional state, and then some. He does that with his extreme responses on immigration, fighting ISIS, stop-and-frisk, etc. Once Trump has established himself as the biggest bad-ass on the topic, he is free to “lead,” which we see him do by softening his deportation stand, limiting his stop-and-frisk comment to Chicago, reversing his first answer on penalties for abortion, and so on. If you are not trained in persuasion, Trump look scary. If you understand pacing and leading, you might see him as the safest candidate who has ever gotten this close to the presidency. That’s how I see him.
Adams attributes Trump’s suitability for the role of president to his persuasive personality:
Most of the job of president is persuasion. Presidents don’t need to understand policy minutia. They need to listen to experts and then help sell the best expert solutions to the public. Trump sells better than anyone you have ever seen, even if you haven’t personally bought into him yet. You can’t deny his persuasion talents that have gotten him this far.
No. You really can’t deny his persuasion talents.
41 more days, y’all. 41 more days.