Scott Adams's Blog, page 273

Renaming ISIS to VZTP

ISIS, ISIL, DAESH… all terrible names for an enemy. Those acronyms sound like corporate projects.

What we need is a name for our enemy that puts a damper on their recruiting efforts.

Here I will assume that most ISIS recruits are youngish males. I also assume the reports of ISIS fighters being totally drugged-up for battle are accurate. And I also assume that those fighters are not experiencing a satisfying love life.

Put it all together and I give you my new name for ISIS: Virgin Zombie Target Practice. (That’s VZTP for short.)

The zombie part feels right because they are too drugged to be thinking clearly. The zombie label diminishes their humanity, which is likely to come in handy once the Caliphate is walled-up and the serious killing begins. And zombies, like terrorists, are on the same part of the Uncanny Valley graph. By that I mean they act human, sort of, but not exactly.

The target practice part of the name is designed to diminish VZTP’s noble dreams of a Caliphate by setting a psychological anchor on the idea that recruits are nothing but target practice for robots. That isn’t a noble calling.

Trump taught us how to set anchors like that. It works every time, even if you announce in advance that you are doing it. Brains are simply wired to move toward anchors of that type.

Once we flood the VZTP war zone with robots and drones (you know it will happen) we will essentially have a first-person shooter game operated by the military. In a disturbingly real sense, our robots and their human operators will be engaged in Virgin Zombie Target Practice. Or at least it will feel like it.

Perhaps it is a failure of my own imagination, but I seriously can’t see this heading in any other direction. At some point the Caliphate will be walled-in by its neighbors, and robots will be doing the fighting against the VZTP.

The only other scenario I can imagine is that the VZTP wins and takes over the world. They seem spunky, but I’d like to think we can stop the zombie apocalypse by catching it early enough.

The Lucky Hitler Hypothesis (Trump Persuasion Series)

I understand why people are upset about Donald Trump’s racist vibe. He’s spreading racist breadcrumbs all over the place. I shall list a sample.

So far, Trump…

1. Implied that Mexicans are rapists (except for some who are good people).

2. Wants to temporarily ban all Muslims from immigrating until we can figure out “why they hate us so much.”

3. Spoke approvingly about the rough treatment his crowd gave to an African-American protester at his speech.

4. Wants to deport 11 million illegal Mexican immigrants and give them a chance to get back into the country legally.

5. Wants to consider shutting down mosques that might be recruiting terrorists.

6. Is charismatic, and talks about immigrants as a threat to this country, like Hitler, who was a known racist.

7. Has a mouth shaped exactly like Mussolini’s mouth. Mussolini was a fascist, and fascists are basically racists with ambition.

8. Is popular with voters who are racist. They know one when they see one!

I’m sure I’m forgetting a few, but that’s enough to make the case. Every single thing on that list is consistent with the Lucky Hitler Hypothesis for Trump. That filter on reality says Trump is a terrible person on the inside – racist, narcissistic, and uncaring – and his success is due to his under-informed base of supporters plus luck. By this filter, no skill is involved except for the Reality TV kind. He was just in the right place at the right time, and loudly, as always. Hence, Lucky Hitler.

But as regular readers know, it is easy to fit today’s data to any hypothesis about the past. Heck, the History Channel has me convinced that those pyramids were designed by aliens. The facts fit! The facts also fit the hypothesis that humans did it all alone. That’s how the past works; data tends to be consistent with a lot of different interpretations.

Our brains did not evolve to serve up a continuous stream of truth. Brains evolved to keep us alive. Your brain is more like an illusion generator than a window on reality. You and I are seeing the world quite differently (I assure you) and yet we both survive. My illusion and your illusion are both perfectly functional. But chances are, neither of us know anything. Except that we exist.

Take for example the many times Trump’s words and policies have revealed his racist inner thoughts. That filter on life explains the past perfectly. Every bit of it fits. 

But you might want to ask yourself if any other filter fits that data too. I’ll toss out a few suggestions to get the ball rolling.

1. Trump is a robot. This filter fits the data because his plans are guided by reason except for a blind spot about how humans feel, especially when you casually mention that some of them might be good people. To other robots, that’s just a true statement. Some people are good, some are bad. The robot doesn’t know it sounds racist. it is just trying to follow the specs in the job description of president. The job description says the president needs to protect citizens from all threats, foreign and domestic. It is silent on the questions of hurting people’s feelings and protecting non-citizens.

2. Trump is consistent. This filter says Trump has a decades-long track record of making a huuuuuge first offers so he has room to negotiate to a winning compromise. He even wrote a bestselling book on the topic. By this filter, Trump is a rational business mogul that created a diverse empire, and he is using the same methods of persuasion he has always used. It sounds racist to you, and he knows it, but he also knows that what he is doing will give him the attention – followed by the power – to get the job done. By this filter, Trump might want to build an Arc de Trump as the doorway to Mexico so he can feed his huge ego, because that would be consistent with his past. But the Hitler path would be out of character with his personal history. His Jewish daughter can explain that better than I can.

3. The Master Persuader Hypothesis. By this filter, a master persuader sends crowds into cognitive dissonance and they in turn generate one rationalization after another for what is behind the phenomenon. Obama is a Master Persuader, and that’s why a big chunk of the public still thinks he is a practicing Muslim. When the top persuaders do their thing, about a third of the public can be expected to literally hallucinate.

Now compare Trump, Obama, and Hillary Clinton. Trump is routinely compared to Hitler. Obama is considered by many to be a Muslim sleeper cell. But Hillary Clinton is generally accused of ordinary flaws such as incompetence, dishonesty, etc. Clinton is not a master persuader. If she were, a third of the country would believe she is a practicing witch. A real one. And no, that is not a joke.

A tell for a Master Persuader is the outlandishness of the criticisms. Jeb Bush is not a persuader, and no one accuses him of anything but running an ineffective campaign. No one believes Rand Paul is really an elf that makes cookies in a hollowed-out tree. But they would, if Paul were a master persuader instead of a policy wonk. 

As I often say, I am not smart enough to know which candidate would be the best president. I’m only interested in Trump’s persuasion skills. And I can’t rule out the Lucky Hitler Hypothesis, or any other hypothesis about Trump, because I don’t know Trump’s inner thoughts. 

So let’s use our different filters to predict the future and see which one does best.

Master Persuader Update - Slip of the Tongue (Trump series)

In the Republican undercard debate tonight, George Pataki referred to Trump as “president.”

That’s the tell for persuasion that I predicted in this post. Search on the page for “bonus thought”. The idea is that Trump has been acting like a president so effectively (and intentionally) that you feel as if he is the incumbent.

That is some world-class persuasion. I saw this developing months ago. You’ll see a flurry of it in the coming months.

Oh, and Huckabee made a point of saying the president needs to be a “persuader.” He used the word several times.

Probably a coincidence. We still can’t rule out the Lucky Hitler hypothesis for why Trump is polling well.

And obviously Trump’s popularity could be because voters like outsiders. And by that I mean they like one of the three outsiders, then two insiders, then another outsider, in roughly that order. Wait, is Fiorina still in the race?

An Unusual Argument for Electing Hillary Clinton

According to some of the Kurds, the fighters in ISIS believe they won’t go to heaven if they are killed by a woman on the battlefield.

I wonder if ISIS fighters really believe that.

And if they do…

What would happen if the Commander in Chief of the United States were Hillary Clinton? And let’s say we train as many women to fly jets and drop bombs as we can. Or perhaps we only need a handful of female pilots plus some propaganda that claims a growing number of the pilots are female.

The idea would be to go full-sexist (on paper) and present the idea that the United States has collectively delegated the destruction of ISIS to women. We’ll say the drones are operated by women too.

That would take some of the fun out of joining ISIS, I would think.

The key to selling this idea is starting slow. Maybe we do some PR about recruiting more female pilots to fight ISIS. A year later we announce that women are volunteering like crazy to be pilots (whether it is true or not). Then we start dropping leaflets saying our women are coming to bring death from the air, courtesy of Ms. Clinton. To sound credible, perhaps we say on the notes that there’s a sixty-percent chance that any particular bomb is dropped by a woman. Next month you move that number up to 65% and so on, so it looks like a trend.

If we have too many boots on the ground, the subterfuge would become obvious. But if we only deliver death from the sky, I think we can sell that as coming from women. Especially if some of it does, which I assume is already the case.

But first you need to put a wall around the Caliphate, including a “virtual” border secured by drones, mines, and whatnot. A defined border is necessary for psychological reasons. Until the world builds a wall around the Caliphate it will seem as if we are fighting an ideology that has no borders. For psychological reasons, we need to convert ISIS from an idea to an address. Then we can send our women to bomb the shit out of that address.

And obviously we need to preserve as many innocent lives as possible while doing what needs to be done.

Some of you will chime in with pig-related ideas (dipping bombs in pig fat, etc.). But to my ears, that just sounds offensive to Muslims without packing much of a psychological punch. 

Here I remind new(ish) readers that most of my ideas are terrible. The fun is figuring out why.

And I don’t endorse any candidate. I’m not smart enough to know who would do the best job of president.

A Voter’s Guide to Thinking

As the American presidential race heats up, you’ll see a lot of bad thinking emerge, especially mine. So I thought it would be useful to agree on some ground rules to keep each other in line.

I give you my first draft (subject to your improvements) of A Voter’s Guide to Thinking:

A Voter’s Guide to Thinking

1. If you are comparing Plan A to Plan B, you might be doing a good job of thinking. But if you are comparing Plan A to an imaginary situation in which there are no tradeoffs in life, you are not thinking.

2. If you see quotes taken out of context, and you form an opinion anyway, that’s probably not thinking. If you believe you need no further context because there is only one imaginable explanation for the meaning of the quotes, you might have a poor imagination. Sometimes a poor imagination feels a lot like knowledge, but it’s closer to the opposite.

3. If a debate lends itself to estimates of cost (in money or human suffering) and you aren’t willing to offer an estimate in support of your opinion, you don’t yet have an opinion. 

4. If you are sure you know how a leader performed during his or her tenure, and you don’t know how someone else would have performed in the same situation, you don’t actually know anything. It just feels like you do.

5. If something reminds you of something else (such as Hitler, to pick one example) that doesn’t mean you are thinking. That just means something reminded you of something. A strong association of that type can prevent you from thinking, but it is not itself a component of reason.

6. Analogies are not an element of reason. Analogies are good for explaining things to people who are new to a topic. If I am busy as a beaver, that does not imply that I also build dams by gnawing on wood. It just means I’m busy.

7. If you think your well-informed and reasoned opinions as a voter are bringing up the average, let me introduce you to the 100% of other voters who believe they are bringing up the average as well.

8. If your opinion is based on your innate ability to predict the future, you might be employing more magical thinking than reason. The exceptions would be the people who use data to predict the future, such as Nate Silver. That stuff is credible albeit imperfect by nature. Your imagination is less reliable.

I also think it is useful to have a clear understanding of the 2D model compared to the 3D model of reality. The 2D model revolves around the illusion that humans are rational beings and we respond to reason over time. The 3D model says some Master Persuaders are operating outside that frame. Here’s the difference spelled out for this election cycle.

2D Model (aka the Lucky Hitler filter)

Media: Guardians of knowledge and reason

Voters: Mostly idiots, but can be guided by the wisdom of the media over time.

Trump: Lucky Hitler with inexplicable staying power that we think will end any minute. 

3D Model (aka the Master Persuader filter)

Trump: Master Persuader controls the media and is already leading the country in terms of setting priorities.

Media: Tries to resist Trump’s “energy judo” and persuasion talents and loses every time because energy always beats reason.

Voters: Swayed by emotion (energy) and not reason, but rationalizing every decision as if reason were in play. Angry at those with competing hallucinations.

I’m not claiming the 3D model of reality (which is a derivative of the Moist Robot filter) is the only truth. Reality is subjective. I am only suggesting that it might be useful to know both models exist, so you can see which one best predicts the future.

—

If you hate this sort of blog topic, you’ll detest my book.

Immigration Without the Hate Part (Trump-related)

Suppose that instead of temporarily banning Muslim immigration as Trump proposes – which offends our sense of religious tolerance – we ban violent anti-Americanism, but we do it statistically instead of individually. That way we can discriminate in the service of national self-defense and not feel so icky about it.

Allow me to explain.

Suppose we say that any group that has both voluntary membership and more than X% of members who seek to destroy the United States (according to polls) is automatically barred from entry. In this formulation it doesn’t matter if you are a Muslim or a member of CostCo. If you are a member of a group with too many haters, you’re out.

We would probably want to further categorize people by country of origin and a few other factors to really drill down to the risk level. But if CostCo members in Ireland have more than X% of members that want to bring down the United States, we ban them all, temporarily, until the situation improves. Simple as that. No religious discrimination at all. Same standard applies to CostCo members as to religions.

Obviously we still need to screen individuals too.

Regular readers know that I like to float half-baked ideas in this blog to see if you can fix them. I’m not sure this one is fixable, but let’s give it a shot.

Can we discriminate based on statistics about voluntary groups while NOT discriminating solely on religious grounds? It feels possible, albeit messy.

Calling the Clinton Top (Trump Persuasion Series)

Today Trump said that Hillary Clinton “Killed hundreds of thousands of people with her stupidity.” He was talking about the Middle East and Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State.

According to the Master Persuader filter, that statement will set off a week of media yapping about how many thousands of people Clinton “killed” with her policy contributions as Secretary of State. As always, Trump sets a high anchor of “hundreds of thousands” and makes everyone think some form of “Can’t be more than 50,000, tops.”

As a bonus, the country and the media will also discuss Trump’s claim she was the worst Secretary of State of all time. That gets you thinking past the sale. The “sale” is convincing you that Clinton did a bad job. If you start wondering whether she was the worst, you have already accepted the premise that she is in contention for the title. 

The secret sauce with Trump’s kill shots is that they are never random. This latest one, like the ones that came before, has enough maybe-truth to it (in your mind, if not in reality) that it will stick like sap. Clinton won’t be wiping this one off with a damp rag. It’s part of her now.

Continuing my practice of using the Master Persuader filter to make predictions (as opposed to interpreting the past) I’m going to predict that Clinton’s poll numbers compared to Trump just hit a top. From here it starts drifting down.

Regular readers know that I correctly predicted Fiorina’s top after she paired herself in people’s minds with a dead baby. That was the worst debate mistake of the past century, at least according to the Master Persuader filter where reason is not involved and associations rule.

You might also know I called Ben Carson’s top after Trump’s speech about his belt-buckle-stabbing ways. 

Now ask yourself who predicted both of those tops.

I remind newer readers that this is just for entertainment. I don’t endorse Trump or any other candidate. They all look qualified to me. The Master Persuader filter is not meant to replace your view of reality. All I ask is that you compare it to your current model of reality and see which one does the best job of predicting.

Clarification: the Master Persuader filter is not competing with the idea that Trump is topping the Republican polls because of his immigration policies, or his outsider status, or his willingness to say what people are thinking. Rather, the Master Persuader filter says people believe they like Trump for one of the reasons I mentioned, but the real reason is that he is using commercial-grade persuasion. The “reasons” people give are rationalizations of irrational decisions. That’s why you see so many reasons offered. The sheer quantity of rationalizations for why Trump is beating expectations is a tell for persuasion. That’s what I learned in hypnosis class years ago.

To put it in simpler language, the Master Persuader filter says Trump would be equally popular no matter which issues he chose to champion, so long as those issues also lent themselves to fantastic statements that could draw all attention to him. He needed topics with natural juice, but he could have picked any other touchy topic and gotten the same good results using the tools at his disposal. 

Bonus Thought: I was watching an American Muslim on TV describe his objection to Trump. The gentleman referred to Trump as “President Trump” before the moderator corrected him. Watch how often people slip and call Trump the president, only to quickly correct themselves. That’s a tell for persuasion.

Also watch how often the media buys into Trump’s “strong versus weak” frame that always helps him. Even the media that is gunning for him is starting to frame the contest that way. That’s another sign of persuasion.

Bonus Thought 2: Every week that passes without a champion coming forward to offer an alternative to Trump’s temporary Muslim immigration ban is a week that Trump’s support rises. Trump’s opponents will call him names. They will say his plan is terrible. But they will stop short of explaining in detail an alternate plan. But not because such a plan doesn’t exist to be explained. Some form of whatever we are planning to do now is the plan. But I’ll bet you only hear vague support for treating people fairly, as opposed to detailed support for an alternative plan with strong screening.

No one can own the alternative plan because someone might slip through. And if that happens, whoever is the name attached to that non-Trump plan owns it. No sane politician wants a 5% chance of owning a terror attack.

Trump set a perfect trap. 

But that’s just one interpretation. To be fair, I can’t rule out the Lucky Hitler explanation for Trump’s success. A lot of smart people are adamant about that one. Maybe.

Bonus Thought 3: One of the weird side-effects of my blogging style (because I write to persuade in the service of entertainment) is that people find a wide variety of reasons to dislike me. 90% of the reasons are valid, but I’m pretty sure that last 10% has some tells.

Master Persuader Update (Part of My Trump Series)

A few quick things of note.

Trump has been saying Hillary Clinton lacks the “strength and stamina” to run for President. In a strange turn of events, Clinton confirms that the campaign is exhausting. She also offered a weak reason why it is still “fun,” but it sounded a little sad. She doesn’t sound like a people person.

According to the 2D political filter, Clinton said something that is somewhat obvious (campaigns are exhausting) and she made no excuses. It was honest. It was real. And it predicts nothing about how well she could perform as President. But voters are not rational. According to the Master Persuader filter, voters heard that she doesn’t have the energy to handle big problems. And when Trump walks on stage and starts gesturing and talk-yelling his opinions, he seems a bundle of energy. Advantage: Trump.

Energy beats reason when it comes to negotiating. 

There is also much chatter about the possibility of a brokered convention in which the political elite could shut Trump out of the nomination. That seems reasonable if you believe the Republican Party has the power and Trump is their puppet. 

But reality is the opposite. Trump owns the Republican Party for all practical purposes because he has both the will and the means to annihilate it if they treat him wrong. And I think most of the country would see that as a fair response. Even Trump haters would bristle at the thought of ignoring the plurality-winning candidate. That would be a death wish.

The Master Persuader filter predicts no brokered convention. There will be lots of chatter about it, and the suspense might go to the last minute, but only one outcome is possible if Trump is still dominating the polls. Trump will be nominated if he is still on top.

For the benefit of new readers, I am not endorsing Trump, or anyone else. I am primarily interested in his persuasion skills.

Update: Mark Cuban had some “harsh words” for Trump. Does that mean he is out of the running for VP? According to the 2D filter, yes, absolutely. But according to the 3D filter, where irrationality reigns, he remains top choice. 

Why?

Because you trust Cuban to stop Trump from doing whatever it is that you’re afraid of him doing. That’s your safety valve. VPs are often useless, but Cuban would not be. And you know he wouldn’t roll over.

Think about it. Then ask yourself which one of Trump’s policies Cuban disagrees with (while also offering an alternative policy). Everyone famous who runs a business has to act shocked at the prospect of a Muslim immigration ban, or mass deportation. So that opinion doesn’t count unless Cuban offered an alternative.

According to the Master Persuader filter, a run-up to a Cuban VP pick would involve Cuban trash-talking Trump, without crossing the line, and without saying anything Cuban has to later walk back about policy differences.

Prediction: Cuban is still on the short list, but Trump isn’t focusing on the VP choice yet. After nomination, assuming Trump drifts to the center, Cuban will have fewer objections. And for someone of Cuban’s talents, the VP job is a free ticket to the presidency.

Does Mark Cuban say no to an eventual presidency so he can spend more time watching basketball? Maybe. He has a family that might not want to move. But keep in mind he is the only person who could take out Clinton (as a team with Trump) and also take out Trump if he got out of control.

Name someone else who could do that.

Who Wants to Create Dilbert for a Week?

I’m planning to take a month off from cartooning, sometime soon, to finish work on the Dilbert movie script and launch a start-up that’s just about ready. The only wrinkle in my plan is that I need to create a comic every day. 

So…here’s my tentative plan. I’m looking for four artist/writers to do one week apiece (six daily strips and one Sunday) of Dilbert, with full credit, and modest pay. (Negotiable.) I would provide the Dilbert comic panel outline in a digital file and you would fill in the art and writing. My syndication editor and I would guide you.

But there is a twist.

I don’t want you to produce the normal Dilbert comic. I want you to introduce a new character or a new perspective so we see something entirely different. I’d love to see any workplace perspective that is not a generic white guy. Show me a new point of view – female, gay, Latino, African-American – whatever you want. Introduce a new character and see if it sticks.

For background, the reason Dilbert lacks diversity is because the market does not yet allow a white male to write humor about well-organized minority groups. The problem is that all comic characters have exaggerated and stereotyped flaws. That’s what makes them funny. I can write about white-guy-nerd flaws because I am one. And I can write about white guy leaders who are jerks because leaders have power. But I could not introduce a gay or African-American character and assign that character a stereotypical flaw. The market is not yet mature enough for that.

But you can. If readers like your character, perhaps I can keep it. But no promises. (For practical reasons, the copyright has to stay with me. You would have contractual rights to republish later for your own purposes, so long as an explanation is included.)

You would also have total freedom to mock the original Dilbert comic, and me, as much as you want. As long as it is funny. Shine a light on my narrow focus and the lack of diversity. Whatever.

You would have to stay within the G-rated not-too-controversial zone of family newspapers, so don’t get wild. That’s the hardest part of the job. Dilbert would be edgier if it only ran on the Internet.

Realistically, I will probably find some cartoonists through my industry contacts, but I wanted to spread a wider net just in case there is some hidden talent lurking. 

If you want to be considered, draw a one-panel first-draft and put it in the comments. You can use Dilbert characters (for this) and add your own. It doesn’t have to be hilarious. I just want to see your artistic “voice.” I’ll ask for more samples if interested.

If I don’t find replacements, I’ll abandon this idea and just take a month off.

Who’s in?

The Trump Immigration Surprise - the Trap is Half-Sprung

As you know, Donald Trump has offended 90% of the media and nearly a third of the country with his idea of temporarily banning Muslim immigration. That’s some crazy Hitler stuff, say the headlines.

You might recall that I predicted in this blog an “immigration surprise” from Trump that follows the format of movies. In a typical three-act movie, you have these main parts:

1. In Act 1, something changes the hero’s life. (Trump surprises everyone by jumping to the top of Republican polls early.)

2. In Act 2, the hero enjoys the ride, and things are going almost “too well” until…

3. At the start of the 3rd Act, the hero is almost always scripted into an impossible bind. Then somehow – impossibly – the hero escapes and prevails. For Trump, his Mexican immigration issue was the third-act problem. I predicted that he had a surprise in store, and that when he escaped it would trigger our “movie pattern” brains and he would win in a landslide.

But instead of escaping his immigration “problem” for the upcoming general election, he seemingly worsened it by adding some religious intolerance to the mix by suggesting a temporary ban on Muslim immigration. You already thought he was Hitler, and he just handed you confirming evidence. Uh-oh.

That was the 2D analysis. By the 2D filter, where people use logic and reason to make decisions, Trump is dead and done. The body has decomposed. He can’t win.

But in the 3D world of emotion, where Trump exclusively plays, he has set the world up for the most clever persuasion you will ever see. 

Do you see it yet? Don’t read on until you spend a few seconds thinking about what he did here because you’ll be mad if I tell you first. It’s right in front of you.

Scroll down for the answer.

Answer: When polls show that Latino voters in America favor banning Muslim immigration, Trump has greased his path to a landslide.

I don’t think he planned the immigration surprise to happen this early. But he got the opening and he took it. (I predicted it would happen after the nomination.)

On a related note, I understand Trump is defending his Muslim immigration ban by telling the public they are thinking it but he said it. That’s the most powerful persuasion technique there is (literally, in my experience). The general form of it involves an educated guess about a person’s inner thoughts. When you tell people what they are thinking, while they are thinking it, and while they think their thoughts are mostly concealed, they hand you the keys to their brain. (It would take longer to explain why.)

Other candidates tell voters what they should think. Sometimes they say what voters do think, but they do so only for obvious issues such as voters preferring lower crime rates. You won’t see a vanilla politician tell you what your secret inner thoughts are, and get it right. The latter is industrial-grade persuasion. The former is just lips moving.

I think there is another immigration surprise planned for after the nomination, but this first one might be all he needed. In movies you often see the hero escape the 3rd Act problem only to fall into greater danger in the final minutes. So movies generally have a big escape followed by another clever escape in the final minutes. Trump might get to use his second immigration surprise toward the final stretch.

Or he’s Hitler. I can’t really rule that out. 

For the benefit of new readers, I don’t endorse Trump or anyone else. I am not smart enough to know which candidate would do the best job of being president. They all look qualified to me. In this blog I use the Master Persuader filter to see if it predicts the future better than the standard 2D analysis that has so far gotten everything wrong about Trump. 

Update1: Here’s a poll showing U.S. Hispanic opinions on allowing Syrian Muslim refugees into the country. See page 104 of the document. 63% oppose. One poll is not conclusive. So wait and see.

Update 2: In the tweet below, Trump uses a persuasion technique called “making you think past the sale.” Highly effective. 

Alert readers saw this “immigration surprise” too.

Speaking of rational behavior…