Scott Adams: How to Use Mass Persuasion Techniques to Become President of The United States

Scott Adams Talks about How to Use Mass Persuasion Techniques to Become President of The United States

Episode 200: Mass Persuasion Techniques- How to Subtly Hypnotize Yourself And Everyone You Meet

Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert, knows the answer and has known it for years.

So I called him and asked. I needed to know. He told me how Trump won. And he told me how anyone can use these persuasion techniques to improve their lives.

What if you can get people to do whatever you want just by using the right words and subtly hypnotizing everyone you meet?

It sounds like a science fiction novel. But it’s true. It’s what happened, and it happens every day. Who are the victims? You’re the victim.

Scott Adams predicted in September 2015(!) that Donald Trump would become President because, “he is the best master persuader I have ever seen.”

Scott Adams trained as a hypnotist and master persuader for years.

“Once you realize that everyone is completely irrational,” Scott Adams told me, “your life gets a lot easier.

“You can start to use the principles behind this to see why people really do things, as opposed to using rational facts, and then use that to your advantage.

“Understanding that people are irrational has made my life a lot better.”

But how did he predict a year and a half ago that Trump would win? I needed to know how. And how I could do it.

Trump was the unlikely choice to be President. Just like Scott was the unlikely choice to be one of the world’s most popular cartoonists with Dilbert.

But we can all learn the skills that Scott learned.

Scott heard a story that made him want to change his life in his 20s. His mother had delivered birth to his sister without the use of anesthetics.

She was hypnotized. “She felt no pain,” Scott said.

So Scott, in his 20s, learned all the techniques of hypnosis.

“You mean,” I said, “You can take a gold watch and swing it in front of their eyes and make them do what you want?”

“That has never happened,” Scott said, “Except in movies.

“What you learn is that basically everything people do is completely irrational. And then they rationalize it later.

“Like, they might say they voted for Trump because of his policies but this is just a rationalization. Everyone is irrational and everyone is subject to persuasion.”

Everything seemed against Trump. But somehow he beat 16 candidates in the primaries and one big candidate in the election.

And, Scott says, all the theories as to why he won have been wrong.

So I called him up and asked him what happened. And he told me:

The Linguistic Kill Shot

“Trump described everyone using two techniques:
– words that had never been used in politics before
– words that were visual. So every time you looked at the candidate being described you would look for confirmation bias.”

Example: Jeb Bush he described as “low energy”. “Low energy” had never been used to describe a candidate before so they stood out.

And whenever you looked Jeb, unless he was jumping around, you would automatically look for clues that showed he was low energy.

Trump systematically did this with everyone who was frontrunner against him, including “Crooked Hillary” which referred both to her legal troubles and the persistent rumors that she was sick.

Charisma = Power + Empathy

Scott said, “Trump clearly had the Power part down. But he was low on Empathy.

“So he used polling to figure out what the critical issue was for the most amount of people and came up with Immigration. By going with this issue he proved he had empathy with his base.

“Expect him as President to try to show empathy to a much larger group of people.”

Overselling the Story

“Trump consistently oversold his point. For instance, ‘Build a Wall’.”

He used hyperbole because it’s the direction that counts.

“It didn’t matter that the facts didn’t support him. His base was listening to the direction while all the media was getting bogged down in the weeds.

“And in many cases, he would back down. He would recognize if he oversold too much and back down on it.

“But again, the media would show his views for free because he was so outlandish and his supporters would note the direction, not the facts.”

I asked Scott: What would happen to Trump if a “Rick Perry” situation occurred like in 2012, where Perry couldn’t name the 3 cabinet departments he wanted to eliminate and that destroyed his campaign?

Scott said, “If Trump was stumbling to name the three he would just say, ‘You know what? There are 10 cabinet positions I’d eliminate! You probably can guess the ones I’m talking about.”

“And then while everyone would be scratching their heads trying to figure out if there are even ten cabinet departments, his supporters would be just note the direction.”


Early on he would say things that were so audacious nobody could believe a Presidential candidate would be saying these things.

But people got used to it. It got him free media coverage which allowed him to spend less than half of what Hillary spent.

It allowed him to consistently say audacious and outlandish things throughout the campaign without upsetting his base.

Embrace the Argument

If you just outright reject someone, they won’t even pay attention to what you say.

But with everyone he spoke with, he would start off agreeing with them and then start to turn people towards supporting his ideas.

Even with Hillary, he would say: “She has great experience” before following it up with, “but after 30 years, what has changed?”

Talent Stack

Scott said, “I’m not the funniest guy in the room. And I’m not the best at drawing. But I’m pretty good at both and that’s where Dilbert comes from.

“It’s really hard to be the best in the world at one thing,” Scott told me, “But if you are ‘pretty good’ at a bunch of things and use them together, you can succeed.

“Trump has one of the best talent stacks I’ve ever seen. He’s not the smartest guy in the room, but he’s pretty good at public speaking, business smarts, humor, hiring and firing, politics, etc.”

Again, he didn’t know as much as the other candidates about every political issue.

“Expect him to get to know the facts that are important once he is President. But he was pretty good at knowing what was going on and combined that with the other “pretty good” things in his talent stack.”

Blame others for people’s suffering

“While Hillary was focusing on ‘I’m With Her’ and ‘Let’s make history with the first woman President’, Trump was focusing on ‘Draining the Swamp’ and ‘Let’s Make America Great Again’.

These were much more powerful persuasion messages.”

Did Hillary have a chance?

How could Hillary have fought better using her own persuasion techniques?

“Hillary was running a strong persuasion game in the summer,” Scott told me. “She might even have won if she stuck with it.”

” ‘Dangerous Donald’ was scary for people. But then her campaign leaked the Billy Bush video and even though it caused Trump to dip in the polls, it wasn’t as bad as portraying him as a madman at the nuclear controls. Ironically, that bad news actually helped Trump.”

My podcast with Scott comes out later today.

I wanted to learn other things from him. Like how can I, or anyone, learn these persuasion techniques.

What are the easiest techniques to learn?

He told me on the podcast. Plus he was very honest and told me a trick he uses with the women he dates.

Does any of this mean Trump is going to be good or bad?

This article isn’t about that. It’s just about what Trump, and all political candidates, do to win elections. Trump, according to Scott, was just particularly good at it. “The best I’ve ever seen”.

Is it bad that people are irrational? That facts don’t matter?


But it’s the reality. Our brains were built to hunt for food in scary and uncertain situations.

In our more complex society, we still respond to primitive emotions even if they are now irrational.

Do I want to be better at persuading so my life is better? Of course.

The reality is: I’m easily influenced and have to constantly remind myself everyone has an agenda all the time.

I don’t think it matters who is President. There are too many forces at work to check and balance everything.

But it does matter how I react, how I build my life day by day. It’s my choice (I hope) whether or not I have a good impact on others.

Or not. Maybe Scott hypnotized me into writing this. In which case, he did an excellent job


Links and resources:


  • What a massive disappointment to see this on your blog, James. Did Scott hypnotize you?

    • Julian Tanaka

      Stay mad.

  • Vida Wright

    Great article. I am a huge fan of Scott Adams!

  • Gary Dawson Smith

    As a College English teacher, I began to research Donald Trump’s use of rhetorical devices and analyze them this last summer. Like Scott Adams says above, I started to see his mastery, not just of some rhetorical techniques, but of the overall game of persuasion and power. Yet, these skills are the hallmarks of demagogues also.

    Thanks for the interview, I have loved Dilbert over the ages also. Will check out Scott Adams book.

    • I got paid 104 thousand dollars in 2016 by working on-line from my house a­n­d I was able to do it by w­orking in my own time f­o­r several hours a day. I followed a business opportunity I found online and I am so amazed that i was able to make so much extra income. It’s very beginner-friendly and I’m just so grateful that i learned about it. This is what i do…

    • Timtim

      Reason favors Trump. You are using tribal power politics instead of reason. That is what Leftists want.
      Do you want to define demagogue, or just parenthetically damn Trump without discussing an idea?

  • Isabella

    OMG the comics are fantastic.. as for the Book I am half way with my life.. I am about to finish with my latest failure.. I hope it’s going to be the last and I will start the “win” part :) : ) thanks James as usual, great insights.

  • Scott Adams read well into Trump’s techniques. The Dilbert blog had the comments off last time I checked.

    • He’s turned them back on. The death threats were getting to him but apparently that’s died off since the election.

  • Bobby Kelly

    Love,Love this article – wow Dr Scott Adams interviewed by Dr James Altucher…great stuff.

    Now my only other comment is singular but needs detail. Yes improving your life is very good and important – but we need more than that since as we have seen in last couple months – we all die!

    So i would ask Scott who is responsible for conditioning my mind hypnotically to never read the Bible for myself.

    There i found salvation is scriptures that are hidden from us, instead of thinking salvation from the Bible is all about keeping the 10 commandments its not that at all – its a free gift from God as a result of his fulfilling the 10 commandments for me and being slaughtered on my behalf.

    Now i know why its called Good news and now i understand how “the whole world has fallen under the sway of satan” as bible declares “blinding the unbelievers” yet Gods word which is “life” “goes forth not returning void” and accomplishing his purpose which is to call “his body” out of it – “declared righteous by faith – not by works” where “no one can snatch me out of his hand” i can never lose “nothing can snatch me out of the fathers hand” and is guaranteed as I am sealed at moment of believe “born again” by the Holy Spirit – guaranteed 5 places Eph 1:14, 2 Cor 1 22, 2 Cor 5:5, Heb 7 22 Ro 16

    The Bible can be trusted as word of God by prophecies of Old Testament verified by Alexander the Great yes I said Alexander the Great not exactly a biblical figure.

    How? He Hellenized the world when he conquered it including commissioning translation of Old Testament from Hebrew to Greek in 330 BC circa de. That my friends is an objective historical benchmark in history that even critics have to acknowledge.

    Well the old testament speaks of suffering messiah who will first die for world in isa 61 and then come back in vengeance also in isa 61. These words were then read in scroll by Jesus when he came the first time but he stopped before it states his vengeance. That was for a reason. Check it out yourself maybe your first independent bible study, which by the way most churches don’t encourage but everyone should read it independently and take advantage of commentaries , bible dictionaries, atlases, concordances, bibles, prophecies. Speaking of prophecies the Septuagint – the Greek Bible translated by Alexander the Great scholars mentions a messiah who would be from Egypt, Galilee, a Nazarene, out of Bethehem…

    How could that be? Did that happen? Did his name begin with J? The variety of accounts and multiple blemished on line of Christ – could not be forgery after the fact because wouldnt they want to clean that up? A murderer and adulterer (David), a prostitute (Rahab), drunken daughters sleeping with fathers direct in his line (Lot),

    No we have become ignorant because we have been hypnotized, but we are to either accept that or uncover it, and move forward into green pastures as psalm 23 promises after going through the gate of Jesus who will keep us safe and give us new house in new Jerusalem Rev 20-1. Peace in the street!

    • petertrast

      Excellent correlation. I have been saying this for years, but this interview and post really solidify my own theories regarding both “believers” and non-believers. I think that many people who consider themselves to be believers are actually “hypnotized” to believe in a false gospel, rather than having had a real contact of faith with God… just a theory, but it explains the sheep and the goats judgment…

  • robert franklin stroud

    Great article. Book-marked.

  • This was a very insighful Podcast episode with lots of note taking. I like how James and Scott tied it into the Trump campaign for real examples. I have used, “Embrace the Argument” several times in the past without even realizing there was a name for it. It tends to work most of the time.

    I can be easily influence as well so its nice to know the different techniques so I can prepare my own defence against them.

  • Walter Stamirowski

    In a way Bernie Sanders did the same thing as evidenced by the millions who followed his message,

  • Kezer

    Trump can’t be the greatest persuader if Adams or anyone else believes that he’s the greatest persuader.

  • Bethany Scott Herwegh

    Great article but it wasn’t Hillary’s campaign that leaked the video. They had no idea it existed until it went public. It was someone at Access Hollywood or NBC. They were the only ones who knew about it.

  • I feel like I need to study this. Hahaha. Thanks so much for ‘different’.

  • Nancy Stalker Swett


  • 70Cinema_Writer11

    Enjoyed this article but baffled by one statement: “I don’t think it matters who is President. There are too many forces at work to check and balance everything.” This is now untrue thanks to massive gerrymandering and clear flaws with the electoral college. What exactly will be the checks and balances when all three branches of government are controlled by one party and one ideology?

    • foljs

      It doesn’t matter much, because both parties share are more or less the same, and share very near ideologies in most important aspects. They might pay lip service to different ideas, but they agree on most (and what they don’t agree with is usually inconsequential for the vast majority.

      • 70Cinema_Writer11

        You think the Dems and Repubs are of the same mind when it comes to abortion, healthcare coverage, the EPA, energy policy, climate change (and the permissibility of scientific evidence in deciding policy), women’s and LGBT rights, and pretty much every pertinent social and civil issue under the sun? The two sides couldn’t be further apart, and this is the crux of the battle happening now. I agree that the two are bought out by rich donors. But at the Dems aren’t owned by evangelicals and hardliners who want to roll the clock back a hundred years for half the population. Beyond unlimited campaign contributions, what “important aspects” are you referring to?

        • foljs

          >You think the Dems and Repubs are of the same mind when it comes to abortion, healthcare coverage, the EPA, energy policy, climate change (and the permissibility of scientific evidence in deciding policy), women’s and LGBT rights, and pretty much every pertinent social and civil issue under the sun?

          Yes. They both don’t give a flying duck for any of those, and just pay lip service to the respective demographics which slurp it down, because, well, there’s a sucker born every minute.

          It’s the corporations and the big private interests that determine what the future of Americans is, and both parties bow to them.

          Regarding wars, the climate, the blacks, unemployment, corporatism etc, both parties have pretty much the same track record. Obama continued and expounded on Bush’s wars, who did the same for Clinton’s wars. They all continued to expand state surveillance, continued to grow the national debt, continued to pass laws making the rich richer. And like Bush had his pals benefit from his policies and arms purchases, Obama gave 1 trillion bailout to those “too big to fail” Wall Street scum. The rich continued to get richer on both Dems and Reps watch. And then there’s the matter of blacks, which continued to be discriminated by the police and be over-represented in incarcerations, and whose police killings reached record heights under Obama, a black president. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

          At the same time, Dems and Reps find some token issue like gay marriage to rally their suckers, pro- and against-, meanwhile laughing all the way to the bank.

          • 70Cinema_Writer11

            I admit I cannot argue with a single point you just made. You’re correct. The Dems seem to be right-wing lite, white the Repubs are right-wing extreme.

          • foljs

            Yeah, it’s the same here in ole Europe too. 2 parties alternating and nothing changing.

          • 70Cinema_Writer11

            And the Dems seem to exploit the progressive aspirations of the left by pretending to subsume these aspirations under its umbrella. It’s been a snow job. Still, I would prefer a Dem in office, working to protect the ACA (as flawed as it is) and even improve it, over a bunch of saboteurs trying to wreck everything.

          • Timtim


        • Timtim


      • Timtim


  • Kamal Nandan

    Interesting podcast…I was forced to take notes…
    I am interested in learning hypnosis. Where I can I learn it? Any recommendations?
    And what are the prerequisites to learn hypnosis?

  • Nicole Wirch

    Love this podcast and guest, he has so much brilliance!

  • Sophia Kevans

    Scott Adams is right. Kudos to James Altucher for airing it. Hitler and his Reich Minister for Propaganda also come to mind as masters of mass persuasion. Watch footage of Hitler’s speeches, he uses very similar techniques to those Scott has identified in Trump. And, as per Trump’s promise to Make America Great Again, Hitler came to power on the promise to ‘make Germany great again’. Hitler was elected by Germans hoping for the restoration of the Germany economy and Germany itself to its former glory. Substitute the Versailles Treaty for the effects of globalisation on the US economy today … the hope of the German people, humiliated by the economic harshness of the Treaty for the hope of Trump supporters in the rust belt States degraded by their loss of economic means and status. The similarities between Hitler’s and Trump’s use of mass hypnosis in their rise to power, and between Hitler’s and Trump’s lies in their pursuit and wielding of power, is frightening.

    • Timtim

      More true of Hllary than Trump. Also, what have your read about socialism? HItler and Hillary are alike in their national socialst (Nazi) goals. Trump is the anti socialist. A little learning allows you discuss with reason. You are now just using insult power politics.

  • Mada Maday

    This one definitely makes you think… Just listened to some similar topics on The Art of Charm podcast.

  • Timtim

    I did not know about this podcast until I heard someone bad mouthing you for have Scott on! Yea! Scott is quite reasonable, and the leftists can’t have a discussion based on reason. Reason and discussion is the basis of the western civilization that is anathema to their tribal power goals. Socrates taught us that first, when discussing politics, define the terms. Once the terms have been defined, it is a discussion of balancing virtues, or ideas. Leftitst only want to discuss power, not ideas. They try to frame issues as good and evil. “I want XYZ. XYZ is good. You don’t agree with me, so you are evil, so let’s discuss how evil you are and if you can become good by shutting up.”