I didn't think I cared who won in 2016 but when I heard that line I screamed at my t.v. in joy as if I had just watched my favorite sports team win the championship. Then when election night came and Donald Trump was taking state after state I was filled with joy. It was at that point that I realized I had a bias and that I wanted to Trump to win, or more precisely, that I wanted Hillary to LOSE.
Marcos Yudi Kimura I think he still does, but he's mentioned offhand that he lives in Rio de Janeiro several times in past videos. He did use to live in the States before, so it's not entirely wrong.
That's because he's not being partisan anymore. He's not judging based on facts, or figures. He's judging it based on Charisma... "Not a puppet! Not a puppet! You're the puppet!" That's childish, not charismatic.
How can anyone really support Hillary's immigration Policies? I haven't heard 1 person say they want what she is proposing. They just say "TRUMP IS BAD"
The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan. As soon as you sacrifice this slogan and try to be many-sided, the effect will piddle away, for the crowd can neither digest nor retain the material offered. (“Adolf Hitler: quote on propaganda”) Hitler and the Nazi Party treated the German people as if they were one entity, because individuals are rational, think for themselves, and are concerned about their own well-being; whereas groups are unintelligent and easily persuaded. Sigmund Freud stated that groups tend to have the characteristics of “weakness of intellectual ability,…lack of emotional restraint,...incapacity for moderation and delay, [and] the inclination to exceed every limit in the expression of emotion.” Freud went on to say that groups “show an unmistakable picture of a regression of mental activity to an earlier stage such as…children” (qtd. in Bosamajian 69). Hitler used this understanding of groups to strategically manipulate the German people. Hitler and the Nazis recognized that if the German people had a group mentality they would be much more receptive to Nazi ideology and propaganda. To reinforce this mindset in the German people, or Volk, the Nazis held events that required mass participation and did not invite individuality, such as “parades, mass meetings, semi-religious rituals, [and] festivals” (Boasmajian 70). Anyone who did not openly participate or share the emotion of the rest of the crowd was easily identified and dealt with by either the crowd itself or by security personnel. One did not even have to be resistant or cause a disturbance to be viewed as subversive; indifference alone was enough to infuriate the crowd
il give you one word why he wont, and i completely understand: Demonetised. RU-vid is a safe space that doesn't wanna talk about historical tragedies even though it should be encouraged...? RU-vid is weird af.
Good for you. As a white bisexual man, I don't plan to. Mainly because he's running with Mike Pence, a guy who literally made a law that lets buisnesses deny us service on the basis that we're not straight, any buisness. And Trump is 70, he's more likely to die than most Presidents entering office, and if the congress is Republican and Mike Pence is president, than I can see them acting on their party platform and restricting gay rights and trying to turn back the supreme court ruling (which is in their platform, like, their official statement on what they want to do as the party. You can read it)
Do you think that private businesses should be forced to serve all people? should a jew be forced to serve a nazi? If an employee in a business denies someone service they will most likely be fired which is fine. But I think a private business has the right to do what they want. In what way would they be forced to serve everybody?
Look its impossible to have a law that applies perfectly to every situation. You have to make assumptions and reasonable generalizations, and those cases not addressed by those generalizations can be addressed in a court of law. The correct generalization in this case, and the one that is currently in place, is on of protection of the consumer. We have a long and ongoing history of discrimination in this country, so the law is focused on preventing it. So, as long as you are selling a good X, you cannot restrict the people to whom you are selling it. On the other hand, if you are a barber store and you only do men's haircuts, you can refuse to serve a woman.
+Aron puma Ask for an apple pie at a bakery and it's highly doubtful that you'll be denied service, even if they know you're a special snowflake. And if they don't serve the *_specific product_* you want, then you can easily go somewhere else for it. Besides, the vice president doesn't have nearly as much authority as the actual president.
I think that if a buisness is owned by a member of the Klan, then they may not want black people buying their products, but one should not be restricted from an economic transaction because of their race, or their gender, or their sexuality, or such another reason of their ingrained traits, or for that matter their opinions. My great grandparents were killed in the holocaust, but I would not refuse a Nazi, not that Nazi-ism is equivolent to say being gay. Being gay, feeling attraction towards a member of the same sex, is not a choice. The actions one takes are, but the desire is not a choice. Believing in Nazi-ism is a choice one makes. It may not be a well informed choice, but it isn't something ingrained. So no, I don't think it should be the right of a private buisness owner to refuse service to a black person, or a gay person, or a white person, or a straight person, or a Democrat, or a Republican. That is a dangerous precedent to set, becuase it says that a racist has more rights than the victem of the racist thought. And in terms of Mike Pence being Vice President, I am aware of as much. I am also aware that Donald Trump is 70, and he is not popular, and quite frankly Mike Pence is more likely than Tim Caine to become President for the reason that Donald Trump is more likely to somehow die in office. This is based on statistics. A 70 year old man has less years ahead than a 67 year old woman.
being a "good" teacher is something that is intrinsic. It is more of an art than a science. In short, either you have the passion, skill and desire to teach a specific age-group or topic...or you don't. If you need to be taught on how to teach than perhaps choose another profession.
I don't think Charlie should make a video on being a good teacher, because he is not a teacher and he wouldn't have enough credibility to make a video on it. But he can maybe analyse a professor's lecture on a class or a presentation or something like that. I look forward to a video on how to be a lead tho.
There both not great but in my opinion if Trump became president he would be a much more truthful president unlike clinton who has hundreds of secrets.
+Jeremy Hunt I don't understand how any democrat wants that to happen. Everyone should just stop bashing Trump only because mainstream media wants you to and focus on whats really important. Every Hillary supporter ignores the fact that she is willing to go to war. You dont have to vote for Trump. Just don't vote for Hillary if war is something you want to avoid.
You said something about marketing in the beginning. I think that I, along with many others, would really really enjoy some videos on marketing psychology.
She did seem robotic when she talked about "the women she talked to" about pregnancy issues. Also you have to understand that Charlie doesn't know about Trump's hyperdimensional 6D Chess game.
The biggest slam-dunk moment in the debates was at the end of the 2nd debate, each candidate was asked to say something positive about his opponent.. Hillary complimented Trump's children but then just went on to talk about herself. And Trump, on the other hand, just said Hillary was a fighter & he respected that. That was a very powerful moment.
Hey Charlie, If you look at the difference between the different lighting used on the candidates. Hillary was more favourably lit where as Donald seems washed out by the lighting and the glare and his resultant squinting makes him seemed strained. While this is a little off topic, it does change the basic body language of the two candidates in the way that they look at the cameras and resultant audience
trump supporters will grasp on everything to get him some points....ffs the light was off? they probably put him in the part of the stage were the air was low on oxygen and thats why he was so stupid!
Andrei Alexandru This isn't about my supporting Trump, or not, I noticed it myself, having working in Theater and Gallery lighting. It was confirmed by others in the industry. Regardless of who you support, (personally I think Vermin Supreme is a fine choice) you must admit that the mainstream media bias against Trump and for Clinton is overwhelming and seriously brings into question the efficacy of mainstream news reporting. This observation is not as someone who is a Trump partisan, but someone who is an outside observer and shaking his head at the out an out lies, misdirection and misreporting of the US mainstream media. Look at leanerreport.com. There is a good breakdown of who backs whom.
You're a brilliant analyst but I thought Trump made his point quite well concerning the inner city break down and the Democrat's inability to turn it around.
I was worried there would be some political bias in these videos, but I think you did a nice job highlighting purely charisma of performance, and I'm glad you made the disclaimer multiple times about it's disconnect from who's actually better. I think it was a pretty good break down of just the charisma angle, which you are right, actually probably sways more people than the facts themselves.
I appreciate your analysis on the debates. It's intriguing to hear about the concepts of credibility and emotional connection in making speeches, and I appreciate your objectivity on the subject. Objectivity is sadly lacking in politics these days.
Hey Charlie, I'd love if you did a video about how to speak more charismatically and how to engage people with your voice. Specifically, things like tonality, pitch, volume, etc. It seems that more engaging speakers (MLK, Obama, Kennedy, etc.) are very dynamic in their vocal skills, and people with similar skills in normal life tend to be more charismatic. I think an analysis of this would be incredibly useful.
I think you did a great job breaking down the debates. For me, I focus on the content and listen to every word. Trump just goes round and round and his statements heard or written on paper look unintelligible. He really needs to study up and focus on completing a thought before jumping into the next topic. Overall, I really like this channel. Keep it up!
I love your videos. Could you do charisma breakdowns of animated characters? That would be really fun and insightful. You could do Hopper or Flik from "A Bug's Life," Emmet from "The Lego Movie" or all of the emotions from "Inside Out." Sort of how their conversation perfectly reflected Riley's thought patterns.
i think the overall feeling was that Trump clearly won the last 2 debates.... but thats just me. people will remember the 1 liners more than overall composure. idk that is just me
Great analyses, Charlie! All three videos were revealing and mind-opening for me. (As well as so many prior videos from your channel. I keep on watching and rewatching them.) Awesome job!
Excited to watch an unbiased review! Do you have any videos about Meyers Briggs tests, and do you know what you are? You've got great people reading skills. Just curious!
Second debate was 3 on 1. Hillary kinda seems to contrived, that's my opinion and that's of course the opinion of many other people as well. Everyone says Donald won the debate. He won the debate on facts. Hillary seems to look like any other politician, and that's why many people won't vote for her. Of course, these very same people maybe won't be voting Trump either, but Trump in my personal opinion sounded much more confident, and he certainly won Hillary on facts. Hillary is a well known liar. I don't believe her. And the comeback "because you'd be in jail" is just epic. Look at Wikileaks, look at Project Veritas, the whole mainstream media is against Trump and for Hillary, they oversample the polls in order to make Hillary win. Watch some Trump rallies, every and each one of it is simply epic, so much energy, so much genuine love and appreciation and Hillary Clinton seems to look so contrived, robot-like and unnatural.
I agree that the media supports Hillary but I think they have insight the average public don't have. Also, Russia was for Trump, which we all know made a huge difference in the elections. He's confident in a lot of issues he never actually studied.
once more you analised it amazingly, well done! that's why I'd be highly interested in a breakdown like you mentioned @2:20 + anyhow, keep up the great work.
It seems to me that a common thing holding people back from going to going out and socializing, going to higher education, trying to get jobs and stuff like that is thinking "What am I going to say when they ask about what I do for a living," "What I am going to say when they ask what are my hobbies when I don't do anything." I was thinking this kind of psychological problem is something you're in unique position to do something about. Maybe you could do a video about addressing that kind of stuff.
An aspect I think you may have missed, in determining who won the debate from a charisma perspective, is "Which one of the two did you wake yourself up to watch and listen to" as you'd find yourself dozing off so as not to miss anything interesting. Which one was the most captivating?
Actually watching this makes me appreciate just how objective this channel is. For those who doesn't know the uploader of this video actually betted 2000 dollars on Trump winning the presidency, with a video titled "why trump will win presidency" and in it lauding trump's effective talking strategies, and here he is talking about how Hillary won the debate. Just show he is actually analyzing the debates in a very objective, non-biased way for the sake of analyzing whom is doing better. to the uploader: keep up the good work, it is by far one of the most informative channel. I study science so these personal thing is very interesting to me as I don't run across them often.
Really very well done. New to your channel, and if this is my first taste, then I'm in for an enjoyable experience. Also, so relieved Trump won over her.
If you watched this. They pressed trump but just took clintons answer and no interruption. Also to note: she got the questions before hand with all debates. More time to prep.
I don't know if Charlie reads youtube comments, but I think a video about using statistics and facts to back arguments would be really interesting and informative.
Dude I don't know why your videos attract so many Hardcore Trumpettes, but I'm genuinely glad for your analysis on charisma that isn't biased or based on any policies at all. Its just so nice to see genuine, non-political content nowadays. (And how its ruined by a political comments section... Ugh)
Great analysis. Hillary did all the right things. She is not an extrovert and doesn't have natural charisma like her husband and Trump but she showed that preparation can make a difference.
+Hubert cumberdale It's not about that. We *KNOW* Clinton is fake. Everything she says, and does is all scripted to cover up the terrible person she really is. Say what you will of Trump, love him or hate him - He comes across as more genuine and real. What cascadehopsrule is suggesting is that, because Clinton is fake, it thereby invalidates whatever charisma qualities are being expressed, thus rendering her null and invalid. It's one thing to be Charismatic and deceive people, but it's hard to let that pass when everyone knows you're a corrupt liar who is only able to run for president because the whole damn system is corrupt.
Bllazing - "He comes across as being more genuine and real" Hah! "Nobody respects women as much as I" Trump is a walking contradiction that is ready to sell you anything as anything to get your vote. But ya, as long as you're strictly talking about compared to Hillary you could be considered right, but not by much.
Trump insults and speaks his mind about everyone, regardless of gender. It's the same concept as with police brutality against African-Americans. The media only focuses on violence or insults against minorities. The issue with Hillary Clinton and most liberals is that they discriminate against the majority. Trump treats women the same as he treats men, he treats African-Americans the same way he treats whites, and he treats LGBTQ people the same as he treats those who are straight. It's honestly a shame that the media bias and propaganda gets to so many people.
There's a battle rapper named dizaster who is really good at being intimidating. Could you make a video about how to be intimidating and analyze Dizaster's battles against Gjonaj but also against Math Hoffa, where he is the smaller person but still somehow maintains that feeling?
He isn't racist dumb fuck. He said that the guy who shot trayvon was innocent... Which according to a judge HE WAS. He is a bad person how? Because he supported a rape victim? You're an idiot who didn't read past headlines.
Hey Charlie, I love your videos- I myself am a rather shy person, so it's helpful to have such a great resource like your RU-vid channel. One social thing I struggle with a lot is dancing. At parties and school dances I get way too nervous to dance at all, and then if I stop dancing, I get embarrassed at how awkward and boring I look. Do you have a video that could help people like me overcome this anxiety? If not, could you make one? Thanks -Paul
I've really enjoyed your vid on group dynamics. could you do another, maybe more focused on how to make group dynamics work without blocking each other. It's a very odd topic, I know, but I think it's a problem we've all faced :)
Trump won the moment he announced he was running for President. No one is going to willingly vote for more corruption, more war, more debt, and more lies. The media is an extension of the Clinton campaign - they did a very good job at creating a narrative, but it won't matter. By November 8th, the people will decide for themselves. It happened in 1980 with Reagan, and it happened in 1945 with Truman. The side the media/establishment picks always loses because people are smart enough to realize when they are being manipulated.
***** obiously you're a paid troll. You believe whatever the hell you want to believe, I have faith in knowing the American people are smart enough to not be fooled. Clinton is the embodiment of corruption, evil and deception. This is common sense. People may be ignorant, but they are not stupid. We all have common sense to know right from wrong.
Great Video :D I am getting better at thinking the way you think! In the debates i casually was like "that's gonna be mentioned on Charisma on demand" lol
