I have come to a working theory on the emergence of Bloomberg. I watched the clips of the debate last night and saw what I had expected.
Scott Adams has a concept called “The Talent Stack” in his writings, which he uses to size up people . It is blindingly simple , and I have yet to hear anyone challenge it. The more diverse skills and disciplines you acquire, the more you will succeed at what you do. If you are trained in engineering, accounting and psychology, you will do better than a person gifted in any single talent over the long run. Adams reasons it is due to the ability to use multiple mental frames to analyze your situation and find a winning path.
Bloomberg appears to be a single focus person who saw a tremendous opportunity to use computer networks and wide access to link all financial markets and succeeded incredibly well. Unfortunately for him, he stopped adding talents and was cushioned against reality by a huge amount of money he earned on his first talent. He is a narrow focused person who has not grown to add what is needed to become a leader of all the people.
Lack of adversity breeds arrogance.
His debate performance showed a very smart guy caught flatfooted by attacks he should have been prepared to answer. He hired skilled advisors, my bet is he did not listen to them.
ON the other hand, POTUS Trump has the talent stacks of builder, international deal maker, hospitality industry, New York politics in real estate development and most recently a successful reality show producer and star. His exposure to blue collar, white collar , elites and wealthy class is extensive. He is learning about entrenched bureaucrats, but seems to be surviving this schooling.
He has also had adversity after initial success, which makes you stronger.
Which one will persuade 65 million people to vote for him in November, based on talent stacks?