Solipsistopia

Bold = Mine

Parenthesis = Me

“There was no greater war leader and strategist than Chinese military general Sun Tzu.  His philosophy on how to be a great leader and ensure you win in work, management, and life is summed up in these 33 pieces of advice.  They can all be applied by you in your job when you go back to work next week:

A leader leads by example, not by force. 

You have to believe in yourself. 

Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak. ( TRUMP APPEARED WEAK IN PRIMARIES UNTIL IT WAS TOO LATE TO STOP HIM. HE ONCE AGAIN APPEARS WEAK AT THE START OF THE GENERAL ELECTION. HE ‘APPEARED’ STRONG IN HIS IOWA CONCESSION SPEECH. )

If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected. ( ARE TRUMP’S OPPONENTS PREPARED TO RUN AGAINST A HAITIAN-AMERICAN WOMAN WHOSE NAME IS “LOVE”? THAT MIGHT “IRRITATE” SOME PEOPLE... )

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.

Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.

If the mind is willing, the flesh could go on and on without many things.

Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win. ( TRUMP TRIED TO GET GEORGE H.W. BUSH TO PICK HIM AS VP IN 1988. UNLIKE HILLARY CLINTON, TRUMP WAITED A QUARTER CENTURY TO GO BACK TO “WAR”. )

To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.

Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. ( DONALD TRUMP + BILL CLINTON = “FRIENDS” SINCE THE 90′S )

Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can? ( HILLARY CLINTON HAS SUPPORTERS IMAGINING THAT SHE CAN MAKE SLOW, STEADY, INCREMENTAL CHANGES TO BUILD ON EXISTING LAWS AND PROGRAMS. CAN YOU IMAGINE!?!? )

Even the finest sword plunged into salt water will eventually rust.

Engage people with what they expect; it is what they are able to discern and confirms their projections. It settles them into predictable patterns of response, occupying their minds while you wait for the extraordinary moment — that which they cannot anticipate. ( MIA LOVE )

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. ( WHO KNEW TRUMP’S CAMPAIGN STRATEGY WHEN HE FIRST ENTERED THE RACE? WHO KNOWS IT NOW? )

Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory:

Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate. ( MOST OF TRUMP’S POLICY PROPOSALS ARE FORMLESS AND MYSTERIOUS. HE’S GOING TO MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. LEAVE IT TO HILLARY TO EXPLAIN HER POLICIES IN DETAIL... )

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.

There are not more than five musical notes, yet the combinations of these five give rise to more melodies than can ever be heard.There are not more than five primary colors, yet in combination they produce more hues than can ever been seen.There are not more than five cardinal tastes, yet combinations of them yield more flavors than can ever be tasted.

Opportunities multiply as they are seized.

When the enemy is relaxed, make them toil. When full, starve them. When settled, make them move. ( TRUMP APPEARS TO BE HAVING THE TIME OF HIS LIFE UPSETTING HIS ENEMIES. )

Know yourself and you will win all battles. 

Move swift as the Wind and closely-formed as the Wood. Attack like the Fire and be still as the Mountain.

Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt.

When strong, avoid them. If of high morale, depress them. Seem humble to fill them with conceit. If at ease, exhaust them. If united, separate them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.

All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near. ( HOW HIGH ARE EXPECTATIONS FOR HILLARY’S CAMPAIGN COMPARED TO TRUMP’S? HOW DOES IT COMPARE TO TRUMP’S EXPECTATIONS LAST YEAR BEFORE PRIMARY VOTING BEGAN? )

There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare. ( PARTISAN GRIDLOCK )

The greatest victory is that which requires no battle.

Treat your men as you would your own beloved sons. And they will follow you into the deepest valley.

Build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across. ( WITH “TRUMP” WRITTEN IN 40 FOOT TALL LETTERS )

All warfare is based on deception.

When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe too hard.

1 He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. ( TRUMP KNEW HIS IOWA CONCESSION SPEECH WAS A BAD TIME TO FIGHT. HE KNEW WHEN TO END HIS FEUD WITH MEGYN KELLY AND FOX NEWS. HE KNEW WHEN TO SIGN THE RNC PLEDGE TO SUPPORT THE NOMINEE... WHEN DO TRUMP’S OPPONENTS KNOW IF IT’S A BAD TIME TO FIGHT TRUMP? )

2 He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces.

3 He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks. ( WHOSE SUPPORTERS ARE MORE ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THEIR CANDIDATE? AND WHOSE SUPPORTERS ARE MORE PANICKED BY THE THOUGHT OF LOSING? )

4 He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.

Trump can’t win based on his understanding of policy. He can’t win because of humility or introspection. He can’t win on his temperament. He can’t win on an optimistic attitude. He can’t win by demonstrating his understanding of the intricacies of the legislative process...

“the establishment [is] knocking the hell out of me, and it’s really unfair… I’m not being treated the right way. I am not being treated properly.”

-Donald Trump

...he wins by making himself look like a victim...

“How do you play fair? How do you do a pro-Donald Trump joke? You can’t. At least with Bush or Clinton… it’s still within the level of acceptable corruption.”

Bold = mine

Parenthesis = me 

“Jay Leno spent 20 years at the epicenter of political comedy, but he's watching this year's historic campaign from the sidelines. And what he mostly feels is a sense of relief.

"I grew up in the era where Clinton was horny and Bush was dumb and Gore was a robot," Leno said by phone. "It was just a simpler time."

( AND “TRUMP IS MEAN”. WHAT MAKES THAT SO MUCH MORE COMPLICATED? )

Leno has hardly drifted away. He'll perform 210 live dates this year. And his CNBC series devoted to his love of cars, "Jay Leno's Garage," kicks off its second season on June 15.

Still, as host of "The Tonight Show," Leno often set the tone for political humor, and earned a reputation for being even handed.

( WHICH IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN RIGHT NOW SINCE TRUMP’S CAMPAIGN IS PREMISED ON THE IDEA THAT HE’S BEING TREATED UNFAIRLY )

"I never questioned anybody's motive," Leno said. "I just questioned their judgment."

The comic -- who left the show in 2014 -- feels differently about this year's presidential race,particularly the rhetoric being used by Republican candidate Donald Trump. Leno specifically mentioned Trump's call for President Obama to resign on the day of the Orlando shootings.

( SO... WE’RE DONE WITH EVEN ATTEMPTING TO APPEAR OBJECTIVE BECAUSE TRUMP IS MEAN? )

"How do you play fair? How do you do a pro-Donald Trump joke? You can't. At least with Bush or Clinton, you could go back and forth. But this...."

( WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? HILLARY CLINTON IS THE MOST UNPOPULAR NOMINEE IN THE HISTORY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, SHE HIDES FROM THE PRESS, AND SHE HAS A POKER-TELL LAUGH WHEN SHE’S BUYING TIME TO THINK OF A LIE...  AND YOU’RE TELLING US IT’S IMPOSSIBLE TO PLAY FAIR? )

Of the political climate, Leno said, "All this homophobic, vitriolic, anti-Muslim stuff, it's just so nasty. Talk about, 'You get the government that you deserve.' This is pretty incredible."

Leno suggested the bitter nature of partisan discourse "has a debilitating effect," adding, "When we were on 'The Tonight Show,' when times were serious, you did silly jokes. And when times were silly, you did serious jokes. What do you do here, with this Orlando thing? Even telling a joke seems wrong. I'm glad I'm out of that business right now."

( THEN THERE’S SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE BUSINESS MODEL. THIS IS ABOUT MUCH MORE THAN TRUMP. )

Leno was always courteous to guests, usually to a fault, but he said that would have been difficult with Trump.

"I'm sure I'd be polite," he said. "I couldn't see myself being overly gracious. I would try to nail him down and keep him from hitting all the stupid talking points. It's just uncomfortable to watch."

Leno said that the scandals surrounding Hillary Clinton are more in line with those that have characterized politicians in the past.

"It's still within the level of acceptable corruption," he joked. "But Trump goes beyond it."

Trump will to go to Utah after the convention to try and repair his image with non-white voters. Why Utah of all places to try and do this? Why wait until after the convention? How did the Utah state party chairman, of all people, “convince” Trump to tone done his comments?

The simple answer to all these questions is that Trump has now begun concocting his cover story; one that brings his focus towards Utah. The name conspicuously absent from the articles relating to this story: “undecided” Congresswoman Mia Love. 

If Trump selects Mia Love as his running mate, he’ll be campaigning with her in Utah shortly after the convention. And although Utah is almost 90% white, Trump choosing to begin his racial outreach there makes perfect sense. Which state poses a lower risk of Black Lives Matter protests than Utah? 

Bold = Mine

Parenthesis = Me 

“On this past Sunday, in a bit of tongue-in-cheek hyperbole, I tweeted that if our country truly wanted to ban a demographic in the name of halting mass shootings, it would be best to ban white people. After all, white people, white men to be particular, and not African-Americans or Latinos or immigrants or Muslims are responsible for the overwhelming majority of America's mass shootings.

( SO THIS IS JUST TONGUE-IN-CHEEK, CORRECT? THIS IS “IN THE NAME OF” SOLVING A PROBLEM. IT WOULDN’T ACTUALLY SOLVE THE PROBLEM. BECAUSE IF YOU DO BELIEVE THAT BANNING WHITE MEN WOULD SAVE THE MOST LIVES, THEN THAT IS NOT TONGUE-IN-CHEEK HYPERBOLE. )

What I really wanted to see, though, was whether or not the mention of such a ban would irritate the very conservatives whose candidate of choice, Donald Trump, has repeatedly called for such a ban on Muslim immigrants when the truth is that only one Muslim immigrant has ever participated in the 30 deadliest mass shootings in modern American history.

( SO YOU WEREN’T SERIOUS. YOU JUST WANTED TO IRRITATE YOUR POLITICAL OPPONENTS. I UNDERSTAND. ) 

Banning Muslim immigrants would hardly stop any mass shootings in this country. If stopping mass shootings is the goal — and banning people is how we do such a thing — then a good old ban of white men would undoubtedly be the most effective way to handle things.

( NOW YOU ARE BEING SERIOUS. YOU’RE IMPLYING THAT WHITE SKIN CORRELATES WITH MASS SHOOTINGS GLOBALLY. BECAUSE IF THAT’S NOT WHAT YOU’RE SAYING, THEN YOUR ONLY POINT APPARENTLY IS THAT AS OF 2016 MOST AMERICAN MEN ARE WHITE... )

Of course, it rattled a lot of folks. It was meant to. It was also meant to reveal the hypocrisy of just how willing one group is to get behind such a ban when they don't think it would impact them, but completely go bonkers when you suggest they be banned instead.

( HOW DID YOU IMAGINE THIS CONVERSATION WOULD GO? YOU BEGAN THIS ARTICLE BY EXPLAINING THAT YOU MADE A CONSCIOUS DECISION TO USE A TRAGEDY AS A TOOL FOR “IRRITATING” CONSERVATIVES. THEN WHAT? )

Immediately the conservative tweets and blogs starting rolling in calling me a bigot, or a racist, and saying I was outrageous for proposing such an idea. Suddenly, when it was them being banned, the idea was incomprehensible, disgusting and infuriating. For just a brief moment they experienced just a tiny bit of the reality of what it must feel like to have someone say you or loved ones should be banned. Except I'm not the Republican nominee for President.

( BECAUSE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO COULD HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN OFFENDED BY THAT ARE CONSERVATIVE TRUMP SUPPORTERS. THAT’S WHO ALL OF “THEM” ARE. THAT’S WHO “THEY” ARE. )

Banning people, any people, from this nation, is the dumbest, most bigoted, ridiculous notion ever proposed. I completely agree.

( OR YOU COULD CALL BANNING WHITE MEN “UNDOUBTEDLY THE MOST EFFECTIVE” PROFILING STRATEGY TO STOP THESE TRAGEDIES WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY CALLING IT “TONGUE-IN-CHEEK”. WHAT ELSE DO YOU WANT TO CALL YOUR “SOLUTION”? )

It's simply not how it works. We're not Nazis. Isolating a group of people because of their religion, nationality, ethnicity or sexual orientation and banning them, in the name of safety or security or anything else, is a recipe for disaster.

( BUT YOU HAVE ALREADY ISOLATED A NATIONALITY AND ETHNICITY. YOU ARE ONLY WRITING ABOUT VIOLENCE ON AMERICAN SOIL WHERE THE VAST MAJORITY OF MEN ARE WHITE. AND WHAT’S WITH THIS “IN THE NAME OF” PREFACE AGAIN? ARE ALL PROPOSED SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS JUST “IN THE NAME OF”?

However, the logic of my point remains. People calling for a ban on Muslim immigrants aren't interested in stopping mass shootings. They aren't interested in making this country safer. 

(  THEY’RE NOT AFRAID. THEY KNOW THEIR SOLUTIONS WON’T WORK. THEY’RE JUST ENGAGING IN HATEFUL... HYPERBOLE, IF YOU WILL. )

They're just bigots and bigots always need a target. Before it was Muslims or Mexicans or immigrants, the list of who angry white men despised and wanted to kill or relocate en masse has been well populated for hundreds of years.

( YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU’VE PERSUADED ME! YOU CHANGED MY MIND! ANGRY WHITE MEN SHOULD BE THE TARGET! THEY ARE ALL ASPIRING KILLERS! )

Whether we like it or not, we're are all here together and we're going to have to figure out a smarter way to peacefully co-exist.”

Bold = mine

Parenthesis = me 

“WASHINGTON — In the age of Donald Trump, Republican leaders are learning that policy and substance don’t stand a chance.

“People find it refreshing that we’re talking about this,” South Carolina Republican Sen. Tim Scott told The Huffington Post about the anti-poverty agenda he and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) recently outlined. “But the question for me is how do we get more of our message out to more people? The news is being dominated by only negative topics and subjects.”

( GREAT! LET’S USE THIS INTERVIEW WITH SENATOR SCOTT TO TALK ABOUT POVERTY )

It’s a question Scott hasn’t quite answered. Trump’s inflammatory comments provide cable news networks with eyeballs, and internet news sites with clicks, but they have made it impossible for the policy proposals of members of Congress like Ryan and Scott to reach voters.

“When Americans hear the message of hope and opportunity, I find that they’re attracted to that message,” Scott said, when asked about his agenda, adding that his anti-poverty plan is hard to push when he and his colleagues are competing with Trump’s controversy du jour.

( FANTASTIC! FOR THE FIRST TIME, MICHELLE FIELDS WILL BE WRITING A HUFF POST ARTICLE THAT ISN’T ABOUT TRUMP. LET’S FOCUS ON POVERTY! )

“Unfortunately, it doesn’t sell as many papers or get ratings,” Scott said of his poverty agenda.  

The rise of Trump “only underscore the importance of continuing the work that I’ve begun.”S.C. Sen. Tim Scott

Indeed, Trump is undoing much of the effort that Ryan and Scott have been making to reach out to minority voters.

( NO... NOOOO...)

When asked whether he thinks Trump’s candidacy has undermined their work, Scott said that Trump’s comments “only underscore the importance of continuing the work that I’ve begun.”

( WE’RE TALKING ABOUT POVERTY, RIGHT? )

Scott and Ryan have been working on creating a kinder, gentler image of the Republican Party for some time. In January, they hosted a presidential forum on poverty in South Carolina, but Trump declined an invitation.

( BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT SENATOR SCOTT WANTS TO TALK ABOUT. LET’S ASK SENATOR SCOTT WHY HE THINKS TRUMP TURNS DOWN THE INVITATION... )

Scott later teamed up with Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey tointroduce the Investing in Opportunity Act. The legislation aims to help low-income Americans climb the economic ladder by offering investors a temporary deferral of capital gains taxes if they help improve high-poverty areas. Last week, Ryan traveled to Washington’s Anacostia neighborhood to unveil a six-part policyreport titled, “A Better Way.” The 35-page plan calls for increasing work requirements for welfare recipients, focusing on private savings accounts, and giving states a larger role in distributing benefits.

( FINALLY, THERE’S SOME INFORMATION ABOUT POVERTY. LET’S KEEP IT GOING )

Scott said he tries to use every Trump question he receives as an opportunity to transition to the work that he and Ryan are doing to battle poverty.

( YEP. SO LET’S ASK SENATOR SCOTT ABOUT THE LEGISLATION)

“I spend less time trying to figure out what the impact Donald Trump has on my agenda and more time using this as a great chance to pivot,” Scott said.

But Ryan and Scott’s efforts to shift the conversation away from Trump’s daily political firestorms have been unsuccessful. 

( BECAUSE YOU WON’T LET THEM!!! )

Last week, Scott found himself having to weigh in on Trump’s comments about U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who is presiding over fraud lawsuits against Trump University.

“His comments were certainly racially toxic,” Scott told reporters. “I don’t know the intent of his heart, so I’m not going to call them racist comments, but certainly they are racially toxic.”

( WHAT ABOUT POVERTY? )

Ryan faced a similar situation last week, when he went to Southeast Washington to unveil his poverty agenda. After Ryan’s press conference, he was immediately asked about Trump’s racist comments, not his poverty plan. Ryan admitted to reporters that Trump’s racist and controversial comments “undercut” the efforts they’re making.

( ONE PARAGRAPH ON POVERTY? THAT’S IT?)

After Ryan wrapped up his answer to the questions about Trump, reporters followed up with even more questions about, you guessed it, Donald Trump.

( THAT’S YOU. YOU ARE MAKING FUN OF YOURSELF AND YOUR COLLEAGUES AND YOU DON’T EVEN REALIZE IT )

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar,rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.”

Bold = mine

Parenthesis = me

By Margaret Sullivan:

“Does Donald Trump believe in the well-established role of the press in American democracy? It certainly doesn’t look that way. In recent months, his staff has roughed up a reporter and thrown another one out of a press event, and he has insulted journalists and blasted unfavorable news coverage.

Yet he has benefited from oodles (that’s the technical term) of free exposure in the media. And he obviously craves media attention — in much the same way an addict craves his fix. Now, the latest chapter: Calling The Washington Post phony and dishonest, Trump has revoked the press credentials that allow Post reporters access to his campaign rallies.

( THEN WHY DON’T YOU REPORT ON SOMETHING ELSE AND STOP GIVING HIM THE ATTENTION HE CRAVES???? )

This gives The Post unwanted membership in a growing club of banned news organizations, including Politico, BuzzFeed, the Des Moines Register and the Huffington Post.

( YOU JUST FINISHED BLAMING THE MEDIA FOR GIVING HIM TOO MUCH ATTENTION... )

The Post’s executive editor, Martin Baron, called Trump’s action “nothing less than a repudiation of the role of a free and independent press” and pledged that his paper would keep reporting vigorously about the presumptive Republican nominee.

Why did Donald Trump revoke The Post’s media credentials?

Trump’s immediate complaint was with a Post article written off a Fox News interview, in which the candidate criticized President Obama after the Orlando massacre: “Look, we’re led by a man that either is not tough, not smart or he’s got something else in mind. . . . It’s inconceivable. There’s something going on.”

The Post reported that Trump was suggesting some tie between the president and the shooting; the article was a reasonable interpretation of what he said. An early headline was rewritten and made more restrained, not after a complaint, but at the editors’ behest.

( SO THE EDITOR WAS THE FIRST PERSON TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE ALREADY PUBLISHED HEADLINE... )

On Tuesday, I tried to ask Trump to further explain his action against The Post, to see how broadly he intended to define the ban and to ask him how he sees the role of America’s free press. His communications director, Hope Hicks, didn’t shut down the idea of such an interview, but she said she would get back to me.

( WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL HEADLINE??? )

As of deadline, I hadn’t heard from her, but I’ll keep trying to get Trump to answer these questions, sooner or later.

( ASK HIM IF HE HAS ANY OTHER MEAN THINGS TO SAY ABOUT THE POST! )

It’s worth noting that Hillary Clinton — although she hasn’t revoked any credentials or made bombastic speeches about phony coverage — has been far less accessible than Trump, giving no press conferences and very few serious interviews. None of this bodes well for press access in 2017 and beyond. I’ll be trying to ask Clinton, too, how she intends to handle journalists if elected.

( YOU BURIED THE LEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! )

That’s something that ought to matter deeply to American citizens. After all, journalists represent the public when they attend events, ask questions and dig for information. Trump, like Sarah Palin before him, may be trying to score points with his base, which considers the media infected with liberal bias.

( SO YOU’VE ALREADY FORGOTTEN ABOUT THE CLINTONS BUT YOU MUST CONTINUE TO FEED THE ATTENTION “ADDICT” AT ALL COSTS? )

Beyond the troubling big-picture questions, how much does it really hurt The Post not to have the credentials?

( THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION DEPENDS ENTIRELY ON WHAT YOU’RE PLANNING ON USING THEM FOR ) 

National political correspondent Karen Tumulty told me that’s still unclear: “The value of that little piece of paper on a string around your neck is actually pretty limited. Often, it is most useful for the opportunity to talk to people in the crowd and hear what is on their minds.”

It becomes crucial, though, she said, when a candidate takes a trip overseas, as Trump is going to do soon. And “my real question here is whether a credential is the same as access.” Will The Post be able to get its questions answered by campaign officials and Trump himself, or will it be entirely cut off?

( SO YOU CAN GO ON A VACATION WITH MR. ATTENTION ADDICT... REALLY WASHINGTON POST??? )

At BuzzFeed, politics editor Katherine Miller told me that her organization’s best reporting work to date has had nothing to do with access, or lack of access, to Trump rallies, but much more with the time-consuming tasks of diggingthrough audio recordings and following up on tips that reporter Andrew Kaczynski has been doing, far removed from public events. A lack of credentials has never “impeded our coverage or what we’re trying to do,” Miller said. “The most interesting stuff isn’t happening inside the arenas.”

( WHY AM I READING THIS? )

She’s right. And that’s always been the case. Bob Woodward recalled the early retaliation by the Nixon administration in 1972 to The Post’s Watergate reporting: A society reporter, Dorothy McCardle, was banned from White House dinners and parties. “It was absurd,” he said. But it became far less so when The Post’s broadcast licenses were challenged, which in turn caused the company’s stock price to plummet.

( THIS ARTICLE IS ABOUT YOUR REPORTER FRIENDS... )

“They hit Katharine Graham where it could hurt,” Woodward told me. “And she didn’t flinch.”

That’s a solid tradition at The Post, where Baron said Monday that Trump coverage would plow forward, “honorably, honestly, accurately, energetically, and unflinchingly.”

That matters more — a lot more — than a little piece of paper on a string.”

Trump plans to use sports-themed Republican National Convention to show “winners” and project an image of strength. 

But it’s more sinister than that; Trump will use the sports rivalry atmosphere to co-opt dissent. I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump’s acceptance speech is preceded directly by Tom Brady. 

June 7th: Trump says he wants to attend Muhammad Ali funeral:

http://www.ibtimes.com/muhammad-ali-donald-trump-reportedly-seeking-attend-memorial-service-boxing-legend-2379324?rel=rel1

June 8th: Mia Love denounces Hillary Clinton on Facebook…

https://www.facebook.com/miablove/

June 8th: …then becomes sole Republican congress-member to cosponsor legislation honoring Muhammad Ali…

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/282681-nc-dem-introduces-resolution-honoring

June 8th: ...while still publicly undecided on Trump endorsement…

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865655908/Utah-Rep-Mia-Love-for-vice-president-Washington-Post-says-possibly.html?pg=all

June 9th:  Washington Post includes Mia Love among 35 potential VP candidates for Trump:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/vice-presidential-candidate-finder/republican/

June 11th: …Trump announces plans for sports-themed convention without politicians:

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Trump-GOP-convention-athletes/2016/06/11/id/733433/

June 13th: …Trump revokes Washington Post credentials:

Now that the primary is over, does anyone expect to hear either Clinton refer to Black Lives Matter as an advocacy group for crack gang wars between black children? Trump will make things tricky for the Democratic Party if he picks a black running-mate who campaigns on this message:

"I don't know how you would characterize the gang leaders who got 13-year-old kids hopped up on crack and sent them out on the street to murder other African-American children. Maybe you thought they were good citizens — she didn't. She didn't! You are defending the people who killed the lives you say matter... Tell the truth!”

-Bill Clinton (April 2016)

Why Solipsistopia? 

The short answer is: because I’m terrified of what is happening to American public discourse. 

The long answer begins with this decision in July of 2015:

“After watching and listening to Donald Trump since he announced his candidacy for president, we have decided we won’t report on Trump’s campaign as part of The Huffington Post’s political coverage. Instead, we will cover his campaign as part of our Entertainment section. Our reason is simple: Trump’s campaign is a sideshow. We won’t take the bait. If you are interested in what The Donald has to say, you’ll find it next to our stories on the Kardashians and The Bachelorette.”

 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/a-note-about-our-coverage-of-donald-trumps-campaign_us_55a8fc9ce4b0896514d0fd66 

When I saw this, I flipped out. As my roommate can attest to, I screamed journalistic malpractice and insisted that this attitude was akin to pouring gasoline on a fire. I immediately began taking seriously his chances of winning the presidency. 

Finally, in December of 2015, Huffington Post reversed its decision:

“we will no longer be covering his campaign in Entertainment. But that’s not to say we’ll be treating it as if it were a normal campaign.

Yes, there was certainly no shortage of ugly comments from the beginning, as he kicked off his campaign with outrageous comments about Mexicans. But at first, this over-the-top xenophobia, though disgusting, played as the sour shtick of a washed-up insult comic. Now that Trump, aided by the media, has doubled down on the cruelty and know-nothingness that defined his campaign’s early days, the ‘can you believe he said that?’ novelty has curdled and congealed into something repellent and threatening — laying bare a disturbing aspect of American politics.

So we’ll not only be covering the ways Trump’s campaign is unique in recent American politics, but also the disastrous impact it continues to have on his fellow candidates — and the national conversation.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/a-note-on-trump_b_8744476.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Huffington Post spent nearly five months covering the Trump presidential campaign in their Entertainment section in order to “not” take his bait, then blamed “the media” for empowering him by failing to take him seriously.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Donald Trump is the epitome of solipsism. He is synonymous with his personality disorder (NDP). No box goes unchecked. His pathological narcissism, his all-pervasive need for attention, determines his campaign strategy which can be simplified down to, “I know you are, but what am I?” 

Reduce Donald Trump to his malignant personality disorder, (with all of his numerous cognitive errors, but also with all of his extraordinary intuitive powers for emotional manipulation and identifying weaknesses), then the power he has to smash a wrecking ball against civil public discourse and trap the Clinton campaign in a perpetually corrosive strategy should be abundantly clear (HE’S ALREADY DOING BOTH!). As journalist Matt Taibbi puts it: “In modern American politics, being the right kind of ignorant and entertainingly crazy is like having a big right hand in boxing”. 

Not only did Trump use his “big right hand” to obliterate every Republican who stepped in his way (most of the party elites) by publicly humiliating them, one by one... but now he his “left hand” to repeatedly jab Hillary, over and over, with charges she has no response to: “where are the Goldman transcripts?”, “why did you and your husband take my money all these years?”, “Why did you and your husband deregulate Wall Street?”, “Why did Obama call you a liar in 2008?”, “Why’d Obama call Libya a failure?” etc.

He doesn’t need to offer anything positive or specific, so long as he can get his opposition to join him in the mud. That may sound like the strategy of a simpleton - and to some extent it is. Donald Trump lacks a complex understanding of policy. He is woefully unqualified for the presidency. And he is a man devoid of compassion.

But Donald Trump is also a genius. He is a genius at self promotion. He’s a genius at reading people quickly and identifying their insecurities and weaknesses. He has already proven himself to have Machiavellian political mind and he has likely been scheming for the presidency ever since his failed attempt to get on the Bush ticket in 1988. He ran a successful national Republican presidential campaign practically by himself. Think about that. Trump is telling us, explicitly, that the system is rigged, and implicitly, that he figured out how to rig the system for himself. He is controlling the news cycle. That bears repeating: he is controlling the news cycle. He is dictating the Clinton campaign strategy. And Hillary Clinton knows what he is doing but appears powerless to resist his bait:

“he has been engaging in divisive and prejudiced attacks against people. I called him out last summer, for what he said about Mexican immigrants. I think I was the first to call him out for that sort of divisive rhetoric. So even though I can’t say what’s in his heart, if you say someone can’t do their job because of their heritage, that is certainly a racist attack. And it’s just plain wrong. It has no place in our politics. And as we have seen in the last week, a lot of Republicans, prominent Republicans, have rejected that and distanced themselves from it. And I think part of the reason he launched that attack using the racist language he did was to divert attention from the scam that is Trump University. Which has been called a fraudulent scheme by officials on the staff of Trump University. And then he doubled down, saying he wasn’t sure a Muslim judge could be impartial, given his support for banning all Muslims from coming to the country. You know, it’s just a reminder that he has insulted and demeaned women, POWs, Muslims, immigrants, African Americans, people with disabilities. And I just fundamentally disagree. I don’t think you build our country up by tearing people down.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-full-transcript-hillary-clinton-interview/2016/06/08/bf59e6ee-2db5-11e6-9b37-42985f6a265c_story.html

If she understands that it’s a diversionary tactic, then why is she allowing her campaign to be diverted by it? Compare her interview with the Washington Post June 8th to her interview with the New York Times published May 22nd:

“I do not want Americans and, you know, good-thinking Republicans, as well as Democrats and independents, to start to believe that this is a normal candidacy,”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/us/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-campaign.html?ref=politics&_r=3

Who believes Trump is running a normal campaign? Trump’s supporters adore him precisely because they believe he’s the opposite of a normal politician. And how can one reconcile these two fears of the Trump candidacy, expressed by Mrs. Clinton a mere two weeks apart? 

It’s actually quite easy to reconcile these statements if you view the Clintons as people whose entire lives have been spent consumed by the X’s and O’s of winning elections and accumulating power:

“I do not want Americans... to start to believe that... a normal candidacy... diverts attention from the scam”

What’s the opposite of that?

“I want Americans to see that a normal candidacy is a diversionary scam.”

And remember what the Huffington Post said?

“we will no longer be covering his campaign in Entertainment. But that’s not to say we’ll be treating it as if it were a normal campaign.”

And what’s the opposite of that?

“We will no longer be covering an abnormal campaign as an entertainment story.”

Thus, we get race-baiting from Trump, to “divert attention” from his corruption, with enthusiastic compliance from the Clintons who would evidently prefer the election be a referendum on a diversionary tactic than on corruption. Should there be any doubt why Trump has already branded her “Crooked Hillary”? 

Hillary Clinton and the Huffington Post are terrified that Donald Trump will be taken seriously and viewed as normal. But responding to Donald Trump with genuine compassion, accountability, and humility... treating him like a normal adult, refusing to acknowledge his hate-baiting... calling him a serious and normal person... GIVING HIM BEHAVIOR HE CANNOT MIRROR will cause him to crumble. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trump appears to have set up two traps, variations of “I know you are, but what am I?”:

1. “I’ve known Crooked Hillary for twenty-five years and I gotta tell ya, nobody is better at rigging elections and making deals than the Clintons. Low-Energy Jeb was supposed to lose to Crooked Hillary.”

2. “Democrats are the real sexists/racists. Obama doesn’t care about Black Lives or else they’d have jobs. They want to keep you stuck on the welfare plantation.”

That’s where his VP pick comes in. Pathological narcissists don’t believe they “need help” with anything other than the superficial. Trump doesn’t think he “needs” Chris Christie to prosecute the Clintons, or needs Newt Gingrich to work with congress or needs Marco Rubio to unite the party. All he thinks he needs is superficial contrast and an easy marketing ploy. He’s been testing this strategy out since the start with campaign spokeswoman Katrina Pierson..

Trump will contrast himself, likely with a black female running-mate, likely with someone young, likely with someone politically opportunistic enough to pounce on a chance to be ‘the only congressional Republican to honor Muhammad Ali’ while publicly playing coy about supporting Trump (so as not to spoil the surprise). Congresswoman Mia Love is the ultimate temptation for Trump, right down to her last name. How can he resist? “Trump/Love, Hillary/Hate”.

Unconsciously, Donald Trump is on a mission to prove that everyone in politics and news media is as unscrupulous as he is; that everyone is really like him. Unfortunately, there are too many “Trump-lites” among the political elite. The profession attracts people like him. Pathological narcissists like Trump cannot really know anyone other than themselves, but they can see parts of themselves in others. So as long as American politics and news media are full of narcissistic “Trump-lites”, then the Hillary Clintons and Arianna Huffingtons of the world can do nothing but fan the flames. 

Trump CANNOT be shamed. 

If the Republican National Committee does not put a stop to this, and a third party movement fails divert attention from Trump’s baiting, then we will continue to Hate-Fuck Donald Trump until he impregnates America with a new form of outrage-based Democracy.

"You must support the one and only person who can stop a lunatic from launching our nukes" = Not remotely close to what elections in democratic societies sound like

Shouldn’t we be considering that, perhaps, the modern presidency has become too much responsibility for one person to have? 

Shouldn’t we be considering the possibility that an oligarchical two party system is what has gotten us into this mess?

Metaphor for a Trump “deal” or a Clinton “reform”

Make your voice heard! Vote for Outrage! (1) (2) (3)

(1) On a piece of paper or a computer screen, after which it will presumably be counted

(2) After the election is over, presumably that’s when all those wonder things will happen