This morning, John Harwood had a tweet about Trump’s response to the Democratic convention:
I had an original response, which was something along the lines of that in that case, I wondered who it was that came out of the Fog machine to introduce Melania.
As is my wont, I have reflected a bit further, anhave decided this response of Trump is very telling.
First, if there is a problem, it is never his fault — think of the bankruptcies.
Second, he lies regularly. After all, he appeared in some fashion all four days at the RNC.
Third, all along he was bragging — incuding in tweets, abouthow wonderfuHIS convetion was going to be.
Fourth, besides his wife, allof his kids maderemarks at theconvetion.
Fifth, many others who were speaking were doing so because (a) Trump couldn’t get anyone better, and (b) because of personal connections to him (winery manager) or his kids (VP of son’s foundation).
Sixth, he PERSONALLY invited Scott Baio to speak, after encountering him at an event while the convention was going on.
Seventh, when he thought the convention had gone over well, we saw his braggadocio, about having gotten the biggest bounce ever (not true).
Eighth, he has regular told us he would hire “the best people”
So let’s step back for a moment and reflect.
During the 2008 campaign, Barack Obama told people if they wanted to know what kind of presidency he would have, they should watch how he ran his campaign. One can say that starting with the convention in Denver,he demonstrated how competent and at times inspiring his presidency would be.
By that standard,Donald Trump has already demonstrated how dysfunctional would be the presidency that than Heavens he will never lead.
But that should not surprise us. After all, it is ever more apparent that his supposed success as a businessman is as much of a chimera as his campaign has been. Even his involvement with “reality” television can upon reflection be seen more accurately not as a success, but as an escape from the reality. And certainly we now know that “his” book The Art of the Deal demonstrates how much of an illusion the public representation of Donald Trump has been, as made clear by the remarks of the actual author of the book.
I have not in the pundit commentary so far seen one key point made. Yes, many, across the political spectrum, have commented on how wonderfully organized and effective the Democratic convention was, especially as in comparison to what occurred in Cleveland the week before.
What those pundits need to note, and say loudly, is this:
The difference between the two conventions demonstrates the difference between the nominees of the two parties. One totally lacks substance, can resort only to self-promotion (based largely on falsities), relies on fear, and is totally disorganized. That is the convention of The Donald.
And the other demonstrated a life of commitment that was inspired and inspiring to many others, that was as organized with an attention to details (think signage) that is illustrative of all that Clinton has done throughout her career, even when she was not in view of cameras.
One had trouble bringing his party together, because he does not understand that the political process is designed to require compromise. The other demonstrated how to bring all but the most intransigent together in celebration, to join in a common purpose, well aware of the nature of the political process both within the party and on the broader stage of a general electorate.
It is not just the quality of the speeches were so much more in depth at the Democratic Convention. And thing of the quality: can you name ANY speech that approached those of Michelle Obama, Joe Biden, Cory Booker, Bill Clinton (which may have been one of the weakest), General John Allen, Tim Kaine, Barack Obama, Rev. William Barber, Khizr Khan, Chelsea Clinton, … and yes, the candidate herself.
It was the quality, the focus, the organization, the star power of well-known figure, the inspiration given by ordinary people.
It was that the Democratic convention inspired, while the Republican convention???
I will let you offer your own answer to that question.
Donald Trump did far more than just show up for the final speech. He gave Americans a real window into who and what he is — superficial and shallow, without real compassion and sympathy, self-aggrandizing and boasting, and most of all, dysfunctional and incompetent, lacking in some of the most basic concerns about the rest of humanity.
He is dishonest, although since between what ever more clearly seems to be an example of narcissistic personality order and the lack of conscience in the public sphere of a sociopath, I have little doubt that he could pass any mechanical test of his truthfulness, such as a polygraph.
And he certainly lacks sufficient transparency for Americans to be willing to trust him. After all, those who have dealt with him in business now avoid business transactions, which is why he has to go to a foreign bank and to people like the oligarchs around Vladimir Putin.
He won’t like it, but the press and the public should constantly harp on one thing, every time he takes questions, or appears in public:
Where are the tax returns?
This election is not about Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, although those are the only real choices of candidates.
This election is about what kind of country we are going to be, one that can heal, or one that is willing to devolve into our own kind of 21st Century dystopia.
If you have any doubt, all you need to do is compare the two conventions, day by day, speech by speech, even before you get to the comparison of the speeches made by the two candidates.
For some, it may be enough to vote AGAINST Donald Trump. That will help keep the nation safe.
But it is Donald Trump who wants to drive us by fear.
I would argue that Hillary Clinton wants to challenge us to come together for common purpose.
Which is in itself a very strong reason to vote FOR Hillary Clinton.
Remembering that it is not just competence, which she has and he lacks.
It is not just appropriate experience, which she has and he lacks.
It is not just understanding, which she has and he lacks.
It is about all of us together, which she demonstrates affirmatively and he contradicts with his egotism and focus on self.
Make of this what you will.