does not make that person a genius.

I thought I qualified my usage sufficiently. Call it what you want, he achieved something that’s nearly impossible, and he did it by playing to an audience that he was not a part of and did not know.

I have serious doubts about Trump’s mental fitness, and I have serious doubts about him having even a slightly elevated level of intelligence. I pretty much think the guy is a moron who got gifted a bunch of money — enough money that he could fail, and fail, and fail, and fail, and fail at business and still profit from his inheritance.

The term “moron” has a medical definition. He doesn’t fit that definition, and if he did, he wouldn’t have a single property.

I don’t think he has the money he claims. I don’t believe he is an astute businessman. I think he’s probably adequate at conducting honest business, above average at discovering loopholes around honest business, and smart enough to hire men much smarter than himself to handle his investments.

Probably about correct.

And I have never much liked a single politician in my entire life. I don’t need to like him. And all politicians lie: it’s the nature of the beast. But this shit? Either he doesn’t care that he’s blatantly lying about EASILY VERIFIABLE INFORMATION, or he didn’t personally care enough to personally verify the facts.

Shrugs. That sort of error is the least of my concerns about him. Obama said we had 57 states once. BFD.

I’m just saying that he didn’t win because he was a genius. He won because a woman, with an extremely questionable political background of her own, was his opposition and people are sufficiently disillusioned about the state of our nation to want ANYONE who doesn’t represent the very cause of their disillusionment.

I am unaware of any hard data that indicates that Clinton lost because of extant mysogeny in the nation, but when your margin of victory is as small as his was, anyone can point to any one of about a hundred variables and say “that’s one.” If Jill Stein didn’t exist, Clinton wins. If Clinton doesn’t say “coal is dead” in a Western PA speech, she wins. If Clinton has a penis, she wins (that said, she needed only between 1.3% and .3% in three states to flip the election, so don’t take that as agreement that there’s substantial mysogeny in the nation); If Comey doesn’t send a new letter with a week to go, she wins. If Trump sends one more nutty tweet, she wins. Again, BFD.

Fact remains that he was the most beatable candidate in post-WW2 history. Although she may have been the SECOND most beatable (although John Kerry is up there, too, along with a couple of other “winners”) since WW2.

Fact remains that he did, unquestionably, tap into something that both parties had missed for decades. It may well be that his election was not as much as that he tapped into working class pain, but that he gave the working class an opportunity to give the bird to both parties, saying “Hey, you assholes, can you hear me NOW???” But we are where we are.

And I absolutely agree about his “tentative” diagnosis. I’ve been saying this for months.

Well, narcissists produce both monsters and heroes. I am an optimist. We’ll see where this goes. If it goes to a place where we get 3.5% GDP growth again, wages rising faster than inflation, and a drop in income inequality, and he doesn’t blow the place up…..guess what? We’re the better for it.

And, if not….well, I have 60 unique stamps in my passport these last 10 years. Lots of places in the world to live.

Free markets, free minds. Question all narratives. If you think one political party is right and the other party is evil, the problem with our politics is you.

Free markets, free minds. Question all narratives. If you think one political party is right and the other party is evil, the problem with our politics is you.