A brilliant, polished, excellent advert — cuts like a sabre to the only point that matters.
h/t to the great Scott Adams, who says:
1. Trump delivers his lines perfectly, like an experienced actor. We haven’t heard him like this before. You probably didn’t think he had this in him. He stays calm and assured, but not cocky. That is an effective counter-framing to Clinton’s framing of Trump as an unpredictable madman. Here Trump comes off as perfectly reasonable and deeply empathetic.
2. The timing is perfect. This race went so low that even the trolls were starting to gasp for oxygen. Trump made us wait for relief – Hollywood style. He made us crave civility and sanity. And just when we thought it was out of reach, he goes ultra-positive.
But here’s the best part. Clinton has no good options to counter this message.
Countering that, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange says Trump won’t be allowed to win:
My analysis is that Trump would not be permitted to win. Why do I say that? Because he has had every establishment off his side. Trump does not have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment. Banks, intelligence, arms companies, foreign money, etc. are all united behind Hillary Clinton. And the media as well. Media owners, and the journalists themselves.
UPDATE: Out of context, Assange’s reads like a wild conspiracy and I don’t believe the election outcome is predetermined. But his point about the establishment is valid — Trump battles the mainstream media (only 6 newspapers endorse him, the lowest ever), both political party machines (see the Republicans against Trump), and Wall Street which has donated 30 times as much to Clinton as it has to Trump. The big-money end of town is with her: Billionaires are backing Hillary at a ratio of 20 to 1. We know some vote-rigging occurs (and has been documented in previous elections) — but we don’t know how much. We do know that the Democrats don’t want to do anything to stop it. At the highest levels Clinton supporters brag about cheating on as many votes as they can.
On Trump’s side apparently are FBI agents who are fed up with corruption, the PayPal founder, Immigration And Customs Enforcement Officers (ICE) Make First-Ever Presidential Endorsement and a lot of very small donors.
The establishment players have trillions of dollars staked on the election, and 3 decades of schmoozing. Trump threatens all that. Can the people beat the corruption?
UPDATE: To the NeverTrumpers from a Sympathizer, by Paul Rahe.
Think about what else we have now — a press corps that colludes with a campaign, allowing figures in the Clinton campaign to edit what they publish. Television reporters who send the questions apt to be asked at the presidential debates to one campaign. A media that is totally in the tank for one party, downplaying or suppressing news that might make trouble for that party, inventing false stories about the candidates nominated by the other party, managing the news, manipulating the public, promoting in the party not favored the nomination of a clown, protecting the utterly corrupt nominee of the other party from scrutiny.
Let’s add to this the fact that the Democratic Party is intent on opening our borders and on signing up illegal aliens to vote. If you do not believe me, read what Wikileaks has revealed about the intentions of Tony Podesta. Barack Obama promised to “fundamentally change America.” He called his administration “The New Foundation.” Well, all that you have to do to achieve this is to alter the population.
To this, I can add something else. Freedom of speech is under attack. Forty-four Senators, all of them Democrats, voted not long ago for an amendment to the Constitution that would hem in the First Amendment. Ostensibly aimed at corporate speech, this would open the doors to the regulation of all speech. The Democratic members of the Federal Election Commission have pressed for regulating the internet — for treating blogposts as political contributions and restricting them. Members of the Civil Rights Commission have argued that freedom of speech and religious freedom must give way to social justice.