How to Solve the "Politics Problem" At LinkedIn and Other Social Sites

by Dr. Ellen Brandt

This brief story is a slightly updated version of a post I made in the comments stream of Jeff Weiner's article, "My Thoughts On the Election," at LinkedIn's Pulse.


Weiner, the CEO of LinkedIn, wrote about the need for "healing" after the 2016 Election results, which, it seems, were a major surprise to the management and employee base at LinkedIn. Their reactions, says Weiner, "ran from shock and sadness to grief and mourning."


Democrats and others who voted for Hillary Clinton may empathize with such reactions. The vast majority of Republicans and others who voted for Donald Trump will not. But that wasn't the point of my comment on Weiner's post, which got many thousands of reader views and elicited hundreds of comments.


Weiner prefaced his post by saying he didn't often write about politics at LinkedIn or elsewhere. And many of the competing comments in the stream following his story continued a (mostly faux) debate we've all seen in such comments streams whenever an overt political story appears at LinkedIn or other social media sites.


I say that such debates are mostly faux, not only because so many comments-stream participants are Chatbots, rather than Humans, but also because there is now a very fine line between which kinds of articles are political and which are not.

I'm going to expand on this point in a follow-up story, which I'll try to post within the next couple of days.


But my comment on Jeff Weiner's article presented something else: my take on how LinkedIn and other social sites can satisfy both readers who love political posts and want to read them and those who say they do not.


Beyond this, I made a further observation and suggestion on how LinkedIn can effect a key bit of "healing" within Pulse itself, by making the facility more inclusive and reaching a large and important constituency of readers who feel left out.


Here, then, is my comment:


Jeff, since we Republicans and you Democrats remain gulfs apart on the Election and its aftermath, I am not going to comment on the political content of your post.


But as a very early initiator at LinkedIn, a Group manager, and an avid user of the site, I want to make two suggestions that I think would be eagerly approved of and embraced by LinkedIn users in the United States.


First of all, since there appear to be some users who don't want political posts in their Pulse feeds, how about seriously considering establishing some political channels among your existing channels?


There could be just one Politics Channel, which those (many) of us who like political stories could subscribe to. Or you could, in addition, establish separate LinkedIn channels for Democrats and Republicans. I think this would greatly increase, not decrease, viewing stats at LinkedIn Pulse and make everybody happy.


Second, many of us who are either members of your generation, Gen-X - now late 30s to early 50s - or my Generation, Baby Boomers - now 50s and 60s - are unhappy that there are now separate Pulse channels for Millennials and even High-school students, but no separate channels for Gen-Xers, Boomers, or the possibly substantial number of LinkedIn users who are older than Boomers.


We think this leads to a skewing of content at Pulse and its "Stories You Can't Miss" facility towards articles by, about, and for younger LinkedIn users versus mature LinkedIn users.


It just doesn't make sense to many of us. We all, don't we, want the site to be as INclusive as possible, appealing to as many constituencies as possible?


So if you are going to maintain separate channels for Millennials and High-Schoolers, please do establish similar channels for Gen-Xers, Boomers, and possibly Older-than-Boomers, too.


Thanks so much for reading this. Ellen Brandt


*********************************************


Those are my suggestions, and I welcome reactions from fellow LinkedIn users - and eventually, cross fingers, from LinkedIn management.


*********************************************

Quick Take - Adorable and Certainly Not Deplorable

by Dr. Ellen Brandt

 
Just three months old and cute as a button, little Donald Trump Otiendo of Kenya is being hailed all over Africa as the world's first "Trump baby."

 

The tiny tot's parents, Lorna and Felix, belong to the Luo people, an ethnic group that often favors naming newborns after world leaders. The Otiendos were prescient enough to pick the U.S. election's winner back in August - which makes them far better prognosticators than, say, Larry Sabato.

Proud papa Felix Otiendo told Kenya's The Nation newspaper that he hoped the baby would grow up to emulate Trump's values and personality.

"I love people who speak the Truth without any fears," Mr. Otiendo declared. "Most politicians are not sincere."

**********************************************

#partyofyes #ellenbrandt #quicktake #GOP #Republicans #politics #donaldtrump #donaldtrumpotiendo #otiendobaby #kenya #babies #election2016

Quick Take - Hey, We're Adorable

 
by Dr. Ellen Brandt


A last quick suggestion about what I'd advise Candidate Trump to do immediately in this last two weeks of his campaign:


Print up as many T-shirts, caps, scarves, and anything else you can manufacture cheaply and fast - i.e. within the next 24-48 hours - with the prominent message Adorable Deplorable.


These items are not to be sold.

They are to be given away en masse to millions of people throughout the country, but particularly in Swing States, where the voting is likely to be close.


Encourage everyone possible to wear the Adorable Deplorable message shirts and caps and urge them to wear them everywhere, in the hope of starting political discussions in unlikely places: the grocery store, a restaurant, a gas station, or anywhere else people congregate.


Make sure to make a substantial number of the shirts in large sizes, since many who will eagerly accept them will be members of the GOP Loyalist Base over age 50 - fully 1/2 of expected voters this cycle - and people tend to be slightly heavier as they age.

 
Publicize the giveaways both nationally and locally and get as much press and word-of-mouth coverage as you can.


Have campaign staffers wear these shirts and caps, and wear them yourself. You might want to manufacture them primarily in red, white, and blue, already the primary colors of the Make America Great Again shirts and caps.


If there are enough staff and funds to spare, you could also try to stage some Adorable Deplorable contests and events leading up to the election: Most Adorable Deplorable Baby/Family Pet/Grandmother/Trump-friendly celebrity.

 
The overall message should be: The Other Party and its Candidate proclaims its Elite, Know-It-All, Better-Than-You-Are stance . . . . . Fine! We will turn that stance on its head, by demonstrating we're the Party of Yes, the Party that welcomes everybody, the Party of the hard-working, modest, humane, and decent American Woman and Man and Child.


You think we're Deplorable, Hillary. We know we're Adorable. And we are ready to show it.


**********************************************

Quick Take - Something Wonderful

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


For some time, I've been thinking about what might make a quickly viral, super-terrific and super-positive Trump Campaign Video that Team Trump could post on YouTube and other streaming sites throughout the world - not just the U.S. - Internet.


It's funny; it's relevant; it's sophisticated; and it's that old-fashioned word, charming.


I would put it together myself, but I am not an animator. Those who do put it together should be JibJab-style and JibJab-caliber animators. One would think there might be a few of those somehow attached to the Trump campaign team.


If you like this idea, with just two weeks until the Election, please get it to friends at the core of the campaign as soon as you can. Several core campaign people are part of my LinkedIn network, so maybe one or more of them will also see this and utilize it quickly.


Here goes:


I propose an animated video using the absolutely perfect-for-Donald-Trump-and-entourage lyrics of the song Something Wonderful from The King and I, the Rodgers and Hammerstein classic musical, which first appeared on Broadway in 1951 and was later made into a superb 1956 film from 20th Century-Fox.


The first line will be "sung" - or more likely, dubbed over - by an animated figure with the face of Melania Trump, adding more and more people in the Trump entourage on each subsequent line of the song.


Here are suggestions with whom to add when as the song progresses. I think you'll see why I'm so keen on this idea - and why I believe it would go mega-viral very fast.


(Melania Trump)

This is a man who thinks with his heart, his heart is not always wise


(Add Trump children)

This is a man who stumbles and falls, but this is a man who tries


(Add Trump children's spouses and Trump grandchildren, plus Mike Pence and family)

This is a man you'll forgive and forgive and help and protect, as long as you live


(Add Kellyanne Conway and a few more key campaign aides) 

He will not always say, what you would have him say


(Add several more well-known Trump spokespeople, like Lynne Patton and Scottie Hughes)

But now and then he'll say, something wonderful


(Add half-dozen political bigwigs who often speak for campaign, like Newt Gingrich, Rudy Guiliani, and Jeff Sessions)

The thoughtless things he'll do, will hurt and worry you


(Add several former primary opponents now supporting, like Mike Huckabee and Ben Carson)

Then all at once he'll do, something wonderful


(Add Reince Priebus and key Congressional members supporting Trump, as many as you wish)

 He has a thousand dreams that won't come true


(Add TV and talk radio personalities supporting, like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh)

 
You know that he believes in them, and that's enough for you


(Add Hollywood and Nashville stars and other Celebs supporting Trump, like . . . . whomever you choose)

 
And so you'll go along, defend him when he's wrong


(Add some humor, by putting in some on-the-side-of-the-angels historical figures - Mahatma Gandhi? Mother Teresa? Nelson Mandela? Albert Einstein?

 
And tell him, when he's strong, he is wonderful


(Add in, over last two lines of song, 100 or 200 or 500 typical supporters, all ethnic groups, ages, hairstyles, wearing Trump hats and T-shirts)

 
He'll always need your love, and so he'll get your love


The man who needs your love can be wonderful (crescendo!)



Seriously, isn't that perfect for this campaign? Well, I think so.


*********************************************

Quick Take - The Knockout Ad

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


If I were advising Team Trump, I would suggest that within the next 24 hours or so, they get their top political advertising gurus to put together a truly memorable Knockout Ad to run everywhere possible the last two weeks of the campaign.


This is the kind of ad I'd run:


Smiling Barack Obama. Smiling Hillary Clinton. Flashing word UTOPIA fading immediately to flashing word DYSTOPIA.

Smiling Obama, Clinton, Soros, Blankfein, Dimon, Buffett, Bezos, Zuckerberg, DiCaprio, Michael Moore, others in the Wall Street, Tech, and Hollywood Thug-Elite.


Word scroll of their words: Jobs, Stock Market, Economy, Luxury, Skills Gap, Immigrants, Open Borders, NAFTA, Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Fade to Pictures of Closed Factories, Closed Retail Establishments. Main Street Ghost Towns. Foreclosed Homes. Foreclosed Farms.


Word scroll of our words: 95 million Americans unemployed or underemployed. Up to 50 million Americans over age 50, all occupations, all races, all religions, all educational levels have lost their life's savings, their jobs, their businesses, their hope . . . . The end of the Middle Class? The end of a kinder, gentler, more humane Nation? The end of the American Dream?  
      

Quick flash pictures. Riots. Bread lines. Hoovervilles. Dust Bowl. Crime scenes. Finish with an older middle-aged woman - someone Caucasian, 55 or 60, no older - graying hair, beautiful but anguished face, recognizably mimicking Edvard Munch's The Scream.

Word scroll: When the Status Quo means DYSTOPIA, we need to vote for CHANGE.


Vote Change. Vote Republican. Vote Trump-Pence. And make America Great Again.


**********************************************

 

The Gain Control Series - Caricature Assassination

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


The Gain Control series offers our two cents worth of advice to Candidate Trump, telling him how we - GOP Base Loyalists - might like him to respond, in debates and otherwise, to specific kinds of attacks by Hillary Clinton.


With the three Great Debates concluded, we offer this last piece in the series, focusing on continued Clintonista attempts to deflect voter attention from issues that are important - plus Clinton's own many scandalous failings - by playing the sleazy, slimy "card" of Trump's alleged unwanted advances towards women.


The Clintonistas are furiously attempting to demonstrate that this ersatz issue defines Candidate Trump's basic Character, a fuzzy term at best, but one that resonates with the electorate, especially if they're not paying close attention to those issues that are actually important, like growth, jobs, immigration, security, and Globalism's many ills.


In these final weeks of this historical campaign, here's how we'd like Donald Trump to respond to these Caricatures of Character attacks, talking tough initially (but only in the tiniest of soundbites), then taking the loftiest possible High Road, in contrast to Team Clinton's delight in gutter - or is it cesspool? - politics.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (On Alleged Sexual Misconduct): Aren't we all - all Americans - getting sick and tired of tabloid politics, politics kicked into the Gutter? I know I am. And I know our supporters are.


What is most difficult for me - someone admittedly new to national politics - to understand is how Secretary Clinton, in the political arena for 40 years, can be so sanguine, so self-satisfied, about piling these Dirty Trick allegations on me, when so many similar allegations have been laid at the door of both her and her family for what is now four decades.


Bill Clinton, of course, was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice by the House of Representatives, with his impeachment linked to his real - as opposed to our imaginary - sexual misconduct. And now there are numerous allegations about Bill Clinton's fathering an illegitimate son - significantly, a half-black son - whom he refuses to acknowledge with pride as his offspring.


As for Hillary Clinton, she has been accused of pretty much everything under the sun, except, perhaps, cannibalism and bestiality - although there are probably tabloid articles somewhere or other which says those are among her sins, too.


But there have been more substantial - if still unproven - allegations of her own serial adultery, both heterosexual and homosexual, as well as reports that she has abused alcohol at times, to the point of harming her health.


There have even been suggestions that her overzealous aides or close supporters have been implicated in dozens of mysterious deaths, from the well-publicized suicide of Whitewater lawyer Vincent Foster to the very recent unsolved murder of young DNC staffer Seth Conrad Rich.


In other words - and we will say this just once and forever hold our peace - if the Trump Campaign wished to climb into the gutter with Hillary Clinton, there would be plenty of sleaze and slime that could be made to coat her own political persona.


But we choose not to. We choose, despite such extraordinary provocation, despite Clinton campaign tactics that might be common in a corrupt Failed State somewhere, but are not only uncommon, but unheard of in our own great Nation - despite all this, we choose to take the proverbial High Road.


Hillary may bully. But we will not retaliate in kind.


We will turn the other cheek.


We will acknowledge that the Clintonistas, many of whom are not People of Faith, may very well "know not what they do."


And we will Pray for Them. 

 
 
**********************************************



 

The Gain Control Series - Miscellaneous Mayhem

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


This series offers our two cents worth of advice to Candidate Trump, telling him how we - GOP Base Loyalists - might like him to respond, in debates and otherwise, to specific kinds of attacks by Hillary Clinton.


The series now proceeds to a grab bag of attacks which were made in the First Debate, dropped in the Second Debate, possibly because of the Town Hall format, but which could emerge again towards the end of the campaign.


As Republicans, many of us think these particular points of attack are inconsequential, certainly not matters of national import which deserve a place in a Clean Campaign. But they've become part of the grease and grime of the Clintonistas' Dirty Campaign and, as such, must be taken care of in a calm and efficient manner - if possible conveying the message that, "We Republicans are better than this and would love to get back to real issues. But since Secretary Clinton continues to fling mud, here's how we wash it all off."


We here outline brief suggested responses to five such Miscellaneous Mudslingings: the Birther issue, contractor lawsuits, bankruptcy allegations, the family foundation and its miscalculations, and the charge that - horror of horrors! - some Trump companies have lost money.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (On the Birther issue): My distinguished Opponent, as we all know, also utilized this particular issue during her 2008 campaign for the Democratic nomination.


At that time, many questions had been raised which had not been thoroughly investigated. Some Republicans and some non-Republicans think that still more investigation needs to be made. But we no longer believe this is true - nor, I hasten to add, does Secretary Clinton. So we are both on the same side of this issue now. Case closed.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (On Contractor Lawsuits): To be frank, this entire line of attack seems so irrelevant, it continues to baffle both me and Republicans in general.


Business people operate in the worlds that surround their industries and their particular sectors of those industries. In order to be successful, you need to become a respected part of your industry. I believe I have been greatly respected - in fact, admired - within my industry, as were my father before me and my children today.


Bringing up class action disputes from 30 or 40 - or even 50! - years ago in a purely political attempt to "prove" anything whatsoever seems the height of folly.


Has my particular industry made mistakes in the past? Of course, it has, as all industries have. Have any of my principal or subsidiary companies participated in such mistaken actions? Again, of course, we have. Industries and companies, like individual human beings, make errors, correct those errors, and continue to improve and to grow.


All business people understand this. And I would hope Secretary Clinton, despite her dearth of business experience, might be able to grasp these concepts, as well.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (On Bankruptcy Allegations): In my almost 50 very successful years in business, I've launched approximately (GIVE NUMBER) new principal and subsidiary companies, creating thousands upon thousands of new jobs.


Of that number, which most would consider impressive, only (GIVE NUMBER) companies, all subsidiary companies, have run into difficulty and taken advantage of the business protection and income protection statutes which almost all large companies - and many medium-sized or small companies - take advantage of, if a pressing need presents itself.


This manufactured political issue is analogous to the manufactured taxation issues we've discussed before. Any and every truly successful businessman or businesswoman is going to hire the best lawyers and accountants and advisors, who in turn are going to assist her or him in utilizing existing laws and existing legislation in the ways that benefit his or her companies the most.

Secretary Clinton seems to be accusing me, in essence, of choosing to make beneficial business decisions, under the letter of the law, rather than bad business decisions, that she would somehow approve of more readily.


This is Through-the-Looking-Glass fuzzy thinking on her part. And what it proves, once again, is that her own business prowess and judgment are questionable - not mine.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (On His Family Foundation and Its Miscalculations): Most Republicans - and by this time, one would hope most Americans - realize that any mudslinging against our relatively small, domestically-oriented Family Foundation is a blatant attempt to deflect the myriad scandals - which many think may skirt the borders of High Treason - at the Clinton Foundation, a large, extremely influential, and internationally important - in the very worst sense! - institution.


Our Trump Foundation is a true domestically-based "family office" kind of entity, akin to all the very comparable family philanthropic foundations you see funding public television or museums or the national parks - all of which we also contribute to.


And if we have made some paperwork mistakes in our funding - that's what they amount to - we are extremely sorry and have now made amends, financial and otherwise, to any complaining entities involved.


How can one possibly compare this to the vampire squid which is the Clinton Foundation? It seems to have its hands out to every government or corporation or political group in the world that thinks it needs government access at the highest levels in the United States. And in most cases, the Clinton Foundation has been happy to deliver that access on what most believe is a "pay for play" basis.


The Clinton Foundation is a global morass of pure corruption, according to many who have studied its complicated and Machiavellian operations. It is, of course, the "family foundation" everyone should be focusing on now - and my distinguished Opponent fully understands this.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (On the Charge Some Trump Companies Have Lost Money): On this charge that - horror of horrors! - some of my business ventures have lost money over the course of my 50 years as an entrepreneur and business leader: Hillary, you are absolutely right!


The hallmark of a successful and creative entrepreneur is taking chances, taking risks, in order to make wonderful things happen. They have to be calculated risks and risks you can afford to make, of course. I think the very fact that our core business of real estate has been able to expand and grow and create jobs and help the various states and cities into which we've expanded proves that the majority of the risks we've taken have panned out.


If Secretary Clinton doesn't understand what business is like, what entrepreneurship is like, what creative risk-taking is like - well, once again, that is par for the course for someone whose entire career has been spent inside a cocoon of protection and privilege and being "anointed" by the wolves of Wall Street and the Thug-Elite of the Globalist Agenda.

It all returns to what we've been talking about since the beginning of our campaign: Is America satisfied with the status quo? Or are we finally ready to take some risks - Yes, some entrepreneurial risks! - to get this country moving again?



**********************************************

The Gain Control Series - When Hillary Road Runner Beeps, Donald E. Coyote Has to Stay Calm

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


The Gain Control series offers our two cents worth of advice to Candidate Trump, telling him how we - GOP Base Loyalists - might like him to respond, in debates and otherwise, to specific kinds of attacks by Hillary Clinton.


Democratic operatives - and Hillary Clinton herself - love to use what we think of as the Road Runner Strategy: Coming back over and over again to certain kinds of familiar points of attack - Beep Beep! Beep Beep! - in the hope that Candidate Trump will, in Wile E. Coyote fashion, lose his cool, bluster his way into ineffectual responses, and be blown up again by the Clintonista Acme Corporation.

 
Just say No! Donald. You're a Republican, not a Coyote. Throw the dynamite back in Clinton's face by staying calm, cool, and collected and giving (100 percent accurate) responses that both illuminate the real issues involved and adhere to the philosphies and viewpoints of the majority of Republicans.

We give you suggested answers to three very typical Road Runner attacks - on so-called Gay Rights, Americans of Latino ancestry, and Clinton's collection of endorsements from "former GOP officials."


Trump Channeling Our Advice (on so-called Gay Rights, Gay Marriage, and Unisex Bathrooms): Although these are contentious issues, we Republicans are happy to talk about them in a way that will unite Americans, not try to divide us, as the Democrats are apt to do.


First of all, as we have said before, we believe there are only two kinds of Rights anyone should be focusing on: Human Rights, which all Human Beings share, and American Rights, which all American citizens share.


Talking about any other supposed kinds of Rights is simply a blatant attempt to divide Americans, rather than to unite all of us to work towards common goals. No American's Rights should be abridged nor denied because of irrelevant categorizations, whether we are talking about gender, age, ethnicity, religion, sexual preference, or any other personal characteristic or trait.


As for both the Gay Marriage and the Unisex Bathroom issues, most Republicans' uneasiness or objections, I firmly believe, have to do with jurisdictional issues, not anything else. 


We tend to think it is absolutely horrid when a President and his administration go all-out to usurp powers that have been in the hands of States and local jurisdictions since our nation's founding and arbitrarily hand those powers over to the Federal government.


Most Republicans want this rapid trend towards Centralization of powers that were formerly Decentralized to cease and desist. Many in the GOP therefore thought the Supreme Court decision taking marriage law away from States and localities and placing it into the hands of the Federal government was both wrong and dangerous and should be reversed. The Supreme Court does sometimes make what the general population feels are errors. And when that happens, efforts may be made to reverse those errors.


The issue of Unisex Bathrooms and Locker Rooms is a bit more complicated. But again, let me explain how most Republicans tend to feel.


First, this is another States versus Federal government issue, in which an arbitrary decree from the Federal government seeks to take away rights which have historically been in the hands of the States. Many State administrations and legislatures are very upset about this, as are many American citizens.  


An additional issue, of course, is whether any human being can actually change his or her sex and become transgender, up to the time when scientists have figured out a way to alter people's basic DNA.


Many people, within the GOP and otherwise, think the entire concept of gender reassignment is pure political correctness, invented as an artificial conflict which does not belong in the political arena at all.


Again, if all Humans possess basic Human Rights, and all Americans possess basic American Rights, by all means, individuals can dress the way they please, alter their appearance any way they please, or utilize plastic surgery or hormone therapy to make them look or feel the way they want to look or feel.


But whether all of this actually changes one's basic gender - well, many still disagree. And most Republicans tend to think it is a matter for philosophers and theologians to argue and decide upon and not the place of government to take one side or the other - let alone legislate this issue in any way, shape, or form.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (on the Latinos-Are-Upset-At-Your-Proposals Canard): The majority of Republicans - me included - are getting really very tired of this "Latinos Hate You" theme, which has pretty much no connection to the Truth, either in terms of Republicans in general or of my campaign in particular.


First, let me tell you that many people, whether with some Latino ancestry or not, seriously question the way polltakers and Democrats define the terms "Latino" or the more narrow term "Hispanic" for purposes of their polls and the propaganda arising from those polls.


Many think there is now, in today's America, about as much sense talking about "Latino" voters as a bloc as there is talking about "Caucasian" voters as a bloc, which we don't do.


And, in fact, we greatly dislike talking about "Black" voters as one homogeneous bloc, either - and at some point, both the pollsters and the political propagandists should do something about that, as well.


But back to Latinos. Americans with ancestry from the "Latin" nations, whether in Europe or in the so-called New World, are every bit as diverse a population as those traditionally called "Caucasian."


In fact, the vast majority of Latinos are Caucasian or mostly Caucasian, although some have African ancestry, others have Native American ancestry . . . What does it really matter? Once you are an American citizen, you are part of the American mix - period - and shouldn't be sliced and diced and divided into ethnic groups and subgroups for purposes of polling or political propaganda.


We might also mention that in the Western and Southwestern States - which tend to be GOP country, by and large - an exceptionally large proportion of our citizens can claim some or a lot of Latino ancestry - and are very proud of it - just as they can claim some or a lot of Native American ancestry - and are very proud of it.


In fact, the oldest families in many of the Western States were Latinos who populated those States long prior to their becoming States and, in some cases, many decades prior to the landing of the Mayflower or the settling of the American East coast. They are, in those terms, the most aristocratic citizens - the ones with the oldest and proudest lineage - of any Americans, other than Native Americans.


A second point: Which Party, one has to ask, had the most prospective Presidential candidates with a Latino link of some kind this past primary season? 


I think we all know the answer to that. Candidates Rubio and Cruz are themselves Latino. Candidate Bush has a lovely Latino wife. And many other GOP candidates - Rick Perry, Carly Fiorina, Chris Christie, George Pataki - as well as myself - come from States with large Latino populations, which we are proud of, as all Americans should be.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (on Clinton's braggadocio about Endorsements-From-Ex-GOP-Officials): Well, Gee, endorsements are always nice, and we've gotten some very surprising ones ourselves. For instance - Here the Candidate should list 7 or 8 endorsements he is proud of from unusual sources, particularly those which are Democrats or generally allied with Democrats, like labor unions or Black groups.


Yes, all these endorsements are hunky-dory, but I don't think either I or Secretary Clinton should really focus on them much or brag about them very much.


Because we don't want potential voters - do we? - to make up their minds about whom to vote for or not vote for based on what some well-known individual or media personality or newspaper editor or Hollywood actor says or doesn't say or thinks or doesn't think.


I mean, really, Hillary, we don't want our American voters acting like sheep who can't make up their own minds and need some outside force to do it for them, now do we?


At least, we Republicans don't. We're proud to be the Party of intelligent and sophisticated and well-informed voters, who are perfectly capable of thinking for themselves. We're just not "politically correct," after all. Based on Secretary Clinton's way of thinking, we're Adorable Deplorables. And darn proud of it!


**********************************************

 

Quick Take - Poll-Axed

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


At this stage of the Presidential election, Polls - in fact, warring Polls - seem to be taking on exaggerated importance, used as a form of Psy-War to encourage or discourage potential voters from showing up on the Big Day.


But this time, as in the U.K.'s Brexit vote, virtually all the Polls may be off-balance and off-base - even the relatively honest ones.


That's because this is an election where the Populist vote is so central to the outcome, both nationally and in individual swing States. And guess what? Populists refuse to be polled.

That's especially true with the two major Populist constituencies which are leaning Republican - or at least anti-Democrat - this cycle.


The first group - leaning Republican - is the fully 1/2 of potential voters who are Gray voters age 50 and over.


I know Grays because - like both major candidates - I am one. And we Grays tend to be reluctant to participate in political polls. That's because:


***** We're security-conscious, and we want our privacy respected. We tend to screen our calls, and if we see you're a pollster, we'll probably treat you the same way we treat telemarketers - less than enthusiastically.


***** If we're GOP-leaning, we almost certainly detest a large part of the Mainstream Media right now, as clearly biased in favor of The Other Side. Why in the world would we agree to talk with CNN, NBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Gallup, or Reuters? Most of us wouldn't.


***** Many Grays find polling procedures suspect in the extreme. If we've ever taken a previous poll, we're more likely than not to have been upset by the process. Many polling employees seem to be very young and poorly informed, and they read from a script like robots. The questions asked seem geared to eliciting certain answers and certain answers only, with no wiggle room for extended or unexpected responses.


*****"Populist" and "Individualist" are compatible character traits. "Populist" and "Naive" or "Compliant" are not. If those who are the angriest and the most passionate about this year's political choices refuse to be good little poll subjects, while the Meek and the Unaware are happy to be polled, you're going to get badly skewed results, no matter how scientific you think your protocol is.


Again, this is exactly what happened in the pre-Brexit polls. Overwhelmingly, Brexit supporters were Gray citizens over age 50 - in the U.K., as here, about 1/2 of the potential electorate. And a lot of them obviously did not care to be polled. All they cared to do was vote.


There's a second group of Populists in the 2016 election, who may not be GOP-leaning, but are clearly anti-Clinton.


These are the "Bernie Sanders voters," who are of all ages and from greatly differing backgrounds. Many of them tend to be somewhat in sync with either or both of the Third Party candidates, Johnson and Stein, although some will vote for the Democrat or the Republican.


If Gray Voters over age 50 are security-conscious, privacy-conscious, wary of the Media, and just not particularly pro-polling, the Sanders Cadre - as well as other Libertarians and Greens - tend to be all of these things to the Nth degree.


Would Mr. Robot talk to a pollster? Would the Person of Interest people-of-interest? For that matter, would Rand Paul?


Of course, if this cycle's Presidential polls are as far off the mark as those gauging Brexit, the entire art or science or scientific art of political polling may have to get a major facelift.


In 2020, they may decide to use tea leaves or tree rings - or perhaps depend on Punxsutawney Phil.

 

**********************************************

Quick Take - Their Pabulum Or Our Truth?

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


Some will not like this particular Quick Take. But at this point in this swamp - this morass - of a filthy dirty campaign, I am stating things that not only need to be said, but also need to be imbibed and absorbed and calcified into the basic core and the basic truth of the Republican Party and its existence for the next 20 years or more.


The most basic truth of all is that we cannot play using the Other Side's playbook and win.

We cannot. We should not. And I sincerely hope we will wake up and decide that we will not.


This basic truth was exhibited in what I consider stark outlines a couple of days ago on one of the biggest so-called Republican Groups at LinkedIn.


I say "so-called" Republican Groups, because some of the GOP Groups on social media, including those purporting to support the Trump campaign, have been badly infiltrated by Botnets allied with MoveOn.Creeps and other "hacktivist" collectives.


The Chatbots they sponsor join our Groups in order to post nonsense - some of it outright seditious nonsense - that they want to be linked to and with the GOP. Or they're there to spew Pabulum much more appropriate to Democratic Party Groups, in the hope we'll be diverted from the real issues and initiatives we need to embrace and instead mouth the "Puppies and Rainbows and Executive Positions for Syrian Refugees" rhetoric of the Clintonistas.


I got a bit testy when a young woman (or young-woman-Bot?) purporting to be a "Republican volunteer" from a key swing state posted extreme Disney-inspired Pabulum about how we need to elect Donald Trump "for the good of future generations of American children," without reference to the realities of this election nor where this country is right now.


This is how I responded to her (name changed to protect the silly):


Debbie, an "Our Children" strategy is the Other Side's strategy, not ours.


This is the 1980 election - Reagan versus Carter - all over again.


Then, my Baby Boomer generation tried to take over the country from older Americans via very similar bombastic propaganda and scandal-mongering - only, of course, not as extreme as this time around, since we Boomers were not in cahoots with Those- Who-Control-the-Media, nor the Markets, nor the Business Community in general.


Now, in 2016, most of my fellow Baby Boomers - people only in our 50s and 60s and the major victims of every bit of "politically correct" behavior the Limousine Liberal Thug-Elite has come up with - want very badly to be able to vote against that Thug-Elite and for the GOP, which at this point is in every way the real "Outsider" Party, no longer in control of almost all the American institutions that count.


I believe all of those older than Boomers - i.e. everybody over age 70 - want to vote with us, too, as do many Gen-Xers, who have begun to turn 50 and have therefore hit the Limousine Liberals' Age Maginot Line, where one ceases to be a valuable and viable American worker - according to the Globalist Agenda of Clinton and Obama and Wall Street and Silicon Valley - and for that reason, ceases to have a Voice which is heard, in the Official Mainstream Media or anywhere else.


What is so different now - different both from 1980 and from every election cycle up until this one - is that we Voiceless Grays - people age 50 and over - are going to be fully 1/2 of all voters this time around and more than 1/2 of all women voters. And it is rather difficult simply to "disappear" 1/2 of the American electorate - although the Clinton forces are trying very, very hard to do so.


Again, the Gray Half of the 2016 electorate wants desperately to vote Republican. But many of us - I am talking generically, not about myself, since I'm an extreme GOP Loyalist - will simply stay home in protest, if the Trump campaign does not ditch its Neocons - especially the most visible ones - and start to embrace fully an anti-Wall Street, anti-Globalist, strongly Populist stance and agenda, with people over 50 at the center, not the periphery, of the campaign.


That was the kind of campaign that won in the U.K.'s Brexit Vote. It's what is beginning to topple Angela Merkel, Globalist Extraordinaire, in Germany. It's the kind of campaign that is prevailing throughout the Developed World - and ironically, almost satirically, for the Globalists, the spread of (Gray Citizen) Populism will also benefit the Developing World, where Globalist policies and the Globalist agenda have caused nothing but suffering and sorrow and turmoil for the World's Poor, whom Globalist propaganda said would be their agenda's main beneficiaries.


In the United States, the Clintonistas and their ilk have gifted us with a Dystopian society - at least for those of us in the 99 percent - us Peons, us Undesirables, us Deplorables.


Trump and his Team need to begin to grasp this fully and to demonstrate once and for all that he is on Our side, not just sponsoring a change of control from the Neo-Liberals to the Neo-Conservatives.


Populists know there is no difference whatsoever between Neo-Conservatives and the One Percenters supposedly on the Democrats' Side. In fact, the NeoCons may be even worse, since they are so transparently insincere and corrupt and, frankly, smarmy.


Every Republican leader and activist should come out as a Populist and an anti-Globalist now - since it is Our people, Our constituencies, and Our communities which have suffered the most from the Globalist agenda.


That Hillary Clinton is receiving - what is it now? 95 percent? 98 percent? of all contributions from Wall Street and from Silicon Valley and from Media conglomerates really says it all.


It demonstrates absolutely and conclusively which Party represents the Fat Cats and which Party represents the Great Unwashed - us Adorable Deplorables, who want to embrace the GOP.


**********************************************

I thought the above was a lovely and persuasive and empassioned plea. But Debbie didn't think so! Here is how she answered me:

"I was one-year-old in 1980. And I read a few months ago that once I reach 38, I'm older than most of the other people still alive. Almost there. I will speak of my children, thank you. Donald Trump will be our next President, and I hope to see you at the inauguration. Let's win this election."

In other words, Pabulum heaped on Pabulum, sprinkled with Fairy Dust, with a side order of Cotton Candy.

I made one last stab at injecting some reality:

Keep up with ClintonSpeak, Debbie, and we will lose in a landslide.

To focus on just one key issue this cycle, Demographics are what's really dictating immigration policy now - both here and throughout the Developed World, plus China, which has a Demographic profile almost identical to that of the United States.

Without more and more future immigration - mostly of the extremely Young - America's Gray Voters over age 50 will be - in an absolute sense - 1/2 of the U.S. electorate in 2016, in 2020, in 2024, and in 2028.

And since we tend to vote in much higher percentages than do the Young or the various other constituencies the Clintonistas rely on - Felons For Hillary! - we are the real Swing Voters, the real Determinant Voters, in this cycle and at least the next three cycles.

You deny that, Debbie - you deny us Grays - you literally hand this election to the Democrats.

More than in any other cycle since 1980, this cycle is based on Realpolitik, not on idealistic politics.

The Democrats helped make it about Realpolitik. And we have to throw that back in their evil little faces.

**********************************************

 


 

Quick Take - Bombshell!

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


It's the Bombshell everyone in the GOP has been waiting for - but for some strange reason, we haven't taken the ball and run with it. Have we been fast asleep?


The Bombshell appeared quietly a few days ago in one of a group of 2,000 or so E-mails leaked by Wikileaks and confirmed to be part of the hidden E-mail accounts of John Podesta.


In a series of E-mails detailing what we already knew - that the Clintonistas treated Bernie Sanders and his campaign shamefully, utilizing every Dirty Trick in the Democrats' Playbook of Filth - there appears an exchange between Podesta and his former deputy, Brent Budowsky.


The two seem to admit clearly, cogently, and overtly that the Clintonistas and their captive buddies in both print and broadcast media were working tirelessly to try to assure a Trump victory throughout the GOP primaries.


They come right out and say that the Clinton Team needs Donald Trump to be the candidate against Hillary Clinton, because they fear that everybody and anybody else in the Republican field - that means any of the other 16 GOP candidates - would be capable of beating Clinton, so detested was she by all and sundry.


To Podesta's and Budowsky's minds, only Trump could be made to inspire more detestation than Clinton. This, in turn, almost certainly means that Candidate Trump is 100 percent right when he claims that "opposition analysis" on him prior to the official opening of the campaign was already in place - possibly years ago - with a full roster of political Dirt, Grease, and Grime all ready to be slung at him, including the tawdry accusations being made right now.


What can one say about all this, except that it is horrible beyond belief and confirms that Clinton and the "Friends of Hill and Bill" are a demonic lot, so demonic that they need to be rooted out of our politics once and for all?


But that the GOP in general and the Trump campaign in particular haven't jumped on these E-mail revelations and utilized them to the hilt proves that we Republicans are mired in Despondent Mode, tuckered out from the constant Media battering and uncertain how to proceed.


Buck up, Republicans! This Bombshell is one that can and will resonate with voters throughout the 99 Percent, including crossover Democrats, who are sick and tired of a world - political and otherwise - transformed into a massively rigged Interactive Game - a LARP, if you will - in which everything is strategized artificially and humans turned into Pawns fit only to be manipulated.


And if Team Trump hesitates using this Bombshell, because they think it makes the Candidate himself look like a Pawn in the Clintonistas' grimy hands, our response is:


Great! Then it puts Trump on the level of all the rest of us "Deplorables," an Army of Pawns, angry enough to topple Queen Clinton and her Knights, Rooks, and Bishops.


********************************************








 
 

The Gain Control Series - Divided We Stand, Thanks to the Democrats

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


The Gain Control series offers our two cents worth of advice to Candidate Trump, telling him how we - GOP Base Loyalists - might like him to respond, in debates and otherwise, to specific kinds of attacks by Hillary Clinton.


A Clinton attack that needs to be shredded to bits: Which Party is Divisive? And which Party truly seeks to Unite?


We'd like Candidate Trump to object strongly and turn the tables on Candidate Clinton every time she says that he and the GOP are "divisive," a new buzzword for the Democrats and their lackeys in the Media.


The vast majority of Republicans believe that the Democrats have turned the very concept of "divisiveness" into something of a fine art, gleefully setting groups of Americans against one another in one great big National Fight Club, while mouthing the "politically correct" pabulum that No, it's those Evil Republicans causing the basic dissension.


Here's how we'd like Trump to counterattack:


Trump Channeling Our Advice (Who's the Divisionary?): One thing all Republicans and many others are angry about these days is Democrats' characterization of the GOP - and of me - as acting in a "divisive" manner, when the hard truth is that it is Clinton and the Democrats who have literally relished pitting one group of Americans against another, in what sometimes seem like political dogfights, designed to divide us, rather than unite us, and to stress our differences, rather than what we all have in common as patriotic Americans.


At the heart of this, we believe, is the gross misuse of the term "Rights," which Clinton and friends have somehow semantically morphed into an excuse for various interest groups to fight for domination over other interest groups, rather than fighting together as Americans for a better country and a better world.


We believe there are only two basic kinds of "Rights" that Americans should be concerned about: Human rights, which all human beings on this planet share. And American rights, which all American citizens share.


We believe there are no separate "men's rights" versus "women's rights." No "white rights" versus "black rights" versus "Native American rights." No different set of "rights," depending on whether one's ancestry is Polish or Ugandan or Jamaican or Colombian or Korean or whether one's religion is Christian or Muslim or Hindu or Jewish or Agnostic.


Clinton and the Democrats delight in goading various constituencies into feeling they have chips on their shoulders, which can only be removed by viciously attacking and somehow getting the better of other constituent groups.


The GOP knows better.


Republicans know that, as GOP icon Abraham Lincoln so wisely told us, "a house divided against itself cannot stand."


Lincoln made that speech at the Statehouse in Springfield, Illinois, when he was running for the Senate in 1858. But his words resonate strongly today, especially for us Republicans, who understand that the fastest way to destroy this country is by pitting some Americans against other Americans against still other Americans, rather than seeking the ways we can work together to make all Americans safe and secure and free from want.


That is our vision of Making America Great Again. And we can.


**********************************************  

The Gain Control Series - Fat Cat? You're That!

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


The Gain Control series offers our two cents worth of advice to Candidate Trump, telling him how we - GOP Base Loyalists - might like him to respond, in debates and otherwise, to specific kinds of attacks by Hillary Clinton.


Next Up: Which is the Party of the (Very, Very) Rich?


At the Second Debate, Trump allowed Clinton to get away with calling Republicans the "Party of the Rich," not just once, but several times. That is simply inaccurate at this point in our nation's history. And it is important to this election and to the GOP's success that the truth about its being inaccurate should be proclaimed loudly and clearly and consistently to the American electorate, particularly by our Presidential candidate.


We understand how hard this is for Donald Trump, a man whose entire psychic identity, as it were, is tied up - tied up in knots! - with being wealthy and relishing being wealthy and being known, especially by the Media, for being wealthy.


Well, Donald, you can either hold on to that stance, or you can try to salvage this campaign.


Relinquishing your safety-blanket identity as a "Man Who is Rich" and boldly embracing a new identity as a "Man Of the People," who shares the anguish and the near-desperation of the 99 Percent of Americans who are not only not Rich, but at this point, are mostly pretty darn Poor, is the brave and the moral and the - Yes, reinvigorating! - stance that can turn this campaign around right here, right now, this very day.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (Rich Party, Poor Party): Every time my Opponent enters the Dreamworld of Political Correctness and calls the Republican Party the "Party of the Rich," both I and my supporters viscerally cringe.


Sorry, Hillary. Sorry, Democrats. That Myth is now the Myth-of-all-Myths, something based on conditions that may have been mildly accurate 60 years ago, when Dwight Eisenhower was President, there was thought to be something called a "Military-Industrial Complex," and Republicans were supposedly going to dances at posh country clubs, smoking cigars, and drinking martinis.


Even then, the Myth of the Fat Cat Republican was almost completely false. But today, it is not only false. It is the exact opposite of our current political and economic reality.


Because, Secretary Clinton, every single academic and economic study - every one - from universities, from think tanks, from government agencies, and from independent researchers shows that in 2016, the Party of the Rich is overwhelmingly the Democratic Party - or more specifically, the NeoLiberal, obscenely wealthy Fat Cats on Wall Street and in Silicon Valley, about 90 percent of whom pledge their allegiance - and offer their big bucks - to the Democratic Party and its Globalist Agenda - an Agenda that sees ordinary Americans as "Deplorables," practically another species from the so-called Thug-Elite, of which Hillary Clinton is a charter member.


In short, the Democratic Party is now the Party of the One Percent. The GOP is the Party of Everybody Else - and we are proud to say so.



********************************************

The Gain Control Series - Higher Education On Higher Ground

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


The Gain Control series offers our two cents worth of advice to Candidate Trump, telling him how we - GOP Base Loyalists - might like him to respond, in debates and otherwise, to specific kinds of attacks by Hillary Clinton.


Next topic: Fixing our universities and colleges.


Clinton says our institutions of higher education should be virtually free for qualified students who can't afford them, with a greatly expanded community college system (possibly to train all those new immigrants coming in through her secret plan for "absolutely open borders") and near-blanket forgiveness of existing student loans.


Republicans, she implies, are skinflints and ogres, refusing to back these wonderful freebies.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (on Higher Education): Secretary Clinton is welcome to dream of rainbows, sprites, and unicorns.


Being more practical - and sensible - most Republicans understand that warm and fuzzy as they sound, plans for all these higher education freebies would send our already out-of-control deficit soaring into the stratosphere, where even much higher tax rates for everyone on everything wouldn't help close the gap.


The Republican Party's most urgent concerns about higher education are quite a bit different from my Opponent's.


We are troubled that our once vibrant and exciting communities of scholars and researchers have become virtual dead pools of political correctness, where not only freedom of research, but freedom of speech and freedom of thought are actively discouraged.


This sad state, prevailing throughout much of academia, has come about quickly but thoroughly - and we all can guess why it's happened.


Recent studies have shown that more than 90 percent - in some cases, 95 percent - of the administrators and professors and instructors at our top universities and colleges admit they are strong supporters of the Democratic Party and of the Globalist Agenda, as pushed ceaselessly by Hillary and Bill Clinton, George Soros, and the Limousine Liberals on Wall Street and within the Mainstream Media.


This is simply not a normal state of affairs - and we add that we would feel exactly the same way, if 90 percent or more of our administrators and professors and instructors were staunch Republicans - or Vegans - or Druids - or Whirling Dervishes.


You simply cannot have a vibrant, exciting, open and welcoming community of scholars and researchers and teachers and students, if everyone is forced to be on the same page politically and philosophically and culturally.


But that's what we do have at many of our traditionally highest-ranked schools today. Faculty and staff seem to be screened, not for merit and talent, but for meekness and how closely they toe the Globalist line. Meanwhile, students are indoctrinated with crazy ideas about "safe spaces," where anyone who dares disagree with Big Brother in any way, shape, or form, cannot intrude on their protected little playpens.


Yes, indeed, Hillary - maybe such colleges should be free, since they don't seem to prepare kids for real life, outside of Never-Neverland.


********************************************  

The Gain Control Series - The Other Half Of the Widows-and-Orphans Equation

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


This series offers our two cents worth of advice to Candidate Trump, telling him how we - GOP Base Loyalists - might like him to respond, in debates and otherwise, to specific kinds of attacks by Hillary Clinton.


A new Clinton theme in the second debate: She's the super-champion of poor, defenseless little children, having sponsored or co-sponsored numerous bills supporting them when she was a Senator. And Trump hasn't (sponsored bills), so he isn't (a children's champion).


One obvious response to this - although it takes some initial research - is relating how many bills Clinton actually had a lead role in writing and getting passed and what percentage she merely signed her name to as one of numerous co-sponsors.


But what we'd like Trump to counter with is the other half of the Widows-and-Orphans equation, the essential-to-protect group of Americans who haven't been adequately protected for years: "Gray" Americans over age 50, the Age Peers and Experience Peers of both Trump and Clinton.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (on Widows-and-Orphans Braggadocio): Clearly, we all care about America's children, and we've outlined a number of ideas, in line with the thinking of most Republicans, on what reforms are needed in our early childhood education system, which many feel has deteriorated badly because of Democrats' protection of powerful teachers' unions against the best interests of children and their parents.


But I'd like to talk a bit about the other half of the Widows-and-Orphans equation, that very important core American value of protecting those most economically and socially vulnerable, sheltering them from the vicissitudes of rough spots in our economy - which we are certainly experiencing right now.


The other half of that equation is the pressing need for the continued well-being, financial and otherwise, of the now more than 43 percent of American citizens - or more than 2 in 5 of us - who are age 50 and over, a group which, by the way, includes both Secretary Clinton and myself.


These are Americans who are well-educated, highly-skilled, and highly-experienced, Americans who, up until this period of economic stagnation and virtually no growth, brought to you by the Obama Administration, were mostly comfortable and proud members of the great American Middle Class - a Middle Class which is fast disappearing.


These proud and patriotic and worthy Americans have been the true victims of the economic catastrophes the Limousine Liberals have almost casually - certainly carelessly - embraced over the past three decades.


This litany of catastrophes is downright frightening: Outsourcing, downsizing, financial engineering, the decimation of middle managers and production workers alike, the hollowing out of our resources and manufacturing sectors, the lack of support for small business and dying Main Streets, perpetual housing crises and market crashes, and the flood of immigration which has favored the interests of young and inexperienced workers over well-educated and skilled workers who've suffered the great - supposedly unforgivable - misfortune of having their hair turn gray.


As Mike Pence and I travel this great land, we hear the most heartbreaking stories each and every day: wonderful, creative, superbly skilled and educated men and women left adrift, almost without hope, because of the Limousine Liberals' Globalization Agenda, which seems to state that once you pass the Age Maginot Line of 50 - we hear it's been moved down to 40 in Silicon Valley - you are over-the-hill and useless to this nation, while illegal immigrants are coddled and courted and given all sorts of help we now fail to give unemployed and underemployed people over 50 - people just like you and me, Hillary, our own Age Peers or those just a few years older, now turning into an Army of the Desperate, while a Democratic Administration twiddles its thumbs.


**********************************************

The Gain Control Series - Ticked Off By Taxes

by Dr. Ellen Brandt


This series offers our two cents worth of advice to Candidate Trump, telling him how we - GOP Base Loyalists - might like him to respond, in debates and otherwise, to specific kinds of attacks by Hillary Clinton.


Next up, Taxes - Trump's and everybody's.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (on His Taxes): I think this is really very simple, and I admit I didn't explain myself well the last time my Opponent went on the warpath about this issue.


I have been lucky to be able to afford the very best accountants and advisors and tax lawyers in the world, both for me and for my company. Like any good little client, I don't tell them - as highly skilled and experienced and brilliant as they are - what to do about these matters.


They tell me what to do. I say Yes, because I like them and I trust them absolutely. They've done a great job for me, so why would I have a stake in interfering? I am sure that Hillary Clinton and her wealthy and savvy family members and her wealthy and savvy friends do exactly the same. They follow their accountants and advisors and lawyers, do what they tell you to do, and sign on the dotted line.


Nobody on this earth - not even the sainted Mother Teresa nor Nelson Mandela if they were alive - is going to go against the advice of his or her accountants and lawyers and say, "No, I'm not paying enough in taxes. Do something, so I can pay much more."


And in terms of what to release to whom and when and where, again, I follow the advice of my accountants and advisors and lawyers and continue to do what they believe is in the best interests of my family and my company. That should be my very last word on this subject. If my Opponent wants to harp on it anymore, she's going to have to debate herself, because I'm not going there with her.


Trump Channeling Our Advice (on Everybody's Taxes): Now let's discuss this Tax-Breaks-for-the-Rich business, which has been a Democratic Party theme since possibly the time of the dinosaurs.


First of all, Yes, the GOP as a Party has been in general in favor of lower tax rates - not just for the Rich, but for Everybody, every American, because tax cuts tend to be highly stimulative. And if there is anything this low-growth, stagnant economy the Obama Administration is handing over to the next president needs, it is immediate stimulative action to get our economy moving in the right direction again - and fast!


One of the Democrats' own absolute icons, John F. Kennedy, understood how a stagnant economy needs tax cuts as a stimulative measure, and I had understood that Secretary Clinton was a great admirer of Kennedy and his policies.


Tax cuts - stimulative. More taxes - the opposite of stimulative and generally bad for Everybody. The Rich, the Poor, the struggling masses yearning to breathe free - Everybody!


And a second point I would like to make, which Secretary Clinton, as a former legislator, should certainly understand: Any president, no matter who she or he is, cannot and does not make tax policy in a vacuum. The Executive branch proposes, the Legislative branch debates and discusses and tweaks and tweaks some more - and some more and some more - and we all, jointly, together, come up with our nation's tax legislation.


It's a long process and a valuable process. And what the president does is simply set the tone and the direction, prior to all of us - both major Parties - working together to get things done. Yet another reason my distinguished Opponent's Tax-Cuts-for-the-Rich attack is way off the mark and utilized for propaganda purposes only.


********************************************