The Art of the Donald Trumpocalypse

[msduncan]

(of course I live in Alabama so I really probably could sit out and it have no effect... but still)

Why not vote 3rd party for president, write in a candidate, or skip the presidential vote while voting GOP down-ballot? That would be consistent of your goals of supporting GOP policies both locally and federally while, in your own small way, expressing dissatisfaction with the top of the ticket. Your vote in Alabama for president is symbolic anyway. Might as well vote your conscience and be able to say "Don't blame me" when President Trump inevitably starts a nuclear war when some foreign leader implies he has a small penis.

I'm considering it, particularly because it won't make a difference because Alabama will go for Trump. Then I could at least vote my policies while not supporting the individual.

I do want to point out that lost in all of this judge controversy is the fact that the judge in question is associated with the National Council of La Raza.

I'm curious - are you considering voting Libertarian? That would seem like a fairly logical thing based on your ideological dispositions (and since you live in an essentially uncontested general election state).

Yes. Libertarian would be the choice. I'm not super enthused by Gary Johnson though.....

[Kurth]

I do want to point out that lost in all of this judge controversy is the fact that the judge in question is associated with the National Council of La Raza.

If an African American judge were a member of the NAACP, would he have to recuse himself from presiding over the trial of a white man for lynching a black man because of his potential bias?

No, no, no! Judge Curiel is NOT a member of the National Council of La Raza. He is a member of the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association. This is a completely separate and different group. Please know the facts . . .

The Facts

As The Post and other media outlets have pointed out repeatedly, Curiel is a member of the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association, which is a professional organization for Latino lawyers. The group is the San Diego local affiliate of the California La Raza Lawyers Association, whose membership comprises lawyers practicing in California, and is a 501(c)(6) nonprofit trade organization. It has an affiliated 501(c)(3) scholarship fund that awarded 22 scholarships totaling $34,000 in 2014. More on that later.

This group is not the National Council of La Raza, the Hispanic civil rights nonprofit organization that has pushed for comprehensive immigration reform in Congress with a pathway to citizenship and legalization for undocumented immigrants. It’s often referred to as simply “La Raza,” especially in the context of the immigration debate.

To recap this simple fact: San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association ≠ National Council of La Raza.

When Trump began his public tirade against Curiel, Trump campaign spokeswoman Katrina Pierson and other supporters conflated the two groups, which both use “La Raza.” But now, even conservative groups have acknowledged that they are separate organizations.

A literal translation for “La Raza” is “the race,” but it’s interpreted as a broader term describing the Latino community. Opponents of immigration note that the term has roots in the Chicano nationalization movement of the 1960s. But “La Raza” is a common name incorporated throughout the community and often used by Latino organizations and businesses, including restaurants and medical clinics. A search for “la raza” on yellowpages.com turned up more than 3,000 results in California alone.

“The only tie that we have is that we serve the Latino community, and they do as well,” said Luis Osuna, president of the lawyers association. “But they’re a politically driven advocacy group, and we’re just a local diversity Bar association that focuses on both diversity and equality in the legal field, but particularly among Latinos.”

Lisa Navarette, a spokeswoman for the National Council of La Raza, confirmed this, saying: “The two organizations know of each other but are two completely separate organizations, and nothing wrong with either organization. The judge is not a member of NCLR, but there wouldn’t be any issue if he was.”

Still, Trump’s supporters and surrogates continue to draw misleading ties between the lawyers organization and the National Council of La Raza and advocacy for legalizing undocumented immigrants.

The latest criticism is that the group considers the National Council of La Raza and other pro-immigrant organizations a part of its “community,” as evidenced by a list of organizations on its website under the heading “Community.” But that’s a real stretch. Another misleading claim is that the organization gave a scholarship to an undocumented student in 2014, when Curiel served on the scholarship selection committee. In reality, the student identified himself as undocumented only after he was selected for a scholarship.
The list of Web links is a resource to people who visit the website looking for information and services the organization doesn’t provide, Osuna said. It includes links to groups, such as the San Diego Latino Film Festival, a domestic violence program, legal aid society, the San Diego Superior Court and resources for victims of human trafficking.

As for the scholarship, one of the recipients of a 2014 scholarship from the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association Scholarship Fund was a part-time law student who identified himself as undocumented — after he received the award. The student received a $1,500 scholarship and wrote in his bio that he emigrated to America at age 11, and that he “wishes to someday tell any student struggling with higher education, ‘Look, a boy from Oaxaca, who did not know English and is undocumented has now graduated from law school and is an attorney.’” Curiel was one of 10 people on the scholarship selection committee.

The California Supreme Court has ruled that undocumented immigrants can be admitted to the state bar as long as they have fulfilled requirements to practice law in the state, effective January 2014. The organization does not ask applicants for their citizenship status, and the student identified as undocumented when he wrote his bio for an event program, Osuna said.

“We give [scholarships] to Latino students. It’s not as if being undocumented is a prerequisite or a question asked in the application,” he said.

[msduncan]

Thanks. Popehat agrees as well. Msd, we want to take you seriously but then you go repeating conservative talking points that are easily shown to be lies. Even the most rudimentary research would show these sites that they are wrong, but facts aren't as important as winning (to the sites I mean) I guess.

Hey -- I just saw it come across Twitter in my feed. I didn't dive deeper because who would have thought that the local bar association would share a name with the La Raza of the same name? Poor choice in naming that causes confusion.

Got this snippet from Twitter, which doesn't claim that the group IS La Raza, but points out that they are still tied and associated to the same group: "a group that while not a branch of the National Council of La Raza, has ties to the controversial organization"

[RunningMn9]

MSD - do you mind if I ask what it is about a Clinton Presidency that brings about your personal apocalypse? I mean, don't get me wrong, I certainly would prefer some other option. As I've stated before, when it comes to the President, my selection process is much more about the person than it is their ideology or position papers. I don't need the President to agree with me. I need to have trust in the President to do what they believe is in the best interest of the country, in all of the circumstances that we can't anticipate that will crop up in the next four years.

I don't trust Clinton to do that. I trust Clinton to do what she believes is in HER best interest, always. I don't believe there is any moral compass guiding her actions. Like her husband, I believe that she is guided by opinion polls and her own infinite ambition.

She's a terrible Presidential candidate (IMO).

But I can't even trust Trump to do what he believes is in his best interest. He is genuinely proud that he is erratic and unapologetic about it. His response to *any* situation will be unpredictable, with no chance that it is driven by rational analysis. He has demonstrated time and time again that this is how he is, and that there is virtually no hope that it's all an act.

Even if Trump agreed with me on every issue, I could not vote for him for any elected office. Because he is a shockingly terrible human being, who is unfit for any office. On my way home I will be voting, and I will lodge my vote for John Kasich. I don't agree with John Kasich on very many issues, but I can vote for him because of who he is as a person.

In November, I expect to vote Libertarian unless NJ is somehow in play. At which point I will enthusiastically campaign for a woman that I have opposed for all of my adult life. Because the future of my country is more important than my feelings about Clinton.

(And see how I accomplished all of that without resorting to your churlish references to her being a "vile bitch" which you mean in the most non-misogynist way possible?)

[Rip]

Pretty sure the judge is NOT associated with that group, but rather a Latino bar association with a similar name.

This has been discussed repeatedly in media. So much so I thought msd was pulling our legs at first.

I'm on my phone, can someone take a look for me?

While critics of Trump have argued that the San Diego La Raza Lawyers’ association is not affiliated with the National Council of La Raza, consider the following:

The San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association is a member of the La Raza Lawyers of California, affiliated with the Chicano/Latino Bar Association of California.

On the website of the La Raza Lawyers Association of California, at the bottom of the “Links & Affiliates Page,” the National Council of La Raza is listed.

The website of the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association is joint-listed as San Diego’s Latino/Latina Bar Association.

On the “endorsements” page, the combined website lists the National Council of La Raza as part of the “community,” along with the Hispanic National Bar Association,, a group that emerged with a changed name from the originally formed La Raza National Lawyers Association and the La Raza National Bar Association tracing its origin back to 1971.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/trump-u-judg ... of-laraza/

Depends on a how loosely the term associated is used.

[RunningMn9]

And whether you're willing to link to World Net Daily in a non-ironic way.

[msduncan]

MSD - do you mind if I ask what it is about a Clinton Presidency that brings about your personal apocalypse? I mean, don't get me wrong, I certainly would prefer some other option. As I've stated before, when it comes to the President, my selection process is much more about the person than it is their ideology or position papers. I don't need the President to agree with me. I need to have trust in the President to do what they believe is in the best interest of the country, in all of the circumstances that we can't anticipate that will crop up in the next four years.

I don't trust Clinton to do that. I trust Clinton to do what she believes is in HER best interest, always. I don't believe there is any moral compass guiding her actions. Like her husband, I believe that she is guided by opinion polls and her own infinite ambition.

She's a terrible Presidential candidate (IMO).

But I can't even trust Trump to do what he believes is in his best interest. He is genuinely proud that he is erratic and unapologetic about it. His response to *any* situation will be unpredictable, with no chance that it is driven by rational analysis. He has demonstrated time and time again that this is how he is, and that there is virtually no hope that it's all an act.

Even if Trump agreed with me on every issue, I could not vote for him for any elected office. Because he is a shockingly terrible human being, who is unfit for any office. On my way home I will be voting, and I will lodge my vote for John Kasich. I don't agree with John Kasich on very many issues, but I can vote for him because of who he is as a person.

In November, I expect to vote Libertarian unless NJ is somehow in play. At which point I will enthusiastically campaign for a woman that I have opposed for all of my adult life. Because the future of my country is more important than my feelings about Clinton.

(And see how I accomplished all of that without resorting to your churlish references to her being a "vile bitch" which you mean in the most non-misogynist way possible?)

Mostly it's about the Supreme Court and the clear and immediate danger she poses to the 2nd Amendment and States rights issues. She's said she intends to use the court and her appointees to go after the 2nd Amendment.

Those are my rational reasons. My irrational reasons are that I just don't like her. I think she's a powermonger, and I have personally talked to people who worked on her details that said she was a terrible person when the cameras were not on. Treated them like servants instead of people willing to lay down their life to protect her.

[hepcat]

And whether you're willing to link to World Net Daily in a non-ironic way.

When your front page headline reads:

'Demonic' opening for tunnel has lesbian sex

You know the facts are gonna come hard and fast, baby!

[$iljanus]

And whether you're willing to link to World Net Daily in a non-ironic way.

When your front page headline reads:

'Demonic' opening for tunnel has lesbian sex

You know the facts are gonna come hard and fast, baby!

Is that in one of the levels in the new Doom game? Awesome!

[hepcat]

http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/trump-u-judg ... of-laraza/

Depends on a how loosely the term associated is used.

Apparently so loosely that "associated with" means "not associated with".

Now, can we get back to the breaking story of demons having lesbian sex in a tunnel? I feel we're burying the lead here.

[El Guapo]

http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/trump-u-judg ... of-laraza/

Depends on a how loosely the term associated is used.

Apparently so loosely that "associated with" means "not associated with".

Now, can we get back to the breaking story of demons having lesbian sex in a tunnel? I feel we're burying the lead lede here.

I think we all know that trivial grammatical / spelling corrections are what's truly important here.

[tgb]

It's OK guys. You're taking it the wrong way.

[Holman]

This is too rich not to quote.

It's a minor part of the Trump University swindle saga. But one of the most humorous parts of it is Trump's continued reference to the 98% satisfaction rating given by students of 'Trump University'. [...] But step back. Does anything get a 98% approval rating? Anything? Trump University was basically the North Korea of student evaluations.

Only in the Trump universe would this be a positive rather than comical.

[hepcat]

http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/trump-u-judg ... of-laraza/

Depends on a how loosely the term associated is used.

Apparently so loosely that "associated with" means "not associated with".

Now, can we get back to the breaking story of demons having lesbian sex in a tunnel? I feel we're burying the lead lede here.

I think we all know that trivial grammatical / spelling corrections are what's truly important here.

I wish I could say that was a typo, but I always thought it was "burying the lead".

[$iljanus]

http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/trump-u-judg ... of-laraza/

Depends on a how loosely the term associated is used.

Apparently so loosely that "associated with" means "not associated with".

Now, can we get back to the breaking story of demons having lesbian sex in a tunnel? I feel we're burying the lead lede here.

I think we all know that trivial grammatical / spelling corrections are what's truly important here.

I wish I could say that was a typo, but I always thought it was "burying the lead".

Well knowing is half the battle. Now bring on the lesbian demons!

[El Guapo]

http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/trump-u-judg ... of-laraza/

Depends on a how loosely the term associated is used.

Apparently so loosely that "associated with" means "not associated with".

Now, can we get back to the breaking story of demons having lesbian sex in a tunnel? I feel we're burying the lead lede here.

I think we all know that trivial grammatical / spelling corrections are what's truly important here.

I wish I could say that was a typo, but I always thought it was "burying the lead".

Hmm, upon further review (googling), it appears that lede is a journalism-jargon alternate spelling of "lead". So "lead" is not actually incorrect, it's just different from the standard spelling in a journalism context. Which is evidently the subject of some journalism nerd debates.

So, upon further review, you can feel free to say "burying the lead" when talking about under-appreciated lesbian demon tunnel sex stories.

[RunningMn9]

Mostly it's about the Supreme Court and the clear and immediate danger she poses to the 2nd Amendment and States rights issues. She's said she intends to use the court and her appointees to go after the 2nd Amendment.

So that we're clear, I'm asking because I've seen the same sort of hysteria with regard to President Obama, and yet here we sit at the end of his second term, and the country is bristling with a lot more guns here in 2016 than there were in 2008 (much to the delight of the pocketbooks of those pushing the hysteria). I mean, yeah, I get that she thinks that DC v Heller was wrongly decided. Has there been a Republican President in my lifetime that didn't think that Roe v Wade was wrongly decided, who didn't appoint Justices that likely would have ruled that case differently? And yet here we are with Roe v Wade still being the law of the land?

And that doesn't even get into the fact that historically, no one thought (or assumed) that the Constitution described an individual right to bear arms without restriction for shits and giggles until the 1970s - including the NRA. So it's not like it's a "crazy" position, even if you don't agree with it.

Out of curiosity, what does Trump intend to use the court and his appointees to go after?

[Rip]

Anti-Trumpsters?

Or should I call it the Constitutional Right to Worship Trump?

[Max Peck]

Hey -- I just saw it come across Twitter in my feed. I didn't dive deeper because who would have thought that the local bar association would share a name with the La Raza of the same name? Poor choice in naming that causes confusion.

Neither of those groups is "La Raza" -- La Raza is just a phrase that that means Hispanic. Your rationale is as sound as claiming that you get confused between the United States of America and the United Steelworkers of America, because both use the words "United" and "America" with an S-word in the middle.

[El Guapo]

I haven't run a campaign myself, but when you run for President, you want to remind the press of the time that you were the only person around New York willing to rent property to Moammar Qaddafi, right? Pretty sure that's like campaigning 101.

[stessier]

This is too rich not to quote.

It's a minor part of the Trump University swindle saga. But one of the most humorous parts of it is Trump's continued reference to the 98% satisfaction rating given by students of 'Trump University'. [...] But step back. Does anything get a 98% approval rating? Anything?

Inside Out
Shaun the Sheep (surprisingly good)
Zootopia

There are many more.

[Zarathud]

So Trump University was equivalent to a highly anticipated and entertaining cartoon?

[RunningMn9]

Well, that's that. I have cast my final vote as a member of this Party until such time as they find their way back to their founding principles.

Enjoy it John Kasich.

[Max Peck]

Other people who seem to agree with RM9 to some degree include:

An Iowa State senator has dropped his affiliation as a Republican in light of presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump's comments about a federal court judge's ethnicity. Sen. David Johnson, from staunchly Republican northwest Iowa, said Tuesday that "somebody had to make a statement," about what the 18-year state legislator called Trump's "bigotry."

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval says he's not totally sure whether he'll vote for Donald Trump. The moderate Republican governor issued a statement Tuesday saying he has major concerns with the Republican nominee's "escalating tone and rhetoric." His comments come after he said in May that he planned to vote for Trump because the Democratic nominee was "simply not an option."

Republican Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois says Donald Trump's comments about a U.S. federal judge of Mexican heritage are un-American and he cannot support the presumptive presidential nominee. This is a reversal for Kirk, one of the more endangered GOP incumbents, who had said recently he would support Trump.

For a dissenting opinion...

The only black Republican senator says Donald Trump's comments about a U.S.-born judge of Mexican heritage are "racially toxic." Still, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott says he's supporting Trump for president. Speaking to reporters Tuesday, Scott said Trump needs to focus on the general election and "we need to win." Scott said he saw no need for GOP lawmakers to rescind their endorsements of Trump. He said the Obama administration has been "disastrous" for communities across the country. "(Hillary) Clinton would just provide four more years of the last eight, and that's not in anybody's best interest," he said.

[RunningMn9]

With respect Sen. Tim Scott, the last eight years have been pretty goddamn great for me. If I knew I would get four more years of this, I'd be donating to the Clinton campaign.

[LordMortis]

(of course I live in Alabama so I really probably could sit out and it have no effect... but still)

Why not vote 3rd party for president, write in a candidate, or skip the presidential vote while voting GOP down-ballot? That would be consistent of your goals of supporting GOP policies both locally and federally while, in your own small way, expressing dissatisfaction with the top of the ticket. Your vote in Alabama for president is symbolic anyway. Might as well vote your conscience and be able to say "Don't blame me" when President Trump inevitably starts a nuclear war when some foreign leader implies he has a small penis.

Exactly. You can claim you're not a "political team man", but your big policy is to oppose the Democrat Team Agenda, and you think the only way to do that (particularly in an uncontested state) is to vote for the Republican Team Agenda, then your claim rings kind of hollow.

I'm in Illinois, and Illinois will vote Hillary, and that's that. That frees me up to vote for whomever I want - I don't have to pick between the lesser of two evils in Hillary (who I don't like one bit) or Trump (who is a terrible human being and would be an even worse president). If it looked like there might be a chance that Trump could take Illinois, I'd vote Hillary without hesitation, but I don't have to worry about that. It's actually quite freeing to live in an uncontested state.

I'm in a state that might go either way. If Trumps somehow manages to win, you still can't blame me for not voting for Clinton. I'm still not sure where my vote will go at this point but it won't be for the D or R. I never ever ever ever saw myself voting for Stein but it might happen. Or I might hold my nose and vote Johnson based on his anti hawk and personal liberty positions with regard to being CiC and the head the federal police department and try to look past his slash it all history on government spending at a time when we need to increase both taxes and public services, knowing that he doesn't control spending anyway.

This reminds me, it is high time I find out my more local elections come November. They are much more important to me than trying to extort my vote for president to keep them out of office.

Mostly it's about the Supreme Court and the clear and immediate danger she poses to the 2nd Amendment and States rights issues. She's said she intends to use the court and her appointees to go after the 2nd Amendment.

Oddly enough, Republican party extortion is the one and only thing that almost pushes me to vote for Clinton. That abuse of Congress is unforgivable and why I will never vote for another republican congressmen until the current gerrymandering has been undone. That might not happen in my lifetime. I'm glad to see the back of the party broken after all of this and I truly believe the last 12 years has completely broken the back of the party. It may not die for another decade but it is broken.

I'm not crazy about Clinton stacking the Supreme Court. I'm furious about the current House insisting that controlling all three branches of government is their prerogative. That sort of hostage taking makes my blood boil.

With respect Sen. Tim Scott, the last eight years have been pretty goddamn great for me. If I knew I would get four more years of this, I'd be donating to the Clinton campaign.

Don't you live off of the Federal Government teat?

[tgb]

I like the cut of this guy's jib.

Yes, predicting the political demise of Donald Trump has so far been a loser’s game. He has been the liquid metal Terminator, blown apart into a fine spray of mercury droplets by whatever godawful idiotic blast came out of his mouth. Yet able to reconstitute himself with the encouragement of his rabble of supporters who hate Hillary Clinton more than they love their country and who batted aside serviceable moderates to embrace him.

Maybe Trump will do it again. The dust cloud settles, a single moment of hope, then instead of the credits rolling, the wreckage stirs, the red eye glows, the thing stands, shedding rubble, a big shrug and a grin and forward march toward November. It happened before.......

.......But the truth remains, clearer this week than it was last, for anyone who cares to see: Trump is a demagogue opposed to the rule of law, the rule of decency, anything but the rule of Trump. His candidacy is not about a squeezed middle class or dissatisfaction with the establishment. It is about contempt for America, the America of immigrants, of ethnicities and faiths. Eight years of chafing under an African-American president has driven the Republican Party insane and now they’ve embraced Donald Trump, the embodiment of their weaknesses and flaws. I would almost pity them. But the GOP did this to themselves, firing blindly at Barack Obama and riddling each other. We can’t let them do this to the nation as well.

[Alefroth]

Pretty sure the judge is NOT associated with that group, but rather a Latino bar association with a similar name.

This has been discussed repeatedly in media. So much so I thought msd was pulling our legs at first.

I'm on my phone, can someone take a look for me?

MSDuncan's team isn't particularly well-informed.

[Alefroth]

I didn't dive deeper because who would have thought that the local bar association would share a name with the La Raza of the same name? Poor choice in naming that causes confusion.

Trumpian level of displacement of culpability. Bravo!

[GreenGoo]

Don't you live off of the Federal Government teat?

What a stupid thing to say. If Rmn9 lives off the fed's teat, then most of the military industrial complex does too. HP, Pratt & Whitney, General Electric, etc etc.

Are those companies living off the fed's teat too? All their workers? Their janitorial staff?

Even if you meant this mostly harmlessly and in jest, I hate the sentiment behind it enough to comment.

[geezer]

Don't you live off of the Federal Government teat?

What a stupid thing to say. If Rmn9 lives off the fed's teat, then most of the military industrial complex does too. HP, Pratt & Whitney, General Electric, etc etc.

Are those companies living off the fed's teat too? All their workers? Their janitorial staff?

Well, yes. Which helps one understand why the right screams that every government structure except the military is incompetent and wasteful.

[LordMortis]

Don't you live off of the Federal Government teat?

What a stupid thing to say. If Rmn9 lives off the fed's teat, then most of the military industrial complex does too.

That's the (half) joke.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=ho ... n+military

[Holman]

All eyes are on Clinton/Sanders tonight, but tonight Trump is technically competing in primaries as well.

Is it odd for a candidate to be getting percentages in the 60's and the 80's when he has been running unopposed for more than a month?

(And these percentages don't even count ballots left blank at the top.)

[RunningMn9]

And most old people, and most people in the healthcare industry. There are a lot of fingers in that $3T pie. I'm not sure what LM was asking, implying? A Republican Presidency will almost certainly put more of our soldiers in harms way, and keep the spice flowing to my house. My country is more important to me than that.

[Defiant]

All eyes are on Clinton/Sanders tonight, but tonight Trump is technically competing in primaries as well.

Is it odd for a candidate to be getting percentages in the 60's and the 80's when he has been running unopposed for more than a month?

(And these percentages don't even count ballots left blank at the top.)

I remember reading (maybe on 538?) that if it's below the 70s, it would be worrying for him.

Edit: Guess it's kind of a surprise that he's only getting 72% at the moment in NM, given the Immigration issue. I would have thought the Republicans in that state would be very pro-Trump.

[Kraken]

With respect Sen. Tim Scott, the last eight years have been pretty goddamn great for me. If I knew I would get four more years of this, I'd be donating to the Clinton campaign.

The Obama administration was pretty good to the top 5% (incomes of $80k). The rest held their own or slipped only marginally. Other than the garden-variety recession that's overdue after seven years of (statistical) expansion, why would you expect anything different under the technocrat Clinton?

[Isgrimnur]

Might our slow rate of growth actually be sustainable past the usual drop-dead date? Only time will tell. I don't hear the pop-the-bubble drumbeat that I heard in 1999 and 2007.

[Smoove_B]

In case anyone cares what NJ looks like after our closed primary. Still trying to get my mind around this.

[Holman]

In case anyone cares what NJ looks like after our closed primary. Still trying to get my mind around this.

Jeb should have stayed in.

[malchior]

I didn't dive deeper because who would have thought that the local bar association would share a name with the La Raza of the same name? Poor choice in naming that causes confusion.

Trumpian level of displacement of culpability. Bravo!

I had the same exact thought when I read it. It sounded just like a Trump tweet actually. Has he been playing us all along - have we been in the presence of the Donald the whole time?