Donald Trump: Definitely Not a "no-trump" Hand

I just hate to keep coming back to this man, but he keeps on getting so much lower, and so much worse even still, one would be compromising self-respect if one didn't say something, no matter how small or distant one's voice:

In bridge (technically, "contract bridge") when the first to bid says, "(any number) no-trump," like, for example, "one no-trump" or "two no trump," it's saying to the playing partner across the table: "I'm long on one suit with some high cards (including some tens), pretty long on another, also with some high numbers, and I think I have some stoppers." It's a strong opening bid, inviting one's partner to take risks and play aggressively.


Donald Trump is clearly not a "no-trump" bid, and so, he's a "not Trump" mandate. This post, then, is intended primarily for those still-co-opted and deluded people, those garden-variety angry ones (though they still may not know why), those who don't have what they want but think that (a) this guy can get it for them and give it to them and (b) in the process, they/he can take it away from those whom they fear, whom they just elementally hate for racial and/or religious reasons, and (c) who still don't realize, even now, that  the man is using them while he lies to them (how can that still not be seen, with the bankruptcy cheats? The lawsuits to beat people down and out of money they're legitimately owed? The luddite refusal to release tax- and income information? The really hollow explanation for his avoidance of military service and his gaming The Selective Service System to do it?), and is a person who, now more than ever, is showing signs of psychological imbalance, instability,  and probably, pathology (sociopathology; psychosis; a combination).  Who beside either a clinically immature or emotionally-stunted person uses negative names or adjectives ("Crooked." "Little." "Lyin'" "Pocahontas") to attach to someone's first name, or use instead, to insult them? (Answer: A school child, or, a bully; and therefor, Trump.)


Even the moneyed and the movers in his own party see it, now.


Since the last time one felt compelled to pay attention to Trump (no "Mister," for him, just as he insists upon addressing people who are his social and political betters by their first names, clearly intending disrespect and denigration) we all know - -  or should (hell, the whole world knows) of his most recent string of aberrant and inappropriate exercises in uncontrolled and impulsive and mean behavior:


His snarly, racist comments about the parents of a dead (KIA) military officer who truly died a hero - -  no, a real hero, when his father called him out, angrily and with an edge, saying that he's never made any sacrifice for anybody, much less the country he'd lead; his "explanation" for his racism: "he (the father) attacked me harshly;" his fallback and petulant retort (I've made lots of sacrifices. I've managed thousands or millions of projects [no, he hasn't] and created thousands upon thousands of jobs [no, he's taken away or destroyed far more than he's created]," as though using other people's money to try to recoup his own losses and in the process engage in yet further narcissistic self-aggrandizement with more names on more buildings - -  that he doesn't own or operate - -  were, in the aggregate, a "sacrifice;" and,


His exhorting the so-called "Second Amendment people" to be violent (clearly, lethally violent) against his opponent, Hillary Clinton to keep her from being able to appoint Justices to The Supreme Court, then saying, he was being sarcastic - -  and then saying, "well, maybe a little sarcastic," when it was obvious to all but the most shallow and blind, simply by his tone of voice and his facial expressions and the context in which he made the comment that he meant every word he said and intended the clear inferences to be drawn from then; and,


His saying, with a straight face (Dave Barry, the Pulitzer Prize-winning humor writer would say, "I swear, I'm not making this up!") that Barak Obama, the President of this country, was the founder (actually, in later versions, one of two founders, along with his opponent, Clinton) of the zealous, killer sect called ISIS or ISIL - -  and repeating it and standing by it and insisting that he meant the accusation literally; and,


His using his status as lessor of a meeting hall where he was putting on another "rally" or giving another speech (if you lease a place, whether it's a concert hall or a double-wide trailer, you get to say who can enter and who has to leave: that's why the guy rarely, if ever, appears in a publicly-owned and -controlled location) to eject yet another "undesirable," this time somebody with a squally kid that was irritating him by being a distraction.


Those who are still deluded and enthralled by him love this stuff. But, let's look back:


Caligula (actually, one of the Caesars in a line of several), who ruled around the time of the birth of Jesus. He was a classic tyrant, a sadist, a killer, and a world-class opportunist. He would later come to be scorned for his extravagant use of public funds to build himself ultra-luxurious palaces and villas; he either caused the murder of, or exiled, members of his own family; and he bribed the army of Rome from one end to the other to keep their "loyalty;" and yet, he had a cohort of followers who absolutely loved him - -  while others plotted his own downfall in one way or another.


Want to go back a little further? Draco, known as "The Lawgiver," came into power in the 7thy Century B.C. All that need be said about him here is that, though he was initially elected by a majority, he quickly became know for his overly-harsh laws and their implementation (hence, "Draconian"). He was especially hard on people who were in debt: he ordered that they be sold as slaves. For stealing "a head of cabbage," people were executed.


Want to get more current? Maximilien Robespierre was credited as the leader of The French Revolution, but he's better known for creating "The Reign of Terror." Viewed as a hero by those who said they hated the monarchy (Louis and Marie Antoinette), Robespierre got more and more full of himself, leaving such formalities as trials for accused people in his wake, and keeping people imprisoned in the very Bastille he helped "liberate" without limit. He was one of the first true tyrants of modern times.


Oh, and leave us not forget Hitler. Or Mussolini (almost, but not quite, a matched set). We know how they both manipulated people, Hitler primarily, of course, playing to their prejudices and insecurities, and their anger at the drubbing the Germans had taken during and after World War I. Still, as we all know, he was blindly followed by millions - -  because he told them what they wanted to hear, and made promises that he couldn't keep. He created a class of "villains" (the Jews), demonized them, and whipped people into foamy-mouthed frenzies at "rallies" to mobilize both sentiment and action against them.


Sound familiar?


Even Trump's (former) supporters, both public figures and private citizens - -  including (and, especially) those with money and/or equally valuable endorsements, have now come to see the guy for what he is.  They're running away from him as though he were a disease-carrier. The Republican party is in a shambles, and in a panic. The question is: what to do about the blind ones, the uber-zealots who either can't, or won't, see him for what he is, and refuse to acknowledge that they're being callously manipulated and used, just as Trump used those who bid on his "projects" in Atlantic City and New York (remember The Plaza Hotel? In and out of bankruptcy how many times?); sold enrollment in his fraudulent "university," even lied about his steaks and cigars?

What to do? If you know any of them personally, grab them by the ears or shoulders or neck, and yell at them relentlessly. But if you don't (and most of us don't: they're a pretty Klannish group) . . . hell, wish I knew. One simply can't reason with the irrational.