Friday, November 25, 2016


President-Elect Trump can revolutionize governing as he revolutionized campaigning.

Trump is uniquely positioned as the first nonmilitary, nongovernment, person to ever be elected President.  His mandate for change will overwhelm those wanting an ever expanding and dysfunctional government to prevail. 

The Washington Establishment defends the status quo by asserting: “we have always done it this way”; “you can never run government like a business”; “we are unique”; “we have already cut what can be cut”, and “cutting anything will harm Americans”.

Trump is already doing things his way, breaking new ground as he goes.  The media and the Establishment were against Trump since he announced his candidacy and were consistently wrong about everything relating to Trump and the 2016 elections.  They are now foolishly attempting to second guess Trump, hold him to some arbitrary transition schedule, and giving him unsolicited advice.

These unrelenting, but always wrong, voices ignore that President-Elect Ronald Reagan named his core cabinet on or after December 10, 1980, thirty-six days past his landslide election.  They also refuse to mention that none of Trump’s appointments can be confirmed until the new 115th Congress convenes on January 3, 2017. The first Senate confirmation hearings cannot take place until that first day of the new Congress.  Trump can take his time and get things right from the start.

Trump is crafting his own way of governing.  His only requirement is to seamlessly transition to power.  Think of a relay race where one runner is completing their segment while the other is beginning theirs.  Ideally, both runners achieve stride for stride coordination until one passes the baton to the other.  America’s civic culture is tested and proven strong every time this peaceful hand-off occurs between opposing parties.

Once the “baton is in hand” President Trump will end the Obama era.  Ronald Reagan took time, immediately after his Inaugural Address, to sign Executive Orders ending the Carter era. Trump should move this decisively.

Realigning and mobilizing the Executive Branch to achieve his top priorities will be the first test of Trump’s ability to lead. 

Trump must instill a “sense of urgency”. November 8 was a massive Taser blast to the heart of the Washington Establishment.  They remain stunned, dazed, and confused.  Trump must move swiftly to achieve his goals before the Establishment awakes. 

Revolution’s worst enemy is delay.  Trump is an intuitive thinker and doer. He must act aggressively on his instincts and not let over analysis paralyze his cause.

The federal government is ridiculously huge.  Its size and growth are unnecessary.  In its first 129 years, America became a world power, the leader in technology innovation, and an industrial juggernaut, with only six Cabinet Departments.  All Cabinet Departments, except Treasury, fit into the Old Executive Office Building until World War I.  The door knobs in the building still display the Departmental seals.

Rethinking the role of government can be Trump’s greatest contribution to America.  Private initiative makes America great, so government should only exist when an overwhelmingly compelling case can be made.  Even then, incentives and sanctions through regulation, taxes, or fees, should be exhausted before a new government program is created.  Except for Coolidge and Reagan to varying degrees, no incoming President has ever conducted such a fundamental review.

Much of what sent America over the fiscal cliff were the actions of President Lyndon Baines Johnson in the 1960s. LBJ cynically established the modern welfare state to entrap large swathes of the electorate in an ever expanding federal leviathan. LBJ’s “great society” programs drove millions into voting for Democrats and drove America trillions into debt.

Trump knows government growth can be reversed. Personnel and costs can be dramatically cut.  Agencies can be abolished, like the Civil Aeronautics Board.

Under President Reagan, the General Services Administration invoked a hiring freeze and radical reorganization that reduced employment from 34,000 to 12,000 in three years.  Costs plummeted while the quality and responsiveness of services skyrocketed.  Under Speaker Gingrich, all non-parliamentary and non-security operations were consolidated within a new Chief Administrative Officer. Aggressive outsourcing and business based operations cut employment in half.  Once again, costs plummeted while quality and responsiveness of services skyrocketed.

As President Trump reshapes the Federal Government he needs to take to heart the immortal words of two of America’s most successful Presidents.  Calvin Coolidge directed his appointees to “Trim wherever you can”.  Ronald Reagan had a sign on his desk that inspired his team, “It CAN be done".

Tuesday, November 22, 2016



Obamacare causes 8,000 deaths per year, because of penalties it puts on hospitals The penalties started in October 2012. Death rates from heart failure have risen ever since, because hospital treatment for heart failure has fallen.

Obamacare fines hospitals when they treat Medicare patients for heart failure, if the patients need another hospital stay within a month. Hospitals need to avoid the fines, so now they treat 20,000 fewer patients for heart failure, compared to four years ago, before the penalties.

Do patients survive the loss of treatment?

No. CDC says death rates from heart failure rose after 2012, though these deaths had fallen every year from 2000 to 2012. Higher death rates in 2013 and 2014 mean 7,200 and 9,600 more people died from heart failure in these years than would have died if the 2012 death rate had continued.

The term "heart failure" is also called "congestive heart failure" or cardiomyopathy. It refers to weak pumping because of muscle deterioration, stiffness, leaking valves, etc. It is not the same as a heart attack or heart stopping. It is a major cause of death in the US.

These are the latest national figures, but five earlier studies from 2010-2014 also showed that hospitals which had fewer re-hospitalizations had more deaths, especially among heart failure patients.

Medicare said in August 2012, "We are committed to monitoring the measures and assessing unintended consequences over time, such as the inappropriate shifting of care, increased patient morbidity and mortality, and other negative unintended consequences for patients." They have not reported any of these monitoring results in 4 years.

Re-hospitalization penalties give hospitals an incentive to treat fewer seniors. Medicare even gives hospitals an online tool to predict re-hospitalization risk for each potential patient.

Hospitals can avoid penalties by any mix of the following:
·         Avoid admitting the sickest Medicare patients with heart failure ("There's not much we can do for you. Treatments are risky. You're better off at home.")
·         Treat as many as possible of the least sick outside of hospitals
·         Improve subsequent care for those admitted, to reduce re-hospitalizations
It is easier to give less care than to improve it, though hospitals certainly are doing both. And the result we see is that death rates have started to rise.

The figures here count hospital admissions in July 2008-June 2011, compared to July 2012-June 2015. These are the oldest and newest comparable data available. Medicare released the older data in a comparable form in May 2013.

Re-hospitalization penalties are large. Hospitals get $6,000 for treating a Medicare heart failure patient, but pay a $27,000 penalty for each re-hospitalization within 30 days, above the national average rate. So every hospital tries to be below the average, driving the average down and the risk of penalties up every year. There are also minimal adjustments for the mix of patients each hospital serves.

Penalties total $71 million this year, down from $76 million last year, because hospitals treat fewer Medicare patients for heart failure. The only way hospitals as a group can reduce their penalties is by treating fewer patients. And they do.

The penalties apply to patients treated under Medicare Part B. Hospitals which face the re-hospitalization penalties now admit 5% fewer Part B patients for heart failure than four years ago, even though the total number of seniors covered by Part B increased 12% in the same period.

There are also penalties for re-hospitalizing patients after coronary bypasses. The penalty is $188,000 for each one above the national average rate; penalties began October 2017. Penalties after elective hip and knee replacements are $239,000 and began October 2014. The penalty calculations are written into Obamacare. It is too early to see if the number of people treated has fallen, but the American College of Surgeons warned Medicare that treatment would be cut: "the potential that these hospitals will decrease their care for such patients, thereby creating an access issue."

One state is exempt from the penalties: Maryland, where Medicare has its headquarters, and where many of its retirees live.

Medicare penalizes all unplanned re-hospitalizations, even if they are unrelated to the original care. The law only lets Medicare penalize readmissions related to the initial care, but Medicare found that law, "difficult to implement." So they decided not to follow the law. Obeying the law would help, but penalties would still discourage treatment of frail seniors, who have above-average risks. The law and the penalties themselves are wrong.

In 67 metro areas, Medicare has a second way to discourage hip and knee replacements, especially for the frailest patients who may need them most: hospitals must pay nearly all medical expenses for 90 days after treatment, though they have almost no control over these costs. After coronary bypasses next year, hospitals will similarly have to pay for 90 days of costs. Fewer hip and knee replacements and coronary bypasses, when Medicare patients need them, condemn seniors to reduced activity and faster decline.

Medicare and Social Security do save money when patients die sooner, but that is not how the country wants to save money. 

Monday, November 14, 2016


The Washington Establishment is betting on Trump faltering.  Trump can triumph by not letting any of them subvert from within.

The well proven maxim, people equals policy, should be Trump’s driving force.  Trump can gain inspiration and insight from Reagan’s earlier victory over the Establishment.  These lessons can assure Trump’s tenure achieves historic change.

The Reagan Revolution almost did not occur because the Republican Establishment did everything it could to co-opt it.  Reagan’s transition planning team was hijacked by technocrats who had no understanding or desire for revolution.  Legions of moderate Republicans, who fought Goldwater in the 1960s and Reagan in the 1970s, poured into Reagan’s transition teams in the weeks following the 1980 election.  Former Ford appointees, derisively called “retreads”, filled the short lists for government executive positions.

It took the aggressive intervention of Reagan’s Kitchen Cabinet to clean house and get his revolution back on track.  Reagan’s closest friends, including Joe Coors and Bill Wilson, arrived in Washington, DC in early December 1980 and personally took charge of the transition.  Their clarity of purpose and unwavering devotion to Reagan and his agenda, assured that Americans got the change they so clearly wanted.

President-Elect Trump has not waited until early December.  Trump’s Veterans’ Day Transition realignment was bold and effective. His top associates, family members, and key operatives are now the rocket boosters to propel the Trump Administration into a sustainable orbit.

There is one advantage that Trump in 2016 has over Reagan in 1980 - the Washington Republican Establishment openly and vehemently opposed Trump throughout his campaign.  The usual post-nomination unity was hindered by the “never Trump” forces.  Many anti-Trump Republicans openly boasted about voting against him in countless social media posts on Election Day. 

This disloyalty and outright sabotage must be remembered.  It clears the field for new blood to serve Trump.  It is far easier to “drain the swamp” when the K Street crocodiles have exposed themselves. 

Those who knifed Trump in the back are waiting for the day he “comes to his senses” and sells out his “Deplorables”.  Many observers are smugly musing that Trump will have to scale back his revolution and make peace with the Establishment.  Otherwise, they declare, Trump will not have enough capable people to run the Executive Branch. 

Trump can once again prove his detractors fools.  The private sector has a vast array of corporate change agents. These top executives have successfully run enterprises larger than most federal agencies.  Those who profitably navigated the post-2008 economic collapse are “battle” seasoned and proven innovators.  Those who remained profitable in the face of global competition have mastered the upheavals of the 21st Century.  Many will heed Trump’s call to join his crusade to Make America Great Again.

Trump can tap Republican governors who have turned around the governments and economies of their states.  Their dramatic successes have earned them re-election or assured a Republican succeeded them.

The Republican governors were successful because they unflinchingly fulfilled their campaign pledges, and kept their focus on bettering the economic wellbeing of their citizens. They were also successful because they hired highly effective lieutenants to run their state agencies.   These successful change agents bring a record of vanquishing public sector inertia.  They can be paired with private sector leaders to become an unbeatable team for “Trumping” the Federal Government.

Many rallied to Trump within weeks of his announcing his candidacy.  These included policy experts and strategic thinkers who helped in the Reagan and Gingrich revolutions.  Reagan alumni stood firm with Trump by courageously endorsing him while enduring ostracism from the Washington “powers that be”.  Hundreds of retired military and national security leaders, many of whom helped win the Cold War, stepped forward to offer Trump timely and critical support.

Trump’s “Deplorables” are counting on him winning for them and America.

Monday, November 7, 2016


The fundamental question of this election is do we really want Obama’s third term?  Do we really want a President who will push Obama’s agenda even further to the left?

In 2008, America was facing a terrible economic downturn.  Does anyone really believe that Obama’s trillion dollar “shovel ready” public works, gave America anything close to a real recovery?  Does anyone really think the unemployment numbers are more relevant than the record number of Americans no longer in the workforce?  Does anyone really believe that America’s anemic recovery is the new normal?  Hillary supporters are people who think they and their fellow citizens are economically better off today than 2008. Trump’s message is that America must end the regulations and taxes that have crushed its economy.

In 2008, Americans enjoyed one of the best healthcare systems in the world.  Does anyone really like their current health plan?  Do Americans like paying ever higher premiums and higher deductibles?  Are Americans ready for a completely national healthcare system like Canada or England? 

In 2008, America was the world leader.  Do Americans like the fact that Russia is challenging the U.S., and poses more of a threat, now than at any time since the USSR fell in 1991?  Are Americans willing to watch China consolidate its hegemony in Asia?  Are Americans willing to remain silent as China peels away U.S. allies, like the Philippines, while extending its reach throughout Africa and Central America?

In 2008, the Middle East was dangerous, but at least the major extremist forces were contained.  Are Americans willing to overlook Obama’s refusal to help liberal democratic forces in Iran (the Green Revolution) in 2009 in order to promote Iranian ascendancy ever since?  Are Americans passively accepting that the “Arab Spring” brought peace and freedom to the region?  Are Americans willing to applaud Hillary for her tearing apart Libya, Syria, and Iraq during her time as Secretary of State? Are Jewish Americans really willing to let Hillary continue undermining Israel, the only true democracy in the region? 

In 2016, America is facing a world that is slipping back into 17th and 18th Century trade wars.  The promise of a “flat earth” without policy, technology, or logistical barriers to moving goods, services, and resources has been exploited by China and other state run economies.  America is adrift in how to compete in this “back to the future” trade environment.  Americans are grappling with how to earn a living when robots at home and sweat shop labor abroad obliterate opportunities. 

In 2016, Americans are facing dual invasions that will ultimately destroy our culture and country.  One is illegal immigrants who increase crime and burden social services. The media has been highly successful in deleting “illegal” from any discussion of immigration in order to cast Trump and his supporters as racists or 19th Century “know nothings”. The other invasion is Islamic militants who want to supplant America’s Constitutional freedoms with Sharia law. 

Finally, in 2016, Americans are fed-up with the arrogant unaccountable political elite whose only agenda is to line its own pockets and those of its cronies.  Americans want a real revolution that ends the reign of those who thumb their noses at the law. 

Trump asserts that immigration is a privilege not a right.  Those who America welcomes should be people who will enthusiastically embrace our hard won civic values and bring skills that will revitalize America’s economy.

Trump will drain Washington, DC’s swamp and usher in ethical and accountable government.

Saturday, October 29, 2016


[Published in the Martinsburg Journal on October 24, 2016]

Two of the fundamental requirements for democracy are the integrity of the vote and the integrity of the public record.

Both are in jeopardy in Jefferson County.  Starting with early voting on October 26, and Election Day on November 8, our county has the opportunity to preserve our democracy or watch it vanish before our eyes.

In 2004, Jennifer Maghan defeated Scott Coyle.  It was a classic battle between the court house “in crowd” versus a broad coalition of reformers and citizen activists.

John Ott had been Clerk for 24+ years.  In his final years, he had allowed the Clerk’s office to fall into corruption and dysfunction. 

Prior to Jennifer’s tenure, our votes were stolen, padded, and altered.
-       Voter registration rolls altered to allow phantom votes for favored candidates.
-       Vote count altered to help favored candidates.
-       Public was barred from monitoring vote count.
-       Ballots removed or added to help favored candidates. 
-       Ballot boxes unsealed and resealed.

Activists documented illegal access to ballot boxes.  Uncaring County Commissioners and ambivalent state officials ignored a mountain of evidence, including photos.

In one election, 150 uncounted ballots were “found” at 2:00 in the morning. The vote count for the anti “in crowd” candidate was reported as going down!  The votes were accurately recounted (50 went to the reform candidate) only because the activists monitoring the ballots began shouting in the Court House and alerting the media.

Many public records were also fraudulent:

-       Land titles and other documents backdated, fabricated, and altered to cover illegal acts.  Many of these were entered into court cases as evidence.
-       Land titles and other public documents “lost” when needed, especially when required for evidence in court cases.
-       Land titles “misfiled” or renamed to frustrate public access, and hide actions.
-       Title and land transfer fees not charged to “in crowd” – depriving our county of millions in revenue.
-       Land transactions were hidden from the public.  “Do not publish” stickers were placed on certain transactions to stop them from being forwarded to the Spirit of Jefferson. The “favored few” were able to hide their land purchases, allowing them to amass holdings prior to major subdivision applications.
-       After hour’s access was only for the “in crowd”.       

During these dark years, only dedicated local activists, at great personal and financial cost, were able to expose the truth and occasionally stop illegal acts.

In addition to these illegalities, the Clerk’s staff was universally unhelpful and officious to the public, except to the “in crowd”. 

The public was shut out of information as nothing was online. The public could only access public records during office hours, except the “favored few”.

How our tax dollars were spent was also hidden and falsified.
-       Financial operations were never independently audited.
-       Clerk’s office covered for malfeasance and help hide secret accounts.
-       The public could not access the county’s financial records.

In 2004, against the odds and being outspent 10-1, Jennifer Maghan shocked the “in crowd” with a 500 vote victory margin.  Jennifer immediately launched a dramatic and swift reform effort.  The “in crowd” demonized her and tried to stop her at every step.  Jennifer never wavered in her commitment to make things right.  She was re-elected by a landslide in 2010.  Her success revolutionized everything and made Jefferson County a state and regional leader in digital documents and public access. 

Jennifer’s honesty cost the “in crowd” millions dollars as they had to pay their transfer fee obligations and endure proper public scrutiny of their real estate dealings. 

The “in crowd” is now desperate to retake control of the Clerk’s office.  They have waited twelve years to bring back the corruption and favoritism of the old days.

Herb Snyder is part of this “in crowd”.  Snyder’s brother, Lee Snyder, and his business partners, were some of the primary beneficiaries of the old regime.  A Snyder run Clerk’s Office will reverse Jennifer’s reforms.  A Snyder run Clerk’s Office will shut out the public.  

Jacki Shadle worked on Jennifer’s Clerk Team.  Jacki is our only hope for preserving Jennifer’s hard won culture of honesty and openness.

Monday, October 24, 2016


Also published at: #TRUMPING #therealgame #draintheswamp

Objective evidence is pointing to Trump winning on November 8. This may come as a big surprise to those already jockeying for Hillary Inaugural tickets.

There are major disconnects between the evidence and the polls.  Are polling companies accurate, biased, or clueless?

Most major news outlets feature national and state polls with Clinton maintaining a five point lead that is slowly shrinking.  However, the Investor’s Business Daily, Rasmussen, and LA Times tracking polls are showing Trump pulling ahead. 

All liberal, and many “Never Trump”, pundits have used these polls to declare Hillary the winner.  On its Saturday morning show, National Public Radio shifted to discussing how a Hillary White House would operate.  The media is hailing Hillary as the embodiment of 2016 as a “change” election.  Of course, the media means changing the sex of the Oval Office, not the policies.

What is real?  What is fantasy?

Polling is supposed to be a scientific sampling to achieve accurate insights predicting future results.

2016 seems to be more about fabricating samples and insights to shape future results.  Not since the Harris Poll secretly inflated Humphrey’s support to show him leading Nixon by three points just before the 1968 election has polling been this partisan.

It is all about weighting turnout.  How many registered Republicans and Democrats will vote in 2016?  Most pollsters are assuming 2016 will have the same voter turnout ratio as 2008 and 2012.  They are asserting that November 8 will witness participation by 45 percent Democrats and 36 percent Republicans, just like the two highest Democrat turnouts in recent history.  Quinnipac, Fox, Bloomberg, NBC-Wall Street Journal, and the RealClearPolitics average, all embrace this assumed Democrat dominance.

This assertion automatically gives Hillary an Obama-sized victory.  This is promoted by the “mainstream media” as their narrative is that Americans are just as enthusiastic about electing the first woman as President as they were electing the first African-American.

The facts invalidate this narrative.  This year’s primary battle saw a 35 percent increase in Republican participation, while Democrats fell by 26 percent. 

Votes are generated as much from enthusiasm as inclination.  The “fervor factor” for voter turnout manifests itself in crowds, yard signs, and social media following. 

The media is hiding the great enthusiasm gap in the way they are covering, or covering-up, the candidate rallies. Trump’s crowds have totaled 342,955 as of a week ago.  Hillary’s rallies have attracted only 13,970 during the same period. 

This is where fantasy takes flight.  The media creates the impression of equal enthusiasm with tight shots of both candidates surrounded by supporters.  The reality is that Hillary’s crowds, even for special events with former Vice President Al Gore, are counted in the 100s. Other Clinton rallies have been cancelled for lack of turnout. Trump’s crowds are counted in the tens of thousands. A keen eye sees the Clinton banner peeking-out beyond just four rows of supporters.  A sharp ear knows Clinton’s applause and shouting sound like a small crowd.  Clinton is not using the sound amplifiers that faked enthusiasm at her convention.  The media rarely pulls back to show Trump filling stadiums and field houses with zealous fans.

Clinton enthusiasm, outside of the media, is nonexistent.  One observer recently mused “how can Hillary charge $250,000 for a speech, when no one turns out for her free ones?” 

Contrast the microscopic Clinton crowds to the 100,000 people who turned out to hear Obama on October 18, 2008 in St. Louis, Missouri.  There is a definite disconnect.  If Clinton is so far ahead, where are the Obama-sized crowds?    

On social media Trump’s 10,951,235 Facebook “likes” bury Hillary’s 6,597,785.  On Youtube, Trump’s videos attract 90.8 Million to 24.9 Million views for Clinton.

Drive anywhere in non-urban America and you see thousands of Trump signs.  Many of these are in parts of states not known for Republican sympathies.  Many others are in locations that have never displayed Presidential preference - until now. 

Something very special is happening in our nation.  November 8 could shame many pundits and pollsters. 

Unfortunately, they have no shame.

Tuesday, October 11, 2016


Published at   #trumping #therealgame

Donald Trump is the disruptor Americans have been seeking since the Reagan Era.  He is the Establishment’s worst nightmare. 

The second Presidential Debate displayed all the elements of the epic struggle between Trump and his movement versus the Clinton-Liberal-Media forces arrayed against him.

Starting in 2008, Presidential Debates have been ritualized slaughter of the Republican nominee.  Think of a Bull Fight.  The Republicans, McCain, Romney, Trump, are the bull.  The Democrats, Obama, Clinton, are the Matadors.  The ultimate destruction of the Republican is never in doubt.  Opportunities are given for the Republican/bull to charge around the arena.  This provides the audience with some suspense and builds the reputation of the Democrat/Matador as a brave fighter.

The media moderators are the Picadores.  They are mounted on their dais/horse with dazzling finery.  Their elaborate maneuvers are designed to distract the Republican/bull.  They are armed with questions/lances to wound the Republican/bull.

Once in each debate cycle there is a “town meeting format”.  This is where supposedly undecided voters ask unscripted questions of the candidates.  In fact, these forums bring in Banderilleros who plunge sharped barbed sticks into the Republican/bull to prepare for the Democrat’s/Matador’s final assault. 

The second Presidential Debate was a classic display of Banderilleros.  You had the sympathetic sounding female Muslim asking about tolerance.  You had the sympathetic sounding African-American female asking about unity.  You had the white guy asking about how to balance energy needs with the environment.  All were designed to place Trump/the bull into awkward positions while giving Hillary/the Matador maximum opportunity to pander within her comfort zone.

Trump is not your ordinary Republican/bull.  In the first debate, he fell victim to the Matador and Picadores.  He stormed and charged the Matador’s cape and was wounded by the Picadores questions.  Only because Trump was stronger than previous “bulls” did he survive to fight another day.

Unlike previous “bulls”, Trump adjusted his game plan.  He was not going to play the “Bull Fight” game under the Establishment’s rules. The second “Bull Fight” had Hillary, the Matador, conducting a preemptive wounding with the “leak” of Trump’s off-putting “hot mic” audiotape.  The Establishment’s goal was that Republicans would do what they do best, flee from the fray.  Trump was supposed to spend the forty eight hours prior to the debate in disarray with falling polls, pundit assaults, and everyone abandoning him, including his running mate and campaign team.

Trump outwitted his assailants.  The day of the debate, he called a news conference, not to withdraw, but to open his own barrage against the Clintons. For the first time in decades, a Republican unmasked the Establishment’s hypocrisy.  The media has protected Democrats, and championed counter culture, since the 1960s.  Trump embracing the women who were abused by the Clintons was a game changer.  How can the media and Hillary say every abused women should be heard, when they were the ones who silenced these women?  How could the media feign indignation over Trump’s “hot mic” comments when they defended Bill Clinton’s affairs by asserting people should  look at the public record not the private one?

Then came the debate itself.  Trump wisely did not try to shake Hillary’s hand.  He assumed she had a well-rehearsed moment of ostracism coordinated with the moderators.  Then Trump did the equivalent of the bull pulling out an Uzi and opening fire on the Bullfighters.  For most of the ninety minute debate, Trump indicted Hillary, Bill, the moderators, and the Establishment.  Trump tore off their masks.  Liberal lies and misdeeds of the last twenty years spilled into the public record.

No Republican Presidential nominee has ever assaulted the Democrats and the media with such a sustained onslaught.  Years of passivity vanished.  The bull was not going to slaughter without first taking out the Matador, the Picadores, and their fans. Chaos ensued.

Whether Trump’s high stakes gamble changes the campaign enough to win the Presidency remains to be seen.  Trump exposed the game.  Trump eviscerated the gamesmen.  For at least one amazing moment the bull won. Trump changed the game.