Orchestrating 2016

Ya know, ladies and gentlemen…..

There was a time on this very website where I would wax poetically about the political happenings of the day on what practically seems like a daily basis in an heroic, yet vain attempt to make my point known by all.

I guess I got tired of doing it.

I don’t know if it’s a matter of that innate sense I get that my rantings and ramblings are falling on deaf ears (blind eyes in this case), or just that deep down effacement of my gumption to put a blog out there on a regular basis.

Deep down, I know the real reason is Netflix.

Regardless, I feel compelled to launch a new soliloquy at this time for two reasons.

Reason 1: This week marks the 7th birthday of TharpSter.Org. It seems only fitting that I post something to patronize the seven year itch.

Reason 2: The subject matter of the verbal brilliance in which you are about to be ensconced has been bouncing around in my head for quite some time now. I’m honestly a little surprised I haven’t heard or seen these ideas in the media or on the web. Granted, I haven’t really looked for them (again, probably due to Netflix), so I won’t offer that up as a bona fide excuse. None the less, I feel it’s necessary for me to salt and pepper the web with this flotsam and jetsam so as to enlighten the masses while at the same time purging my gray matter.

Welcome to just one of the many prominent signs of my neurosis.

Much like Newton’s Third Law validates the presence of Intelligent Design in the creation of things and how we got here, I’m not all together convinced that happenings around this year’s election revolve around the fallacy that shit happens. In fact, I’m going to go as so far as to suggest to you that the events of this campaign have been orchestrated more precisely than they have before.

Naturally I have examples, and I’ll start with the innocuous ones first.

Event: The Melania Trump speech at the convention.

Details: During her speech at the convention earlier this week, Melania Trump uttered some statements which Michelle Obama used in her 2008 speech to the DNC. The left went generally ape shit over such a dastardly transgression, even though plenty of their own have committed the same offense of plagiarizing the words of others over the years. A few days after the fact, the speech writer behind Melania’s address reported that in the process of writing the speech she had mistakenly included pieces of the Michelle Obama address in the final draft. As a result, she offered her resignation. Donald Trump declined the resignation, meaning we can look forward future speeches from the Republican candidate to include eloquent passages previously uttered by Deval Patrick.

Orchestration: Donald Trump is known for firing people, especially to millennials. Do it on TV in primetime for a few years, and such a reputation is going to catch on. He also has a reputation for being a tyrannical bastard. I’m not saying he isn’t a tyrannical bastard. I don’t know if he is or not. He comes across as one, and his detractors never resist to point that out. The instance of the plagiarized speech, combined with the refusal to accept a resignation is a two-fold device that helps Trump.

1. I would suggest that someone in the organization knew beforehand about the plagiarism, and let it go knowing that the opposition would lose the collective content of their lower bowels when they caught a potential First Lady in an act of intellectual theft. All the while, the same participants soiling their britches over the plagiarism fail to see the level of righteous indignation they display over some lifted words far outweighs the high crimes and misdemeanors their own nominee is guilty of committing. In short, plagiarize one of their speeches and make them look like fools for it.

2. Donald Trump, the tyrannical bastard who’s known for firing people, refused to fire someone over this episode. This helps to degrade the persona he has. It also shows an ability to keep a level head over a “mistake” committed by the campaign without letting the other guys direct the narrative.

Event: The Ted Cruz speech at the convention.
Details: Ted Cruz gave a speech at the convention in which he refused to endorse Trump. It would seem that Cruz wasn’t prepared to endorse Trump because of the personal attacks Trump made during the primaries. Regardless, this speech was to be for Cruz what the 1976 speech that Ronald Reagan gave to the RNC was for him. It was to be the pathway to 2020 in which the delegates would recognize that maybe Cruz should have won the nomination. Whether the party will forgive Cruz for that speech remains to be seen.

Orchestration: Throughout the entire campaign, there’s been plenty of movement with the GOP and on the right to keep Trump from capturing the nomination. For that matter, there are plenty on the same side who don’t like Cruz either.

Cruz was allowed to say whatever he wanted to. The Trump people had already read the speech before Cruz delivered it to the convention. They didn’t censor it, and they allowed Cruz to speak anyway. So where’s the orchestration?

Cruz should have put his big boy pants on, set his feelings aside for the good of the party, and endorsed Trump. Getting disrespected at his own convention generated sympathy (for lack of a better word) among Trump’s opponents within the party and helped to galvanize party support for the tyrannical bastard.

Event: The Trump Candidacy
Details: Love him or hate him, Trump’s campaign to win the White House has been unique to say the least. Regardless of what he’s said on the campaign trail or in the years before, nothing has stuck to him in a way that would end his endeavor. Trump seems to embody the resentment and frustration of the GOP electorate, and nothing seems to be able to stop him.

Keep in mind that he swept past a massive pot of Whatchagot Stew in the primaries as he dispensed with a whole mess of perspective candidates seeking the same office.

To be perfectly honest, I don’t need to tell you this under the assumption that you’ve made it this far into the blog. You already know the background. Let’s get to the shenanigans.

Get your tin foil hat out and bear with me here.

Orchestration: Allow me to put some dots out there for some adventurous line connecting.

• The left absolutely loves picking GOP candidates. They managed to do it in the last two cycles. Why not do it again?

• Hillary Clinton was facing limited opposition within her own party, and a whole mess of candidates on the other side who wanted to ensure that she wouldn’t get elected.

• Clinton needed a way to dispense with the gene pool and narrow it down to another weak moderate who wouldn’t give her a run for her money. Enter good friend Donald Trump.

• Trump has previously espoused the virtues *ahem* of Hillary Clinton, and has toyed with running for President before. His party affiliations have been pan-sexual. He’s given money to both sides of the aisle.

• Trump would make an excellent killjoy for the Republican primary process. Clinton figures he could knock out some of the stronger conservative candidates so as to leave the weaker moderates (the establishment types) to win the nomination. As before, he would drop out at some point when there are only a few candidates and endorse the weaker one.

• Here’s the kicker – Clinton either directly or indirectly puts a bug in Trump’s ear about running for President. It’s kind of how Christopher Walken’s character did it to the Penguin (played by Danny DeVito) in Batman Returns. The only difference was that it was probably done between a couple of airplanes on the runway somewhere near Phoenix.

• In Clinton’s mind, even if Trump wins the primary, no voter in their right mind will take him seriously.

• Boom. Regardless of whether it’s versus Trump or someone else, Clinton wins the Presidency and interns return to their knees in the Oval Office.

Naturally, any proof of this even happening is pure conjecture that can only be backed up by a series of emails deleted from a private server in upstate New York.

The real sad thing is that I can’t put such a scheme past her.

Can you?

Randy Tharp

TharpSter is a husband to one woman, a father to two kids, a master to two dogs, an occasional cubical occupant, and unable to make up his mind on an adequate theme for this website.

Type something witty and eye catching right here: