My Photo

Ordering Information

Tomi on Twitter is @tomiahonen

  • Follow Tomi on Twitter as @tomiahonen
    Follow Tomi's Twitterfloods on all matters mobile, tech and media. Tomi has over 8,000 followers and was rated by Forbes as the most influential writer on mobile related topics

Book Tomi T Ahonen to Speak at Your Event

  • Contact Tomi T Ahonen for Speaking and Consulting Events
    Please write email to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com and indicate "Speaking Event" or "Consulting Work" or "Expert Witness" or whatever type of work you would like to offer. Tomi works regularly on all continents

Tomi on Video including his TED Talk

  • Tomi on Video including his TED Talk
    See Tomi on video from several recent keynote presentations and interviews, including his TED Talk in Hong Kong about Augmented Reality as the 8th Mass Media


Blog powered by Typepad

« Debate Review: CNN Republican December Debate: All did good, no breakouts, no disasters: status quo maintained (and bonus: GOP Spice Girls Edition update) | Main | Lots More Detail About Narwhal 'Big Data' Machine Performance in Obama 2012 Campaign - Including several use cases and applications (vs Orca the Romney machine) »

December 20, 2015




There is indeed ample confirmation of Trump's Narcissism, for who might still need it:

Is Donald Trump Actually a Narcissist? Therapists Weigh In!

Note that Narcissism is a dangerous personality disorder with sometimes devastating consequences for those around the patient.

See for mental health details:


"he seems to be, a bigoted, racists, hateful, inconsiderate, narcissistic, xenophobic, egomaniac and a destructively delusional one at that."

You forgot to mention that he's also a wanna-be James bond character.

Oh, sorry, I thought you were describing yourself (Tomi) and LEFTist that detail out.

You're meaning to describe Trump.

If you're going to persist in wiping your hinder parts with the candidates, try applying a little bit-O-fanny fudge Clinton's way by describing her many nasty, down right evil traits as well..


Note that Trump will have a legacy. It is now shown that therre is a huge potential for a "genuine" Front National style anti-democratic party in the US, like there is in Europe, Russia, and Turkey.

Someone will jump into that segment. So I expect that some type of Tea Party will splitt off. Within US party structure, this might be a split in the GOP along state boundaries.



“America is the only country where a significant proportion of the population believes that professional wrestling is real but the moon landing was faked.”

― David Letterman

These are the die hard supporters of Trump.

And why Trump can lie with impunity?

I recognize this from European populists. His supporters do not care about the truth. They want bloody revenge on the "establishment. If the establishment wants to protect the environment,destroy the environment. If the establishment is against discrimination of minorities, deport them all. They want a strong man who will take revenge, by any means.

Just seeing the establishment in a fit of rage is its own reward in itself.


Hillary lies about Trump being used by ISIS in videos for recruiting


"Sir Edmund" Hillary Clinton lies as bad
Her supporters don't care about the truth.
The rich ones giving to the Clinton foundation just want access and payback if she is elected.
The poor ones just want to stay on the public dole.
She is the same establishment Trump's supporters are trying to destroy.
Hillary's supporters don't care about the truth.
This might get interesting.

If the Trump campaign calls, I will suggest sending all the refugees and illegal immigrants to Finland where Tomi can be there to welcome them with open arms.


OK, you've lost it Tomi. Trump is a narcissist, and he's running to promote himself. The WSJ had a good op-Ed piece over the weekend. Trump can't actually finance a long campaign. He's been getting tons of free media. Even today Face the Nation spent its entire panel time devoted to Trump vs Saturday's Democrat debate. But Trump has only about $70MM in liquid assets. Romney spent $44MM of his own money in 2012. Trump won't get any SuperPAC support. So he'll run out of money quite quickly.

The GOP nomination will come down to Cruz or Rubio. That said, Trump is a symptom of the state of American politics. There is a not insignificant portion of the populace who doesn't trust either party to fix what's wrong with our country.

Tomi T Ahonen

Hi Winter, untomi and tz

Winter - thanks on the links to narcissism and yeah Trump is clearly having a major narcissistic disorder that is obvious and anyone commenting on it says he is just about as perfect a case of that as possible. Some psychologist said that they were collecting Trump video for educational material and had earlier planned to hire actors to play out such behavior, but Trump does it so obviously and blatantly in his normal life - he is the walking talking case study for students to observe and learn about that disorder.

untomi - haha funny and yeah... I do see elements of Trump's behavior in myself too. I clearly have a huge ego and am to some degree a narcissist as well. But I trust nobody thinks I am a bigoted racist or hateful, inconsiderate or xenophobic. And my megalomania has been kept in check as has my Bond villainesque tendencies by my modest standing in life. In another life, however, I could be posting these blogs from inside a hollowed-out volcano and stroking a white cat. Nah, I'm not a cat person. I'd feed that ugly puss to my vicious dog.

Now about your desire for me to write about Hillary. I will, when there is something to bother about. There is nothing going on, at that side of the aisle. She is sleepwalking to her coronation and the usually rambunctious Democratic party has been hypnotized to follow that path as if zombies. There is nothing to write about. Nada. Even that Benghazi witch-hunt turned out to be a victory lap for Hillary. untomi, I will write about Hillary when there is something to report. I won't waste my readers time putting her name on some nonsense of no news, even if some conservative readers would like me to say nasty things about her 'for a change'. untomi - the Democratic party is not talking about boycotting Hillary as a candidate. They are not calling her a communist. They are not saying they would give their money to the Republicans if she becomes their nominee and they are not saying they would vote for the other side if she wins their party's race. But - TOTALLY UNUSUALLY - Trump IS getting all that from his side. Many in the Republican party are saying they will boycott the election if Trump is the nominee. They are calling him a fascist - something no Republican has called their front-runner in decades. DECADES. Many Republican donors have said they would give their money to Hillary if Trump becomes the nominee, and more saying they'd vote for Hillary. The polling says ONE IN SIX Republicans would abandon the party and vote for Hillary if Trump is the nominee !!!! One in six. Thats an election landslide loss. Its Mondale or Goldwater level crushing defeat.

The reason I write about occasional election topics is if there is something significant happening. On the Republican side there have recently been several significant events such as the brief rise and rapid collapse of Dr Ben Carson or now the unstoppable rise of Trump. I write about what is happening. And then I'm honest about it. The Trump phenomenon is a wrecking ball to the Republican party. I report it honestly. Incidentially its what MANY of the LEADERS of the Republican party including former Republican Presidential candidates John McCain and Mitt Romney have said. Its what current party leadership like Paul Ryan in the House and Mitt McConnell in the Senate have said. Its not just me here on this blog as the weird 'liberal' writer. I call it as I see it - and once again - what I called, also REPUBLICAN and CONSERVATIVE writers have seen. But when Hillary does have something happening, I'll be on it, don't you worry. But the nomination is not a fight, its a coronation and thus, very likely the first real relevant Hillary blogs won't come until next summer with the Conventions and her pick for Vice President...

Winter - on Trump's legacy. Ok, yeah. One, there has been a number of really tiny splinter parties in the USA that do also from time to time nominate Presidential candidates. Rand Paul's dad Ron Paul ran on the Libertarian Party's ticket for example. And there are a bunch of Nazi-type ultra nationalist right-wing nutcase parties that occasionally nominate some head of the Ku Klux Klan etc as their Presidential candidate to obviously less than 1% national vote results. What Trump might do, is create an opportunity for those lingering, festering voter groups to collect together, perhaps as the new Tea Party/Freedom Party/Trump Party or perhaps, separate from that and the Republican party, one could just kind of grow organically more-or-less around Trump. A kind of Le Pen style nationalist party. It would suck voters away from the Republicans and even if the new party only got to say 10% of the national support and won a few seats in the House, it would tilt national elections massively against the Republicans, effectively splitting their vote and giving large majorities in every way to the Democrats.

Now I have said for years that what would be good for the USA is to get rid of the two-party duopoly and move to more pluralistic democracy with more viable national parties. Yes its a kind of sad development if the first national 'new party' is the Nazi party, sorry Nationalist Tea Party/Trump Party of hatred and xenophobia and racism - but that sentiment exists. If it had its own party, and those who really are such 'haters' left the Republican party, the Republicans could get back to their freedom-appreciating liberty party it was as the one of Lincoln that freed the slaves. So it would be a healthy development for the USA, if the nutcases are packed into one loonie party on the Right, the Republicans can invite back their moderates who are living in exile listing their party affiliation as 'Independent' - and then have the sensible new Republican party fight for the middle with Democrats, for sensible solutions, while the loonie right wing nuts yell and sream from the sidelines but at least, are not in power. As to European democratic trends, I would see sooner or later after that happened for something like the European 'Green Party' concept take hold as a revolt inside the Democratic party and if Hillary rules as the Iron Lady she seems cut out to become, she could alienate many idealistic younger voters who could split into that Green Party. And yeah, with Bernie Sanders's brave but doomed campaign, you'd kind of hope his legacy would be a genuine, if maybe modest size Socialist Party to be kind of the left-wing end, where the Tea Party would be the right-wing end. And the USA in say a decade or two, could evolve from the current rigid two-party system to four or five parties.

As to Tea Party split itself as break from Republican party. That has now become nearly a hysteria among GOP leaders and Politico had an article saying if Trump becomes the Republican party nominee, then a REPUBLICAN candidate should run as the 'Independent' and 'split' away from the main party, so that some disgusted Republicans would have a kind of political and moral home in the election, that they would not have to select between the evil of Trump or the evil of Hillary haha. And then that this martyr would of course lose to historic levels but at least it would help eliminate Trump's chances of beating Hillary because most serious politicians see that a Donald Trump as US President would be a gamble at the nuclear war brink. He is utterly unpredictable and ridiculously easy to provoke. He is totally everything the planet does not need, for nuclear annihilation stability. What the world needs is stable leaders. Even unpredictable Putin in Russia is a far greater threat to nuclear annihiliation than past Soviet or Russian leaders including Stalin and Krushchev. But I do find it funny how quickly the conservative writers went from 'Trump cannot possibly win' to 'our party is in danger of being destroyed'. That switch was literally in a few weeks. (and if you read my earlier analysis of Trump and his impact.. I did warn this was on the cards if Trump kept being viable.)

On your next comment - gosh thanks. David Letterman is/was the best. And on that truth vs enrage, yeah, it is weird, and kind of sad but also very true. I wonder if that has somehow been manufactured. Like take terrorism. There are hundreds of mass shootings in the USA every year, every year some kill far more than what happened by the Muslim couple in San Bernardino. And after the World Trade Center attack in 2001, how many successful Muslim-terrorist attacks have there even been in the USA, a handful. Now. Should Americans be incredibly alarmed at the GUN VIOLENCE? Yeah. Is that unusual. No. Should Americans be incredibly alarmed by TERRORISM. Gosh no. There were more than one airline hijacking PER DAY one year in the 1970s, it was that common. One lousy 'Muslim terrorist' shooting in California and the whole country is in shambles. Come on! This is totally manufactured fear, utterly pointless. But is it perhaps created by 24 hour news sensationalism, not just by Fox, this is certainly the way Wolf the Blitzer dude does his show on CNN nightly. Anger and fear every night, especially if its terrorism. The reality of how rare 'terrorism' actually is, in the USA, is utterly not in proportion to the fear and hysteria about it that they have. This is baffling to me. And I kind of ponder if the terrorist leaders really knew, how little they apparently would need to 'achieve' to utterly paralyze the USA... And I wonder if part of this is the Obama factor combined with (Trump-created) birtherism. That if George Idiot W Bush was the President, after a San Bernardino shooting, he'd be on TV saying, come on folks, relax, all is ok, that was a rare isolated incident. Please go back to Christmas shopping. And most would take that as reassurance. But if Obama says there isn't a big terror threat in the USA, Fox yells at him for ignoring a blatant obvious huge threat, and the rest of the TV channels invite some Dick Cheney's or similar idiots to say how wrong the President is. That even as he is not a Muslim, he gets now painted as if he WAS a Muslim and somehow he was trying to find common cause with the terrorists. Its bizarre. But yeah, thanks for all the fear-mongering Fox and friends (and CNN !!)

(more replies coming

Tomi Ahonen :-)


Just one example of why Trump can lie with impunity, his supporters do not care about reality at all:

CNN Interviews Trump Supporters - They Don’t Care That He’s Lying
“Don’t try and screw this up - you’re not gonna convince me otherwise”

"I’ve been saying for a while that the right wing voting base simply doesn’t care whether Donald Trump is lying or not, and this CNN video appallingly demonstrates that point. These people have been so thoroughly brainwashed by years of right wing propaganda that a blatant fascist like Donald Trump can just step in and take control at this point."


Lindsey Graham drops out of the race.


That is a thought-provoking read. I think I agree with Ahonen's hypothesis / speculation, that Donald Trump wants to be elected to be President (or at least to be the Republican nominee), but doesn't actually want to be President. Bluecat has said much the same thing.

And...I don't know which is more terrifying - the idea that Trump knows 75% of what he says is total bullshit, or the possibility that he believes it at the time he says it.

One thing Ahonen is wrong about - Donald Trump is taking donations - 4 million dollars worth, according to the FEC. There is a link to donate on the Trump website, easily accessed by going to

So I don't think Trump drops out before the Republican convention and likely floor fight. He likes a rumble, and the idea of thousands of people shouting his name and waving his signs will feed his gigantic ego.

Ahonen reminds us of Trumps long association with WWF at his hotels, and writes:

Trump is playing us. He’s campaigning not on US Presidential race rules, he has decided to play with Pro Wrestling rules instead.

If nominated, Trump will probably even run a credible general election campaign. Perhaps his goal is simply to wreck political discourse in this country, to cheapen and degrade all civility and journalistic integrity, to remake all of that in his own reality-show, crass, pro-wrestling, gloriously fake image. don't think that he can win in a general election... but if, all deities forbid it, he does....

Then it will be to make the US Presidency his vehicle for the biggest "deal" ever. To make Cheney's shameless war-mongering in order to get contracts for Halliburton look like small potatoes. To build up the Trump empire.

And if a few eight year old Muslim girls or five year old Syrian boys get stomped in the process, hey, just cut to the commercial break, which will be all flowers and sunshine.

Millard Filmore

@Tomi: "even if the new party only got to say 10% of the national support and won a few seats in the House"

A new party would need to get to work rather quickly. The effort required to get on the ballot of the states is not trivial. An appalling number of petition signatures are required to be turned in some months before the voting. Only the big parties are grandfathered into an election.

Wayne Borean


I think you are missing something. Donald Trump maybe a narcissistic maniac, but he's also extremely smart. So if he is so smart, why is he acting like this?

I don't know. Not for certain. But I can guess. What if Donald Trump knows something we don't, something important?

Trump has money, enough money to hire lots of private detectives. What could those detectives have discovered? What if they turned up something about Hillary Clinton that isn't known, and is really negative?

There are dozens of possible scenarios. Trump is smart. What has Trump got in his pockets, Precious...

Stephen Reed


I very much enjoyed reading your post, especially your intriguing speculation, and your increasing focus on Donald Trump.

As a Trump supporter I could remark on every paragraph but let me just say a few things from the perspective of a well educated former Texas Democrat and Obama volunteer who is not only changing parties, but is volunteering for the Trump primary campaign in Texas.

Among your scenarios, I suggest that the Trump you see is the real Trump. Your market segmentation comment is correct.

Being older than you, I can recall a time in the USA when there was very limited immigration, when there was no terrorism, when everything available for purchase was made in the USA, when union jobs were plentiful, and when a man made enough income so that a wife could stay at home to care for numerous children full time. Trump remembers that time too and that is the theme of his campaign.

Here is what Trump calls "Crippled America" ...

Globalism, the new world order, the free movement of capital, intellectual property, goods/services and labor have greatly benefited the world as a whole - who should know better than yourself. But back in the 1950's the USA was about half the world economy and now is a much smaller part. When I go to a Walmart (largest department store chain) everything is manufactured in low wage countries outside the USA. Legal immigration and visas drive down the price of high tech labor in the USA, and illegal immigration drives down the cost of low-skilled labor. In Austin, a sanctuary city where I reside, there is an out migration of african americans who choose not to compete for low wage jobs that illegals take.

In the era before the Vietnam War, the USA was not the world's policeman. In the following decades, Republican and some Democrat neocons (the pro-war military/industrial complex) engaged the USA in a series of expensive foreign wars.


Regarding 9/11, I recall credible news reports at the time that Muslims in New Jersey were cheering as the towers fell. Increasingly, anti-jihad web sites and blogs are attracting American audiences. I hope that if you have young female relatives in Finland that they are very cautious given the news of numerous rapes by Muslim immigrants there.


Trump is winning not only by force of personality, intelligence, and political instinct, but winning because his issues resonate with the republican electorate. I understand Populism to be a good thing for a democracy, to the extent that issues popular with most people should be supported by politicians. As you know in the USA our democracy is not perfect; in recent years elections have proven so expensive that special interests, e.g. industries, trade associations, unions, etc. donate to candidates and elected officials to the extent that unpopular laws and policies are common in the USA. Trump knows this well from the viewpoint of having made such donations to politicians. But free from the need to accept donations because of his personal wealth, Trump can adopt popular issues which have long been ignored by the donor class and their establishment politicians.

The proposed ban on Muslim immigration is a case in point. Trump made the dramatic announcement on the heels of the Muslim terrorist attacks in Paris and in San Bernardino, the latter hitting very close to home for the American electorate. I would argue that existing federal immigration law gives the US President the right to make such a ban with arbitrary criteria - but that is not important. The takeaway is that neither the donor class nor the political establishment could have made such a ban because they are concerned about the reaction of the Muslim majority countries, and domestic Muslims. Trump on the other hand knew that his proposal would be popular among persons who might possibly vote for him in the primary election. This is the nature of Populism. He characterized the ban as common sense. If there was no way to completely vet Muslim immigrants for anti-American sentiment, then simply not accept them and save the lives that would otherwise be lost due to certain immigrant terrorists. Opinion polls have proven Trump correct in how popular his proposed temporary ban would be among Republicans, and supported to a lesser extent among independents. Unlike Europe, Muslims registered to vote in the USA are a small percentage, and would vote for the democratic candidate anyway by probably 80% - so Trump could ignore them.

Birthright citizenship / Anchor Babies is another case in point. The donor class cannot agree to this, but it is quite popular among his base of supporters - a populist issue. I believe that a President Trump will get a constitutional case before the US Supreme Court and win it.

Trumps proposals for trade, for the use of military force, for limiting immigration and deporting illegals and Muslim refugees, will - he argues - restore the American economy, and American culture to how I remember it in the 1950s. I accept that China, Japan, and Mexico and maybe the rest of the world will suffer recession as a result.

Suppose that a President Trump finds a way to tax imported cell phones so as to compel their manufacture in the USA for sale to American customers. How much of a tax would it take? And would Americans be willing to pay substantially more for a cell phone in order to create lots of domestic manufacturing jobs?


I predict that if Trump wins Iowa, he will win every other state. At the moment Cruz leads in Iowa. If Cruz wins Iowa, I expect that Trump will win New Hampshire and then win every other state. And should Cruz win Iowa and remain second place in most other states, the Trump could choose Cruz as his Vice President running mate, thus obtaining the support of Cruz delegates at the Republican Convention, and securing his flank on the right among conservatives for the general election.

In the general election, I believe you are correct about the pivot. Being a former Democrat, Trump is well positioned to propose centrist populist policies to sway independents in the swing states. I agree with you that Trump will get left of Clinton on one or more issues - refactoring foreign trade to create US manufacturing jobs being one of them.

You believe that Trump will be crushed in a general election against Hillary Clinton. I believe the opposite. Setting aside arguments on Trump's electability, you completely leave out the numerous disadvantages Clinton faces ...

* The FBI may present evidence that Clinton has committed national security felonies or obstruction of justice felonies. No felon has ever been elected US president. Obama would be forced to either pardon her or instruct his Justice Department not to prosecute her. Either alternative is damming to both Clinton's campaign and to Obama's legacy.

* The USA is tired of Clintons. Hillary is proven loser, to Obama in the 2008 primary where she was also the initial front-runner. Bill Clinton may not necessarily a plus for Hillary Clinton as a campaign surrogate.

* Hillary is tied to Obama, inheriting his policies and forced to defend them. Obama is increasingly unpopular in the USA, with the situation becoming more similar to that of McCain in 2008 having to defend the unpopular G W Bush.

* Trump and numerous financial experts predict a recession in the USA, perhaps as soon as 2016 as the US Federal Reserve raises interest rates. A recession is very bad for an incumbent or a candidate forced to defend an incumbent in the same party.

* Trump will conduct his general election campaign in the same fashion as his primary campaign with regard to political advertising. It is proven that Trump gets media the high ratings they crave, and I expect Trump to have a similar proportion of free media exposure versus Hillary Clinton similar to what he enjoys over the current republican field. Trump has a faster decision loop as you point out, and will react to events faster than Hillary keeping her confused.

* Trump will characterize Hillary Clinton as not having the strength nor stamina required for the office of President. His observation is based on fact, which should become apparent over the grueling primary campaign schedule.

* African Americans will not turn out for Hillary Clinton in the same numbers as when Obama was running.

* Hispanics may respond positively to a Trump message on limiting illegal immigration because they would benefit from less competition and safer neighborhoods.


I eagerly await your next article on the American election.

Wayne Borean


I read your comment with interest. At this point in time, I'm projecting a Trump Primary win.

Why? There's several reasons:

1) Trump isn't a politician. Americans don't trust politicians. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Though the analogy is bad, since the American electorate has been fooled by every president since Nixon.

2) Trump isn't depending on the donor class. This makes his choosing Cruz as running mate unlikely, since Cruz is beholden to donors. I have no idea who Trump would pick for a running mate, the only other presidential candidate who isn't beholden to the big donors is Bernie Sanders. A Trump/Sanders ticket may seem insane, but both men have enough policies in common that it might work.

3) I don't see Hillary Clinton as a weak candidate, but I do consider her flawed. The woman is a psychopath (guess based on seeing her on TV). Nothing matters to her but Hillary. In my opinion, that is a huge Achilles heel. Sanders would be a far better choice as the Democratic candidate.

4) Terrorism isn't immigration related. Most terrorism is internal, like the shootings at the Jewish Centre. Terrorism in the U.S.A. has always been internal, the KKK being a good example of a terrorist organization. The few cases of terrorism that have external causes are driven by American foreign policy (Boston Marathon and Fort Hood shooter).

5) If you are so concerned about immigration, you should self-deport, and give the land back to the First Nations.

6) Trade is a fun subject. As a former Major Accounts Sales rep, who did a lot of international travel, I liked lack of barriers. Hell, I took advantage of the situation, wiping one competitor out of a market niche (which left us in control of that niche - a very satisfying outcome). But I also saw the damage that uncontrolled trade did. A lot of the U.S.A. looks like a third world country. Far too many people are super poor, far too many people are working two or three jobs to make ends meet. There has to be a better way to handle things.

7) Fixing trade does nothing unless the limitations in banks are brought back into force. Canada was considering deregulating the banking sector, fortunately the financial meltdown started, and deregulation became politically toxic.

8) Taxes, taxes, taxes. Two things need to be done, first the tax code needs to be simplified. Second, exemptions for people earning more than $200k need to be abolished, and minimum tax for those earning above that level need to be 50% or maybe higher. Those earning less than $40k should pay no Federal taxes, and no State taxes.

All of which leads us to whether or not Trump can win. As I said in an earlier comment, Donald Trump is smart. I can't see him running for President without having gamed out the entire thing from the start. He may want everyone to believe he is shooting from the cuff, but he isn't. I know. I may not have pulled deals at his level, but I've worked some pretty large deals, and you don't play silly buggers when working with millions (or billions) of dollars.

Stephen Reed


I build on Tomi's pivot argument to suggest that Trump picks Cruz as VP.

If Trump needs Cruz delegates at the convention, then he can offer Cruz the VP slot as part of the deal. If Trump does not need Cruz delegates by virtue of winning enough delegates himself, then Cruz as VP would appeal to the religious and conservative Cruz supporters that otherwise would dislike positions that Trump will take in the general election as a result of his pivot towards the center.

Cruz has signaled his acceptance of this outcome by not attacking Trump in the primary, rather Cruz is chummy with Trump and they have appeared in a joint event to protest the Iran treaty. Cruz has evolved his positions on the issues to be more like Trump in nearly every case. This again is a signal.

Hillary is very likely to choose a young hispanic male as running mate. Cruz would match up nicely against this decision of Hillary.

Personally, I do not care for Cruz, and being a Texas voter, have voted for the democrat instead. Nonetheless, and given what we know now, I believe that Trump will choose Cruz.

Regarding my views on immigration and the threat of terrorism, they are widely shared by Trump supporters, and perhaps shared by a majority of American voters if the questions are framed in a certain way.

Tomi T Ahonen

Hi tz, Catriona and Winter

tz - haha ok, Hillary Clinton lies too. Big whoopte doo. We knew all that, she was not campaigning as a saint. But look at the freshly-announced PolitiFact Lie of the Year award. They categorially stated that Trump has simply lied more than any politician they have ever measured. So yeah, PolitiFact also measured that 26% of President Obama's statements are untrue and 28% of Hillary Clinton's. They are both less than ALL Republican nominees this time! Even the least lying Republicans lie 32% of the time. Carly Fiorina was up to 50%, Ted Cruz 66% and yes, Donald Trump lies 76% of the time. You want to accuse Hillary 'also' of lying, then yeah, she lies far less than half, almost as little as a third as much as Trump. Now I'd prefer politicians never lie, but that would be naive haha. But I'll take the least lying candidate over the most lying candidate EVERY TIME. And I would never vote for one who lies more than tells the truth ie lies 50% or more.

Now does Hillary represent 'the establishment' yes and totally so. Not just the political establishment in general, she has taken the most public position since Daddy Bush on running for the third term of the sitting incumbent President. So Hillary represents Obama too, and Obama today is nowhere near as popular as Ronald Reagan was back in 1988. But thats also a problem for Trump. Only PART of the Republican base is angry at the establishment. Almost none of the Democrats are. And the vast majority of the Independents in the middle are NOT angry at the establishment. So this appeals to the base voters in a Republican primary. Its a losing proposition - just look at Bernie - on the Democratic side and would be a colossally losing proposition in the general election. But good luck with that haha. I'll be here in November 2016 when you can come and cry about your loss..

Catriona - so where was it that I 'lost it'? Wasn't that exactly what I wrote? That Trump's a narcissist and that I did't see his money going to be spent in the general election so as this early part has been almost free, he can enjoy it, but once the money is needed, I can't see him wanting to spend his cash. Where was I lost? On the GOP nomination coming down between Cruz and Rubio, yes that is a distinct possibility (and would be healtier for the party than for Trump to run all the way to June). But Catriona. Except for Iowa, Trump leads in ALL the in-state polls. All of them. Even Florida, home of your Rubio or Texas, home of your Cruz. Texas will be proportional but Florida? Its winner-take-all and if Rubio cannot win in his home state, he is truly toast. Every recent poll that came out, Georgia, North Carolina, Massachussetts, Trump is ahead everywhere. The last state-wide poll other than Iowa, where Trump was not ahead was Wisconsin more than a month ago, where Trump was a tight second to Ben Carson and by now, Carson isn't gonna win anything out of Wisconsin either. If Trump can score well - winning some, and placing well in others - in the early states that award proportionally, and then do well on March 15 when the winner-take-all states start - come on, and defeat Cruz back home in Texas and defeat Rubio back home in Florida, gosh, why on earth would you think Trump would be out of it?

I argued here in the blog that Trump may not be SERIOUS to run, but he is LEADING and even if he's not serious, he may win it without even wanting, because this method works (for the World Wrestling Federation voter, sorry, for the Fox News voter, sorry, for the Tea Party voter) for enough of a plurality in the Republican base, that as long as several Republicans split the rest, and neither Cruz nor Rubio emerges as the clear alternative - then Trump will keep picking more delegates. But yes, if Trump QUITS voluntarily, then BY DEFAULT it would fall to Cruz vs Rubio. If Trump stays in it, its Trump vs the pair of midgets. Rubio is not strong enough to take Trump down. Cruz might be, but he is unwilling. And until Trump gets plastered from all sides, he stands. And then he goes on to collect tons of votes as the Alpha Dog. The in-state polling is truly alarming if you are thinking of the party and any rival to Trump. Me, here at the CDB blog, gosh I'd love to experience a deadlocked convention actually that the voting goes on, on the floor, with no decided nominee at the start. I'd love to witness that scenario once (on either side, as I've said, I have no dog in this fight)(oh, and a deadlocked convention especially with 24 hour news and social media and Twitter) and it is becoming increasingly likely. Plus as I've written, the GOP is diseased with TeaPartyitis and that disease must be cured, and to get there, the party will need to experience an epic loss. So the sooner the better for the USA. And with that, I of course hope that Ted Cruz becomes the nominee this time to bring that epic loss to the party the soonest, to get the cure also working the fastest and get the party back to pursuing sensible goals.

On Trump the symptom of the nation - no. Absolutely not true. He is only a symptom of the Republican side, who for just reason, feel betrayed by the repeated lies by Bush-Cheney, then Sarah Palin and the Tea Party, then serial liar Mitt Romney and now the current Senate and Congress. I mean, at one point its 'shut down the government because of Planned Parenthood' and a few weeks later - a REPUBLICAN budget with FULL FUNDING for PP. I mean, come on. If I was a Republican voter, gosh I'd be mad too. But the Democrats are not mad. We just saw the poll last week that the vast majority of Bernie's supporters would be perfectly happy with Hillary as their President. And most in the middle, the moderates, they HATE what Trump is doing, not that they'd be somehow begging to burn down the Capitol. There is SOME anger on the left and in the middle. Yes, some voters would be also taken from Hillary if Trump ran. But nothing NOTHING like the one in SIX that would desert the Republicans to vote for Hillary.

Gosh, thats the biggest loss since.. who was that guy who spoke of Lets Make America Great Again, but actually meant it? Yeah, the Reagan Democrats. They didn't vote for Reagan because they wanted an ultra-conservative. they voted AGAINST JIMMY CARTER. That is EXACTLY what Trump would do now. He'd create a class of Republicans who would vote AGAINST TRUMP and they would be known as 'Hillary Republicans' and they would be a big reason why some Democrats over around year 2025 will suggest that Hillary's face should be cut into the rock next to the four American statesmen on Mount Rushmore as the first woman President who 'was so bipartisan' haha. Wouldn't that be the most bitter pill to all who hoped to put Reagan's old mug onto the rockface haha. That Trump came and enabled hated Hillary to get her grandma's grin onto the cliffs.

Winter - gosh yeah, its really painful to watch those vox pop interviews of Trump supporters. Its like someone has polluted the gene pool and the worst nutcases are let loose. Its sickening to listen to them. But God bless them, haha, they will have their moment and then hopefully at some point in the future, someone will explain to them what a lie is, and why lying will not get your elected President, and that yes, Trump was actually a bad boy, yes and thats why he lost.

But the point is true. The base Fox News viewer has been conditioned to accept these lies as truths. So the Republicans made their bed, now they have to sleep in it (for many election cycles). Incidentially... what do you think Hillary will do with House and Senate inquisitions once she has both houses (but not before)? You think she hated Benghazigate. You think she hated WHITEWATER. And the impeachment hearings for Bill. You think Clintons are at all vindictive? I betcha that Congress where Democrats take both houses (either 2016 or 2018 or 2020 or very latest 2022) will be a serious attack of 'PROPER' hearings but against really many Democratic targets including all of the Clintons' enemies. And they will subpoena all emails... So yeah, obvious ones like Dick Cheney haha and the Koch Brothers and Sheldon Adelson. But also... all Republicans of the Benghazi hearings... and then what about Fox News? The USA has the freedom of press but what could a massive congressional hearing reveal about the mission of Fox to distort the truth and deliberately lie and to DECIDE not to correct errors? It would be a First Amendment nightmare but somehow I think if the Democrats controlled both Houses, they could call the Fox News management for some grilling in front of the nation and expose some of their lies. And then toss some of their management to prison next to Dick Cheney and perhaps.. perhaps Fox might evolve to a less lying more honest network. Who knows. But I could see the DEMs trying that. And if this was when Hillary has flipped the Supreme Court, it might even stand up to the court challenges haha. Give us all your emails... I am sure Hillary will want emails of all her rivals. All of them. And then humiliate them on hearings, true witch-hunts. Because this was not the first time she was attacked this way, and they also did it to her husband Bill. Its just one more reason why Hillary is so determined to flip not just the Senate, but the House.

For me, I don't care about the others but Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowiz and that gang, I'd want to see them rot in prison for the rest of their lives. Nixon's Chief of Staff Bob Haldeman was thrown to prison (but only 18 months) for Watergate as well as many lower ranks. (VP Spiro Agnew only resigned as part of a plea-bargain related to his tax mess). I think the Iraq war lies are a far worse crime than that and hoping that once Democrats have both Houses, they do run the too-long-delayed hearings about that war. And I'd love W Bush to also be found guilty but then for Hillary to pardon - only W but not the others. But Cheney is the worst war-criminal and he (and his gang) should live in prison till the day he dies.

(more replies coming, keep the discussion going)

Tomi Ahonen :-)

Tomi T Ahonen

Hi all

Two items of news. First off, yeah, Lindsay Graham quit the race (thanks Winter for posting the news here). He had no supporters left to divide to anyone, so it won't help anyone.

Then the Cruz news. Quinnipiac poll just out gives Trump 28% and Cruz 24%. Its the highest Cruz has ever been. Its the third highest polling of anyone other than Trump (Ben Carson received twice national a polling level above 24% and Jeb Bush never reached higher than 23% in any poll). Note that even this poll has Trump still up one point from their previous poll one month ago, so while Q has Trump below his RCP average, this poll means even Q finds Trump still on a slight upward tick. But this is one of those polls that consistently has Trump nearer 30% than 40% (based on methodology) and Cruz is really now nipping on Trump's heels. Can Trump just go along and ignore Cruz, as Cruz is clearly headed for a win in Iowa and now nationally starting to close the gap. Of course one poll does not mean anything more than a warning, we have to see if other polls will repeat this finding but now, if the gap is only 4 points as Quinnipiac counts it, then an 'Iowa Bump' after Cruz's victory there, could close that gap all by itself and Cruz could find himself a point or two ahead of Trump on the days after Iowa and heading to New Hampshire. (who was losing, obviously Ben Carson. Who else was gaining, Chris Christie has his national polling up to 6% which is his highest level since May). Oh, and add Cruz and Trump together and you have 52% of the Republican support haha.. Is this really their dream ticket.

Ok, will do replies next

Tomi Ahonen :-)

Tomi T Ahonen

Oh, sorry, forgot. Quinnipiac found that over half of Americans would be ashamed if Trump was their president and only a quarter would be proud.. yeah.. and he loses by 7 points if matched against Hillary. There was another poll just recently, might be PPP, that tested the three-way matchups, if race was Trump vs Cruz vs Hillary, Hillary wins by 45 and the two got something like 25 and 20. And if its Trump vs Rubio vs Hillary, Hillary still wins but only by something like 40 over the two others.

Tomi Ahonen :-)

Tomi T Ahonen

Hi Winter, Kim, Millard and Wayne

Winter - thanks. Its funny, so the one candidate who believed in global warming and not deporting Muslims and a path to citizenship for illegal aliens etc, that guy is kicked out of the race for no support. And this was the most warmongering candidate so you'd think for all the desire of bombing the arabs until the sand glows, haha, according to Cruz, that a Graham would find a slice of support. But no. (personally I think it was the low height standing next to Santorum. He looked like a pygmy - and this coming obviously from another pygmy).

Kim - thanks. And gosh I agree "I don't know which is more terrifying - the idea that Trump knows 75% of what he says is total bullshit, or the possibility that he believes it at the time he says it." So about the donations, yeah, Trump is selling his hats and made four million on that yeah. But I thought he doesn't have a pure 'donate here' campaign but yeah, if you say the button is there, then yes. Ok. That makes some sense but 4 million per quarter is utterly peanuts if the general election campaign would cost at least $1 Billion to be competitive against Hillary's money machine. And I cannot see Trump gambling his whole fortune or a vast slice of it, on such a bad bet as his run in the general election. It doesn't make sense to me. But if we see Trump now ramping up his donations intake to say 20 million this Christmas quarter and then to say 40-50 million by the next quarter, then yeah, it would start to make sense - and would suggest he's in it at least to the convention and possibly beyond.

I do totally agree that Trump would love the massive convention audience to scream his name and those balloons to drop on his candidacy. He'd love to be the candidate at that stage. And then yes were Trump ever to become President (as I said, a late Hillary heart-attack would alter the race dramatically) then it would be like a supersized version of The Apprentice meets Pro Wrestling haha. I do think most people would pay attention to his rants and 'press conferences' but he would be soon impeached. Not before he had transferred billions to his family - and then given them all Presidential pardons to prevent any criminal prosecution haha.

Millard - I hear you. I saw somewhere that one of the states has a very early deadline well before the Republican convention (might be Ohio) that kind of prevents Trump waiting to the convention and then running as Independent, and a bunch of them were right at that time, including Texas. And yeah, he'd need huge numbers of signatures but .. he'd have the money to hire a staff fast, and his Tea Party supporters could be mobilized real fast if he needed. He is a social media sensation definitely so he'd have the ability to mobilize those and should be able to match the onerous signature counts with only a modest amount of pain. But its likely if he started late, he would miss a few states totally. Ever further diminishing his chances of winning in a three-way race. (see above polling on three-way)

The Democratic dream is Cruz as their rival. Their Christmas present would be Trump as their rival. The combination of all Christmases coming at once, would be for Trump to run as a third party candidate.

Wayne - I totally agree with you. Trump is smart. He 'has to be smart'. His book, The Art of the Deal, was truly one of the biggest selling business books of all time and regularly recommended to all involved in any negotiations (I haven't read all of it, I read parts of it way back when. It didn't seem as useful to me, because so much of that was 'hardball' negotiations of the kind attorneys do when in litigation, and I trusted more my instincts of persuasion learned in debating and all the debate books I had already read, but the Art of the Deal is a kind of must-read for any negotiators, at least to recognize the 'hard nosed' negotiator when they appear across from you haha).

So Wayne, me too. Why would such a smart guy go into this (like this). I don't know, which is why I have been scratching my head and reading reems about him and thinking abut it, to come up with those four (or five) scenarios. Now that Trump would know something that the rest of us don't, about Hillary, yeah. That is possible. Its INCREDIBLY unlikely. I think Hillary is probably the most researched politician in history, because its been so obvious she would run for President, long before 2008 came along, and because the Clintons were so smelly of all kinds of scandals starting with Whitewater. So anyone with any nose for wanting to win a Pulitzer award, or write a bestselling book, has been digging into the Clintons for DECADES. Yes, its plausible that 'only Trump' has something that would be devastating to Clinton but that is HIGHLY unlikely. Its FAR FAR more likely that FAR MORE damaging history of Trump is discovered as the hungry media pack is now digging through his dirt. Remember, Hillary KNEW from before 1992, that she would follow Bill and run for office. She took all those 'I did not have sexual relations' lies and lived stoically through them standing alongside the hubby. She has played the long game on this, and knew from Whitewater hearings that anything may be drenched up. She's kept herself clean as a Catholic nun haha. She cannot have skeletons because they could sink her. I don't mean she is an angel, I mean that she won't have the obvious smoking guns. She'll be sleazy and untrustworthy, I'm sure. But she won't have any financial or sexual or other such skeletons in her closet. She's far too ambitious to let that happen. Bill may well have more, but not Hillary.

Now. That being said. If we NOW look at the Trump 2015 year, and if this all was planned, or at least 'sketched' that he'd go not only against the Mexicans but also women, John McCain, journalists, Muslims etc - if this was all part of the plan - then yes, Trump might have a completely unforseeable 'second act' for the General Election that could be some kind of masterstroke, similar to how appealing to the racist wing was to break into the race at that late date. It could be really something weird. Imagine a bribe to the Americans. Like the Alaskans now get a check as payment for the oil drilling taxes. So imagine something really outrageous but theoretically valuable. Sell a couple of national parks but in areas that are so valuable that he can pay all American taxpayers say 1,000 dollars. So sell something worth say roughly 200 Billion. Bribe the Americans for his vote. Promise this check is sent on the last day of February to all taxpayers. Something like that would horrify a slice of the country but most low-income people - this would be a huge infusion to their household and many struggling with credit card debt, would be a life-saver. The land held by the USA is worth about 1.8 Trillion dollars. Trump could go so far as selling a bit over half of that and promise all tax payers 5,000 dollars as his bribe haha...

I agree, if he really is going to run, and this is his PRIMARY season gambit he HAS to have something 'clever' and 'unforseeable' for the main election. Has to be. What Wayne suggested, gosh that would be a game-changer, picking Bernie Sanders as the Vice Presidential choice (but he would never in a million years agree to it). But again, it COULD be something really radical and weird, maybe something like a TV celebrity like himself, so Oprah, Letterman, Jon Stewart (all who would totally say no, but that TYPE of person, someone might be in his pocket, ready to say yes). Sarah Palin would be the Dumb & Dumber pairing that only the Tea Party would love but no, Trump is not a dummie.

Could there be something really outrageous but a promise that conceivably he could also deliver. Say abolish the national speed limit on the highways, so that just like Germany, you could drive as fast as your car can go. Could something like that ignite the voters and get them to vote for Trump even after all the nonsense. I'm thinking of his wealth. He could pay out of his own pocket but thats not big enough. If he liquidated all he owns, he couldn't pay all Americans even 100 dollars haha. He could theoretically promise all say a night or two nights for free at some Trump resort but just to have all Americans use up that coupon, would take a decade or more haha, so again, difficult to imagine. But some bribe, and selling some US government property could be a key - could be really raping the nation for Trump's personal gain. He'd be murdered for it by almost all sources though. I don't know. If he is serious, he HAS to have some 'awesome' plan to it, not this bullshit about banning Muslims or deporting illegals haha (or just building the most beautiful fence and having Mexico pay for it)

I totally agree with you, Trump is one of the smarter ones to run for office (nowhere near the smartest, not in class of Obama but maybe on par with Hillary and obviously anyone would be smarter than W Bush) and he cannot be going into it knowing this is it, there is no game plan for the general election, he will just continue with what played so well with the racist edge of the Tea Party haha.

(more coming)

Tomi Ahonen :-)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Available for Consulting and Speakerships

  • Available for Consulting & Speaking
    Tomi Ahonen is a bestselling author whose twelve books on mobile have already been referenced in over 100 books by his peers. Rated the most influential expert in mobile by Forbes in December 2011, Tomi speaks regularly at conferences doing about 20 public speakerships annually. With over 250 public speaking engagements, Tomi been seen by a cumulative audience of over 100,000 people on all six inhabited continents. The former Nokia executive has run a consulting practise on digital convergence, interactive media, engagement marketing, high tech and next generation mobile. Tomi is currently based out of Helsinki but supports Fortune 500 sized companies across the globe. His reference client list includes Axiata, Bank of America, BBC, BNP Paribas, China Mobile, Emap, Ericsson, Google, Hewlett-Packard, HSBC, IBM, Intel, LG, MTS, Nokia, NTT DoCoMo, Ogilvy, Orange, RIM, Sanomamedia, Telenor, TeliaSonera, Three, Tigo, Vodafone, etc. To see his full bio and his books, visit Tomi Ahonen lectures at Oxford University's short courses on next generation mobile and digital convergence. Follow him on Twitter as @tomiahonen. Tomi also has a Facebook and Linked In page under his own name. He is available for consulting, speaking engagements and as expert witness, please write to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com

Tomi's eBooks on Mobile Pearls

  • Pearls Vol 1: Mobile Advertising
    Tomi's first eBook is 171 pages with 50 case studies of real cases of mobile advertising and marketing in 19 countries on four continents. See this link for the only place where you can order the eBook for download

Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009

  • Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009
    A comprehensive statistical review of the total mobile industry, in 171 pages, has 70 tables and charts, and fits on your smartphone to carry in your pocket every day.

Alan's Third Book: No Straight Lines

Tomi's Fave Twitterati