|Click above to read article
By Hal Brown, MSW, Retired psychotherapist
I was thinking about writing about the coming first GOP presidential wannabe debates and how I’d watch them if both Trump and Christi were on the stage together. This was after I watched the most recent appearance of Christi on “Morning Joe” where he was his usual acerbic and articulate self.
For sheer entertainment value pitting Christi against Trump would be a poltical version of the Thrilla in Manila, only in Milwaukee. In this instance instead of a battle to be the heavyweight champion of the world it would be to be one step away from being the leader of the Free World.
I have no doubt that Christi would be Muhammad Ali and Trump would be Joe Frazier. I don't know if Christi could match Ali's rhyming boast that the fight would be "a killa and a thrilla and a chilla, when I get that gorilla in Manila." He can't literally float like a butterfly but he can certainly sting like a bee.
I see him more like a great white shark and Trump like a lumpering walrus.
"The great white shark is a large predator that feeds on a variety of animals, including walruses. These sharks are one of the largest and most feared predators in the ocean and can reach up to 20 feet in length. They have sharp teeth that can easily tear through flesh, making them a formidable opponent for any animal." Reference with photos.
It could be dubbed after the fact as the Massacre in Milwaukee.
The last sentence in this Time article was click bait for me:
There’s no place where these dynamics will play out better than the debate stage, especially if the ex-President is on it. For candidates like former Vice President Mike Pence, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, or former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, this may be where the group piles-on Trump and provokes him. After all, Trump has never proven a terribly disciplined person when he feels disrespected, let alone challenged. Remember him bragging about the size of his… ummm… let’s say hands on stage at a debate in Detroit?
I clicked on the word bragging which led to this 2016 Time article. Here’s the excerpt which includes an unprecedented piece of braggadocio coming from a presidential candidate:
It was a debate that highlighted the GOP’s descent into the Twilight Zone, where facts don’t matter and displays of bravado substitute for policy. Within minutes of the start of the debate in Detroit, Trump was assuring supporters that his, um, hands were adequate—and it only escalated—or spun into the sewer—from there.
It was a spectacle unlike any other in modern debate history, with facts playing a minor role, records cast aside and personalities taking primacy over political purity.
“Look at those hands. Are they small?” Trump asked the crowd, holding his mitts up. “And he referred to my hands—if they are small, something else must be small. I guarantee you there is no problem.” The audience roared.
I won't bother elaborating about Freudian psychoanalytic theory beyond noting that in "The Intretation of Dreams" that all elongated objects such as sticks, tree-trunks, umbrellas, long, sharp weapons such as knives, daggers and pikes had a symbolic meaning. Reference
You can reach your own conclusions about why Trump might bristle and become defensive at the implication that he had short fingers.
My title is meant to be a rhetorical question.