Jester,

For better or worse, I do believe that Hilary has a 'lock' on this. This will likely be long and rambling - I apologize in advance.

This is my reasoning and there's a lot of it: Just about everyone who is dislikes her is already  in that camp. Including me, as I'll be sitting out this election. Hilary is a narcissistic charcter disorder (e.g., "Coronate me, I deserve it") with a dollop of paranoia. I believe she is whip-smart. And, as you say, qualified - at least to keep the status quo going. But her 'weak' spot is of her own doing: e.g., Even the most freaking minor admission of having made a mistake, admitting a vulnerability - she is incapable of it - e.g., "I have pneumonia. I'm taking antibiotics for it. And feeling much better, thank you." How can someone so smart take such a dumb, shoot yourself in the foot stance that only embellishes her reputation for non-transparency and shadiness? I don't think she can help it. The narcissism plus paranoia (if I show any weakness, they'll tear me to shreds. All of my and Bill's problems come from a 'vast, right wind conspiracy.) Lady, just take a reasonable amount of realistic responsibility. David Brooks, probably the best-thinking Republican I've seen, summed it up this way: The reason people don't trust Hilary, is because Hilary doesn't trust them. Translated: She denies even the smallest of 'defects' - It makes her appear cold, and inhuman to a degree - the possibility that if he slips, and it's public knowledge, the public won't 'catch' (as in 'mosh pit') nor forgive her.

I think she did better in the debate, and I think that's probably attributable to that she must have a good staff, as they have a line on what turns people off. It's my speculation that they probably put her in front of a mirror for hours at a time, on many days, and taught her how to smile without looking smug. (That's narcissism in action.) She did pretty well on the smiling not looking smug or her usual 'bizarre' smile' where she looks like it was 'frozen' on her face, as if someone has just electrified a cattle prod that's up her butt. Or maybe her staff should get the credit. 

If she just sits tight, STFU for the most part, she's a shoe-in. Why? 1. Because Trump is an even *larger* (by far) narcissistic character disorder. I think Hilary's staff has sussed him out well. When you 'wound' him narcissistically, he often goes completely 'off the rails' and just *has* to go into a long, boring, who cares diatribe defending and (he hopes) negating the pride-wounding thing he's been accused of. Case in (many) points: When Hilary attacked his secretive non-release of his taxes, and accused him of being a tax cheat, he went into that defensive rant. What he should have done is 'counter punch' and stay on 'offense': Before he went out of control, he had said he'll release his taxes when she realeases all of the 33,000 emails that were on her server. I believe that if had followed that lead, and pursued it, he could've made her a bargain that she couldn't win: I'll release my taxes when you release the 33,000 emails you claimed contained no classified information, and wasn't hacked. And you release a transcipt of your talk at Goldman Sachs that netted you $225,000 for speaking for an hour or so. What made your time that valuable, eh? Have we got a deal? At that point, she's screwed - if she says 'yes' there's bound to be some really juicy bits that will become public and will be fodder with which to attack. If she says 'no' her reputation for hiding everything makes people worry even more.

Similarly, when she accused Trump of sexism, being disrespectful of women, calling them all kinds of degrading names, he screwed himself again - going on the defensive, denying such things happened. And again, he went 'off the rails' rather than being a good 'counter puncher.' I think he should've brought up the issue of Hilary's denigration of the women who alleged Bill with sexual predation as "Bimbo Eruptions" (well her staff coined that, but lie a bit, who cares? At the very least, she endorsed it.) And ask her to square that more recent statements that any woman who claims sexual abuse should be treated with the utmost respect and sincerity. Lady, your 'track record' is a problem - did you know that? Bingo.

Trump is not especially stupid. But like Hilary, he's his own biggest problem. When his fragile narcissistic image of himself gets 'wounded', he CAN'T HELP going into such a defensive rant, rather than doing the smart thing. And his problem with narcissism is a lot bigger than hers. Yeah, he does hold an advantage in terms of people expect him to lie and just give him a pass - the lies are so outrageous. Hilary is  held to a higher standard.

And, when Hilary talks about us being the 'clean energy superpower' of the century, why doesn't Trump again 'counter-punch' by highlighting that her 'solution' to the jobs lost for coal miners is 'retraining programs', and everyone knows that's an outright lie. Especially the coal miners themselves: Retraining someone who has no skills but mining coal for the past 35 years is not going to become a 'successful computer programmer'. And even if he could, will he be hired at an elevated salary, or the young kid who just got out of college? Lady, you've got no viable plan that will help the people you're kicking out of work. Gotcha.

And as the election moves closer, personally, it no longer seems like a really interesting sci-fi 'reality' show, and more worrisome. At least to me. Given Trump's penchant for out-of-control reactions, does one worry if Putin calls him a 'useless schmuck', and Trump has his finger on the nuclear trigger. Or make it a 'quiz' - which of the following people would you trust most with their finger on the nuclear trigger:

1. Moe

2. Larry

3. Curley

4. Trump

Maybe Trump beats Curley by a thin margin, but unless you like fireworks, you've gotta think about this one.

Lastly, and to kinda answer one of your questions: Yeah, there's an awful awful lot of anger out there about the 'status quo' politicians who promised the middle class relief and action in their interests, but instead 'threw them under the bus." And Hilary personifies that. And Trump is the beneficiary of that seething anger. And yeah, there's a strong element of 'wish fulfillment' - a simplification of a complex system, a promise made and believed that we can all live on 'Fantasy Island'. 

But I think the larger chance is that Trump will continue to self-destruct. Especially given that, if Hilary continues to 'have his number', as I believe she did last night, she knows how to make him go 'off script.'

The only disclaimer I make is this: If Julian Assange releases Clinton emails that shows she's been having a Lesbian sexual affair with Elizabeth Warren for years, that might be a problem. (Or maybe not - LGBT pride.) I have a hard time imagining similar scenarios that is going to derail her, as long as Trump doesn't learn to counter-punch, and she doesn't go back to acting like some 'anamatronic' character at Disneyworld. 

In any case, if Trump were to pull off the impossible and win, I'd suggest we all have our fingers on the portfolio 'sell' button, because the market opening the following day is going to look like 9/11 all over again. I apologize for the volume of words.