This reality show is becoming scary

I used to enjoy the show, The Apprentice (especially the music..."Money, money, money, money, money - money!"). It was a novel idea where entrepreneurs and business grads competed to see if they were cut-out to work for none other than Donald Trump. 

Trump was both ruthless and entertaining. The show offered him the role of a superstar, one with superior business acumen and judgment. But it was fictitious. We know so much better now... or at least some of us do. 

Judging by the tightening polls, a good portion of America still believes in The Apprentice version of Trump. Apparently the public has a difficult time distinguishing fiction from reality. And Hillary Clinton has no idea how to rise above the reality show that has become this election campaign. 

To be fair, she's not alone. Others have fallen before her: Jeb "low energy" Bush, "little" Marco Rubio and "lying" Ted Cruz were decimated by the Trump train that tramples all who might offer a more rational approach to politics. The Republican debates were nothing but school-yard shouting matches, showcasing one man's celebrity appeal. 

Clinton once laughed aloud at the thought of Trump becoming a legitimate candidate (just another one of her awkward public moments). Now she may lose an election that should have been a cake walk for any Democratic candidate. 

But she is not, unfortunately, any candidate. She's the kind of leader whom everyone gets excited about until she gets up to speak. She's the kind of politician where a bout of pneumonia costs her 5% in the polls (doesn't sickness normally humanize a candidate?). 

She's a self-admitted unnatural politician, someone who doesn't glow in the spotlight like her predecessor. She's loathe to admit she's wrong and struggles to display her most redeeming qualities. She lacks political radar. There's a remarkable resemblance to Thomas Mulcair (except for the beard, of course), the interim NDP leader who doesn't quite understand the meaning of "interim." 

Yes, Clinton is remarkably inept at managing the media and gaining the public's trust. But the fact is, she's by far the more credible candidate.

Trump has displayed in full view his many, many shortcomings... like showing poor economic judgment (opposing all existing free trade agreements), lying whenever advantageous (claiming to not have supported the Iraq war when at the time he said he did), engaging in unethical business behavior (using his charitable foundation to settle private lawsuits and purchase paintings of himself), displaying a contempt for democracy (claiming the election will be rigged if he should lose), encouraging racism and divisions within the country (committing to ban all Muslims from entering the country and calling Mexicans criminals and rapists), demeaning women (insulting the looks of Ted Cruz's wife among others), and limiting the freedom of the press (banning certain news organizations from attending his events and admiring Vladimir Putin despite his clampdown on Russian media and the killing of journalists). 

This is just to name a few things. If this was any ordinary candidate, even a couple of these qualities would surely sink him. But not Trump. His persona is bigger than anything he says or does. He has successfully normalized lying and hate. And somehow, almost half the American public is willing to turn a blind eye to his deceit and ruthlessness. It's just a show, after all. 

I understand that the American public wants change. It happens every eight to ten years in democracies – it's the natural political cycle. 

But for the sake of your nation and the world, please, all ye American voters, let it not happen this November.