Speedy sniper shots triggered by the presidential debate

Three Comments to articles, and to others' comments, in the New York Times and the Washington Post:

Here are Democrats and liberals assuming that most of our citizens are so impressed by Trump's lies, delusions, and narcissistic bravado that they will make him president again. This is the worst cynicism possible in this country. And unfortunately, it is probably justified.

Pretty much the only way to defeat a thug-like, malignant narcissist is to have or adopt an even greater level of narcissistic-style self-confidence, but armed with facts. The opponent would have to understand and project that Trump is a pitiful, abortive child with an imperious façade that doesn’t fool or cow her one bit. Knowing this "in her bones" would give her the strength to look down upon the child with legitimate superiority, rueful contempt, and magnanimous pity. It’s that approach that has been missing in all of Trump’s opponents, leaving them wilted, babbling, emasculated. A "good" narcissist could make Abraham Lincoln, Albert Einstein and William Shakespeare feel like bumbling boobs.

A variation of the above:

A narcissist with an average (100) IQ would beat a genius in a debate because of the nature of the disorder. The person's identity is completely dependent on * his delusional self-confidence of perfection and ascendency, * his gyroscopic need and therefore ability to defeat the other by any means possible, such as lies and shaming, and * his wounded animal-based relish for cruelty and contempt. Yes, it's possible that a sincerely decent (not just politically decent), extremely articulate person could make the narcissist look like the rageful child he is. But the most likely victor would need to come from a place of deep psychological understanding of the narcissistic disorder, its pitifulness, and would then automatically project as the only adult in the room.