In 1987, current Republican nominee for president, Donald J. Trump, co-authored a book entitledThe Art of the Deal.The Art of the Deal was #1 on The New York TimesBest Seller list for nearly a year, and was Trump's inauguration into being a household name. (I, like many of you, hope that that is the only inauguration he will be receiving, but we will get to that later). In short, his book is part memoir and part business advice, and to his credit, it has amassed a significant following, as well as respect within the business community. This book was produced as a result of Trump's business "successes," and I believe that after his 14 incredibly successful months on the campaign trail that he should write a book about his immense political success, aptly and purposefully namedThe Art of the Joke.

Now, I used very specific diction here by using "joke" to replace "deal." Why? A recurrent pattern has occurred to me as I have woefully followed the election this past year; seemingly every time Trump comes out and says something outright ridiculous/demeaning/insulting/irresponsible, his fellow political defenders, most notably former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, insist that Trump is merely "joking" or "being sarcastic."

Now, this leads me to the main story at hand, and one very specific and disconcerting example. This past week at a campaign rally in Wilmington, North Carolina, Trump was speaking on the topic of the Second Amendment, and the divisive debate that inexorably entails, specifically how it should be read, and what the "right to bear arms" really means. He was articulating that when Hillary Clinton becomes President, and has the power to choose the judges who will sit on the U.S. Supreme Court, she will inevitably "abolish the Second Amendment" (something that is, in fact, nothing she has ever said or even hinted at) and that "there's nothing that could be done about it." Instead of stopping here, he went on to retrace his steps, seemingly working on the fly with no teleprompter (or filter), and appeared to leave the door open just a sliver for a possible way in which to stop Hillary from having this opportunity, by saying that the Second Amendment people, a core base of the Republican Party, could in fact "do something about it". He went on to claim that this event would be "a horrible day."

It took me a couple times watching and re-watching the clip to fully grasp how real and legitimate this threat is. I mean, we have a major-party nominee who is terrifyingly close to being the most powerful individual on the entire planet. This same nominee who just not-so-subtle suggested that a Second Amendment person, someone who is probably an overt gun-lover and would go to extreme lengths to protect their guns, "do something" about Hillary Clinton, and her prospective policies that would "abolish the Second Amendment." Looking past the initial problem that is the fear-mongering and blatant lying regarding Clinton's position on the Second Amendment, what Trump just uttered was a call for political assassination. He has said a host of questionable and head-shaking things, but this, this is beyond it all. The guy is so thin-skinned, narcissistic, and oozing with pride that he is actually willing to suggest that one of his supporters assassinate Hillary Clinton as the only way to protect their beloved guns.

I tried to envision a legitimate defense and explanation for what he said, but I was unable to fathom anything that could effectively defend and explain his remarks. It wasn't until I watched Rudy Giuliani's interview on CNN with prominent anchor Chris Cuomo that I heard how the Trump Campaign is rationalizing his threatening comments. It was painful to watch, as Giuliani, an ex-attorney, stumbled through the defense, claiming that Trump was innocently referring to the voting power of the staunch and impassioned "Second Amendment people" when they are mobilized, and that Trump was just the vehicle driving this mobilization. Easy enough, everything's cleared up, right?

Wrong.

I suggest you watch the clip and judge for yourself, but between the bewildered reactions from the people in the crowd, and Trump going on to exclaim that "that would be a horrible day" something doesn't add up. As an aspiring attorney, that defense isn't convincing, and probably wouldn't hold up too well considering the context. (Why would mobilizing voters to vote out of their passion for the Second Amendment be "a horrible day" as Trump went on to say directly following his comments regarding the Second Amendment people doing something about Clinton and her prospective judges?)

My biggest concern that comes from this is that history repeats itself. This isn't the first instance of Trump inciting violence at one of his rallies, and calling on his constituents to lash out with violence. Earlier this year, Trump implied that if anyone disrespects his campaign or any of his supporters, that the offender should be "socked in the face." Within weeks, as a protester of one of Trump's rally's was being escorted out of the arena, a Trump supporter came out of the crowd and sucker-punched the protester in the face. The correlation to be drawn here is that the man's a demagogue, who plays on people's prejudices and desires, and his devout supporters worship him. A suggestion, implication, or joke can be heard by just the right person; an individual who wants to make a name for him or herself, make Trump proud, protect his or her guns, or a combination of all three. And that person can and will lash out, except this time it won't result in a punched protester, but the possibility of an assassination attempt on Hillary Clinton's life.

It's difficult to grasp the seriousness of this threat, as us millennials have been fortunate enough to not have dealt with any presidential assassinations, or really much violence at all towards them. But guess what, our parents experienced Ronald Reagan's close call with being assassinated, and our grandparents lived through the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert Kennedy, another high-profile politician.

The threat is real. And the time is ripe for someone with an unhinged hatred for Hillary Clinton combined with an obsession for Trump, guns or notoriety, to do something to change the course of this divisive and polarized election. The trigger is ready to be pulled. All that needs to be done is for the gun to be loaded. With Trump's comments, he may have just provided the ammunition.

I've heard enough "jokes" from Trump and his campaign. Enough fear-mongering, violence-inciting, and scapegoating. This election isn't a joke and it surely shouldn't be considered one. Unless you're looking for a cheap laugh, I'd recommend staying away from Donald Trump's The Art of the Jokewhen you're at the polls this November.