It’s July 29, 2016.

And that means it’s 20 Questions Friday, which also serves as my commentary about last night’s presidential nomination acceptance speech by Hillary Clinton. Because it might have just generated more questions than answers.

— So, can Trump really tell the difference between Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Michael Jordan? 

— Despite the fact that there’s no love lost on my part, is there any doubt that Michael Bloomberg would kick Trump’s ass in a fight? 

— Are there more Democrats who won’t vote for Hillary Clinton than Republicans who won’t vote for Trump?

— After seeing Khizr Khan’s speech about his fallen hero son, does everyone now understand why using the phrase “radical Islam” is stupid? 

— Was that the most over-the-top balloon drop at any political convention ever?

— Is there a drought where you live?

— Is there some way to make blueberries, Vidalia onions and corn on the cob grow all year round?

— What do you think Jeffrey Lord does when he’s not on CNN?

— Changing nothing else about her life, would Hillary Clinton do better or worse in the polls if she ran as Hillary Rodham?

— Why do you never see videos of Trump mingling with people the way Hillary Clinton does?

— Remember when everyone thought there’d be violence in the streets at both political conventions?

— Did you watch the conventions on your TV screen, your computer screen or your phone screen?

— How many people know that the Rio Olympics start next week?

— Do you take your summer vacation before or after August 1?

— Why is the U.S. economy growing so slowly, and isn’t that still better than contracting?

— At what point did men wearing a jacket with no tie become a norm?

— Is there any better music to write to than English classical?

— Who’s the better actor: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar in “Airplane” or Scott Baio in anything he ever did?

— Do each of my remaining gray hairs reflect a time when the Mets left runners in scoring position?

— Is this summer going fast or what?

— So Bob, Luis and Gordon were still doing “Sesame Street”?

It’s Thursday, July 28, 2016.

Some thoughts after the third day of the Democratic National Convention:

— Yes, I’m blown away by the speeches.

The President was amazing. Joe Biden was great. And there was Bill Clinton on Tuesday night and Michelle Obama the night before.

But, to paraphrase, do they play in Peoria? Are people across the country getting the message?

Most of the people who watch the Democratic Convention are Democrats, as most of the people who watched the Republican Convention last week were Republicans. It’s an affirmation of your beliefs, the extension of why conservatives watch Fox News and liberals watch MSNBC.

So, are the speeches making independents think about voting for Hillary Clinton? And are they inspiring slightly less enthusiastic Democrats – including the Bernie Sanders backers – to get behind her candidacy?

We’ll start seeing the poll numbers next week. For about two weeks now, starting the week before the Republicans met in Cleveland, Clinton’s numbers have been sliding – a combination of the fallout from the FBI report on her e-mail and the GOP consolidating behind Trump.

If these were normal times, we would start to see a bounce in Clinton’s favor starting next week. If we do, the rhetoric worked.

If not, watch out.

— My god, the bar is high for Hillary Clinton tonight.

She has to give the best speech of her life, overcome her tendency to step on her best lines, and thread a needle to avoid saying anything that will piss off the Sanders people.

Over the past three nights, she’s watched her husband, her former boss and his wife leave the arena abuzz. Heck, even the second tier of speakers, including Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, have kept people engaged.

Clinton knows that speaking is not her long suit. She’s admitted it.

But, until the debates, this is her best chance to regain the lead in the polls and quiet the drumbeat of antipathy that beat strong in Cleveland last week.

One thing for certain: Before the convention, there was talk that she wanted to avoid the same negative tone about Trump that was sounded against her by the Republicans. She has let others do the dirty work.

Now, she needs to minimize the anti-Trump talk. She needs to give people reasons to vote FOR her rather than AGAINST Trump. That’s the big challenge tonight.

— I don’t know half the people in the Elizabeth Banks-produced music video that supports Hillary.

But I was thinking earlier this week that Clinton needs a song to galvanize support. And this video of “Fight Song” does a really good job. It’s very catchy, and the video is fun to watch.

“Fight Song” is a hit single by Rachel Platten. I, being the old man I vowed I’d never become, had never heard it until yesterday.

So while it might be fresh for me, there’s a possibility it’s a tired old song for some people.

I don’t care. It’s going on my playlist. It’s the song I’ve been looking to play to overcome the blues every time I see a goddamn Trump sign on the highway.

— Yeah, my jaw is still on the floor from Trump’s exhortation to the Russians to hack Hillary Clinton’s e-mail.

Hey, Trump chumps, watch the video of what he actually said before you deny that he said it.

As they say in the glassware stores where my wife loves to shop: You break it, you own it. That’s where Trump is with Russia right now, and I don’t see how that isn’t something abhorrent to any American.

Also, a note to my fellow Democrats: I know it’s meant as a joke, but I think even saying that the Russians should hack into Trump’s unreleased tax returns is a mistake. It undermines the seriousness of the treason Trump has introduced.

And, yes, what Trump said yesterday is treason. Plain, simple and despicable.

— I understand that Michael Bloomberg spoke.

Having worked for him, I’ve heard his voice as much as I intend in this lifetime, so that was a good time to do something else.

I suppose I should be glad that he’s on the side of the good guys.

By the way, the fivethirtyeight.com people were speculating what role Bloomberg could play in a Clinton adminstration. Is there a cabinet position for him?

The answer is simple. Michael Bloomberg doesn’t work for anybody. With $48 billion and that ego, why would he?

It’s Wednesday, July 27, 2016.

Some thoughts at the midway point of the Democratic National Convention:

— I guess the idea was for Bill Clinton to make his wife seem more relatable.

The whole thing about Hillary looks for drawers in Chelsea’s dorm room to line with that paper. Until last night, I thought that was only something that happened in my family.

But Bill Clinton was trying to intertwine the mother and lover with the career public servant. Eighteen years after we found out about Monica Lewinsky, the lover part remains awkward – although he addressed those problems so briefly that I’ll bet a lot of people missed it.

After describing a walk to a Yale art museum in law school, he said, “We’ve been walking and talking and laughing together ever since. And we’ve done it in good times and bad, through joy and heartbreak.”

Did Bill Clinton succeed?

He gave it a good 50-minute-or-so shot. He actually looked at his watch at one point, a striking change for a guy who doesn’t seem to be affected much by time. It’s also an interesting juxtaposition from 1992, when his opponent -George H.W. Bush – looked at his watch during a debate, making it seem as though he wanted to be anyplace other than there.

I’m thinking Clinton did some good. People who actually watched the speech probably learned a lot more about this possible president than they would have otherwise.

But a lot like last week in Cleveland, the only speech that matters this week in Philadelphia is the one Thursday night. A lot is riding on how well Hillary Clinton can tell her own story.

The fact that her former president husband thinks she’s up to the job is great. And her former boss, Barack Obama, will surely give her a great reference tonight.

But while voting against Trump will be a big motivation, it can’t be a complete victory unless Hillary Clinton gives people a reason to vote FOR her.

The stakes are getting raised.

— Poor Tim Kaine. Tonight, he’ll become the Democratic vice presidential nominee – and he’ll be an afterthought.

The man who he would succeed, Joe Biden, will speak tonight to party faithful who love him like an eccentric relative. The best political orator of my lifetime, Barack Obama, speaks as well.

And, over the last two nights, Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama have electrified the crowd in Philadelphia. Throw in Bernie Sanders, with his gruff passion, and you see Kaine’s problem.

I’m sure he’ll do OK. He’s that sort of guy. But it must be daunting to have to speak to a crowd that’s heard some impressive oratory.

— If Hillary Clinton is elected, one of the little things I would push for is some sort of memorial to those killed in Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan since 1990.

For one thing, it’s the right thing to do. These people sacrificed for this country – even if we now realize that it was stupidity to send them to Iraq in 2003.

For another, the memorial should be a reminder of the folly of just thinking you can send American troops somewhere to solve problems, real or imagined.

If Trump is elected, of course, it’s doubtful that any such tribute is forthcoming. The way he sees it, those folks didn’t win. Why would we honor them?

It’s Tuesday, July 26, 2016.

Some quick thoughts on day one of the Democratic convention:

— Michelle Obama’s words are about to be lifted again. By any politician with half a brain.

In her amazing speech last night, many of the turns-of-phrase that she and writer Sarah Hurwitz came up with were epic.

The one that stood out was her describing what happens in her home when people nastily criticize her husband. “Our motto is when they go low, we go high.”

You will hear that phrase in campaigns for the next 20 years. It’s a brilliant way to go after a negative campaigner, made more so by the fact that a woman of such obvious intelligence and compassion is who you’re aligning with when you say it.

— During the primaries, Bernie Sanders was often compared with Trump because both seemed to tap into the national anger.

But last night, early in his speech, we were reminded why Sanders is very different. 

“This election is not about, and has never been about, Hillary Clinton, or Donald Trump, or Bernie Sanders or any of the other candidates who sought the presidency,” he said.  “This election is about – and must be about – the needs of the American people and the kind of future we create for our children and grandchildren.”

Sanders and Clinton ran on issues. They fought, hard, more on the ways to achieve their goals than on the issues themselves.

The two of them didn’t run on personal matters. “I don’t care about your damn e-mails,” he told her in the first debate. They never spoke about physical attributes or their spouses’ characteristics.

In his speech last night, Sanders stayed true to those issues, repeating his positions on income inequality, campaign finance reform, college costs and climate change, among others.

He also forcefully endorsed his rival. Unlike Ted Cruz a week earlier, he left no doubt who he wants to see win on Nov. 8.

— Sanders is in the exact opposite position of Cruz in the Democratic Party.

If Clinton wins, it will be seen as testimony to the fact that he put his ego aside and worked for the good of the party and the country. If Clinton loses, he will – because he’s being a good soldier – have a lot to say about how the Democrats recover from this disaster.

That’s probably why Trump spent a lot of time last night tweeting negatively about Sanders.  And when it comes to Trump, Sanders isn’t going to be afraid to stand up to him.

After Trump tweeted “Bernie Sanders totally sold out to Crooked Hillary Clinton. All of that work, energy and money, and nothing to show for it! Waste of time,” Sanders dismissed him with a simple “Never tweet” – the Twitter version of “Drop dead.”

— Are you as nervous as I am about what Bill Clinton is going to say tonight?

He is such a freakin’ wild card out there. Will he make things better or worse?

Four years ago, he gave one of the most interesting long-winded speeches in American history in support of President Obama’s re-election.

But what he can say about his wife without raising unspoken subtexts? Can he actually accomplish something akin to what Michelle Obama did for his wife last night?

It’s what makes these things interesting.

1. It’s Monday, July 25, 2016.

2. Mets fans welled with pride yesterday with Mike Piazza’s enshrinement into Baseball’s Hall of Fame. That there was a large orange-and-blue contingent among the approximately 50,000 gathered at Cooperstown was yet another reason for Piazza to break out his handkerchief.

I’ve gone from watching the stars of my childhood get enshrined to watching the stars of my sportswriting years get enshrined to now watching the stars of my kids’ childhoods get enshrined. It is part of the baseball continuum, the beauty of a sport that spans generations and ties families together.

Way to go, Mike!

3. I can’t say I was super excited about Hillary Clinton’s choice of running mate. It’s not that I had anything against Tim Kaine. It’s just that I wanted some out-of-the-box thinking – my choice was Facebook chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg.

Apparently, I wasn’t alone. The reaction to the Kaine selection has been tepid at best. Some of the people who backed Bernie Sanders aren’t happy because Kaine isn’t progressive enough.

But Kaine’s been pretty good so far. He’s a ray of sunshine after the gloom that marked the Republican convention. And I appreciated his telling his story – his early career, his days as governor of Virginia.

One of the things I thought impressive was his dismissal of the insults of Hillary Clinton that seemed to dominate in Cleveland. According to a transcript of a “60 Minutes” interview with CBS’ Scott Pelley, Kaine and Clinton both said they wouldn’t respond in kind. 

“Because we got real serious problems to solve,” Kaine said. “And look, most of us stopped the name-calling thing about fifth grade.

Kaine could be the antidote to the meanness of this campaign. That would be quite a contribution.

4. Fifth grade was when kids passed notes back and forth slamming other kids. That’s sort of how I see the contents of the Democratic National Committee e-mail leak.

Most of this stuff seems to consist of snippiness. About how the Democrats are covered on the networks. About Sanders, who wasn’t the choice of party regulars. It was probably the kind of cattiness that should have stayed in the office break room, but not been committed to e-mail.

Because, as any of us who’ve worked in big organizations know or should know, there’s no guarantee that someone you don’t want to see your e-mail will see your e-mail.

Is this a scandal that should impact the election?

Well, the fact that the Democrats have some of the same disorganization that we saw last week with the Republicans isn’t reassuring. So it shouldn’t be swept under the rug during the convention.

One way not to do that is to announce, during the convention, a new chairman or chairwoman who is acceptable to both the traditional and the insurgent wings of the party. And announce a restructuring that will make certain that all views in the party are represented.

There must be Democrats who bridge the gap, which is nowhere near as big as the one between the Trumpsters and the old-line GOP conservatives.

Get this resolved before the Democrats leave Philadelphia, or else we get to hear about this instead of infrastructure, gun control, the economy and the other real issues in this campaign.

5. When I was in the fifth grade, in 1964, the Russians were the bad guys.

It’s 52 years later. And, if the reports are true, the Russians are finding ways to subvert our institutions that the old Soviet Union couldn’t even imagine.

The Times says that researchers believe the Democratic computers were hacked by two Russian intelligence agencies, who then disseminated the e-mails through WikiLeaks.

It’s not going to be easy to get definitive proof. But the fact that Trump has, at the very least, shown some positive inclination toward Vladimir Putin has to make folks a little uneasy.

Let’s see if Trump and the Republicans condemn Russian hacking or just try to make hay of the e-mails without considering how they got them. If they’re so willing to get ahead that they’ll let a country that doesn’t seem too inclined to be an ally influence their behavior.

Now, I know what Trump supporters will say: This is nonsense. You Democrats are just embarrassed by both these e-mails and your crooked presidential candidate.

But that’s what the mean boys and girls in the fifth grade would have said.

It’s July 22, 2016, and time once again for 20 Questions Friday.

Why do I do this? Because I’m looking for a shtick. (And, no, that wasn’t the first question.)

Here we go:

1. Do you think Jon Stewart is bothered by the idea that he might not to be the guy to take Trump down? 

Why doesn’t Trevor Noah get more credit for making over “The Daily Show” to his personality and being really funny? 

Is it possible for people who don’t watch “Game of Thrones” (hand raised) to get political references to “Game of Thrones,” or are those analogies lost on them (us)?

Did any Republican politician emerge as a star from this week’s convention the way Barack Obama emerged from the Democratic convention of 2004?

Will any politician ever explode on the scene quite the way Obama did?

Why does a heat wave sound worse when it’s called a heat dome?

When was the last time you saw a sugar cube at a restaurant?

Will Ted Cruz face a primary challenge when he runs for re-election for his Senate seat in 2018?

Is it me, or is there an outbreak of really bad driving out there?

Where were all these animated films that are out in theaters now when my kids were the   right age for them?

Is there a chance Hillary Clinton will give her acceptance speech in Parseltongue?

Is it obnoxious to follow a dig at “Game of Thrones” references with a Harry Potter reference?

Are there other people as excited as I am for the release of the “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child’ script a week from Sunday?

Am I the only person who believes TV cooking shows are a sign of civilization’s decline?

Is someone who says “Believe me!” a lot really believable?

Do you think Justin Trudeau can handle the title of Leader of the Free World if Trump wins?

Right now, I’m listening to the late Mulgrew Miller – a wonderful pianist. Who is your favorite jazz pianist?

What percentage of drug ads is taken up by disclaimers warning of possible ill effects from the drug the company is trying to get you to ask your doctor about?

Despite their team’s lackluster play of late, is this a great weekend for Mets fans watching Mike Piazza get inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame?

Despite Trump’s hour of doom acceptance speech, is it possible to feel bad after listening to Stevie Wonder, or Sharon Jones and the Dap Kings, or even Michelle Obama and James Corden sing “Signed, Sealed and Delivered”?

1. It’s Friday, July 22, 2016. (I’ve updated this from the initial 1:45 a.m. post, so it’s no longer as early.)

2. Songs that are played at the end of conventions usually portray a positive emotion. “Don’t Stop” by Fleetwood Mac. “God Bless the USA” by Lee Greenwood (corrected). “City of Shining Lights” by U2.

The Trump Republicans played “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” by the Rolling Stones. What the hell kind of message is that?

Maybe it’s the end of the refrain that applies: “You get what you need.” The implication being that Republican true believers might have wanted someone else, but they need the guy they got.

Maybe.

3. You know, long speeches aren’t necessarily bad.

Four years ago, Bill Clinton went on for an hour extolling the virtues of Barack Obama as his renomination convention in Charlotte. And people loved it – there were many who believed it was the highlight of the gathering and helped propel the President to re-election.

The success of Trump’s speech – which, according to C-SPAN, was the longest in at least 44 years – won’t be known until the early hours of Nov. 9. If he somehow wins the presidency, the speech will be regarded as a pivotal moment.

In my lifetime, the candidate who painted the more optimistic picture has won. JFK. Reagan. Clinton. Obama.

Trump tried to paint a picture of dysfunction and chaos. His view is there are threats all over the place, mostly from people who have snuck through our porous borders and infiltrated our communities. They’re ready to kill at any time.

It’s simplistic and stupid. There’s nothing Trump is saying that would prevent another Orlando shooting – he gave a shoutout to the NRA, whose advocacy of firearms is far more responsible for what happened that night than any failing international terrorist group.

And yet.

4. I can’t say with certainty that this speech won’t resonate with voters. With Trump, it’s as if the Howard Beale exhortation to shout “I’m mad as hell” from the window has come to life in the 21st century.

There are people ready to open their windows and scream – hell, they just watched an orange-faced guy yell how mad he is for more than an hour.

The acceptance speech is always the high point of a convention. So, maybe we should expect that this is Trump’s big moment, and it’s all down from here.

5. But now I feel the fate of 240 years of American freedom lies in the imperfect Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, a woman Republicans want to see put in prison or executed.

She needs to counterpunch big time next week in Philadelphia. And, unlike Trump, she’ll have some help. Her opponent in the primaries, Bernie Sanders, won’t be kneecapping her the way Ted Cruz did to Trump.

Elizabeth Warren will be there. Joe Biden will be there. And both of the Obamas will be there.

But Clinton has to carry most of the load. She needs to inspire and make people want to vote for her. She needs to reassure her core and welcome Republicans who don’t share the Trumpian gloom.

Her speech needs to be upbeat and full of ways to solve problems. And I still feel she needs to address the criticisms and accusations, the way she did when she answered 11 hours of questions from the wackos on the Benghazi committee.

She can do this. She has to do this. Our country and the world depend on it.

1. It’s Thursday, July 21, 2016.

2. It’s the final day of the Republican convention, this summer’s entry for the most bizarre reality TV show.

And it’s the one that a large percentage of the American electorate will watch. Because at some point, the Republican presidential nominee will give a speech accepting that nomination.

What Trump will show up at about 10 p.m. ET in Cleveland?

Will he try to befuddle his critics and make a speech that makes him seem like a President of the United States? One in which he seeks to inspire the American people. When he tries to bring his party together and appeal to the few voters who haven’t made up their mind.

Will he use a Teleprompter? Or will he dare to deliver the single most important speech of his life, and one of the most important speeches of the early 21st century, ad lib?

Will he set out specific proposals? Other than the wall.

Or is this the grand finale of “I Hate Hillary”? Does Trump bring the hatespeak to a crescendo, give all the delegates pitchforks and torches, and set them upon the land to bring justice to the heathen woman?

There are things Trump could say tonight that, believe it or not, could make us forget the Melania plagiarism flap, the Christie lynch mob rousing and even the Cruz perfidy of last night. It’s possible.

Some of those things would actually be smart politics – he could be restrained and say that this election is about ideas and not personalities. He could share a vision of peace in the world and justice at home. It would absolutely leave his opponents as bewildered as they’ve been since he started this unlikely journey a year ago.

Or he could spend the time being what he’s been all along. About himself. He could divide the nation further and add to the sense of crisis he seems to think will advance the Trump brand.

A lot is riding on what Trump says tonight. Whether you’re for him or, like me, think this is the saddest excuse of a human being ever to seek the nation’s highest office, it’s must-see TV.

3. A former boss of mine loved the phrase “too smart by a half” to describe someone who might have outsmarted him or herself.

Ted Cruz’s speech reminds of that phrase.

Cruz battled Trump to Indiana in May before seeing the handwriting on the wall. But after standing on a debate stage earlier in the process and promising to support the party’s nominee whoever he or she was, Cruz played coy for months about what he’d do at the convention.

So unlike John Kasich and Jeb Bush who just didn’t show up, Cruz decided he wanted the chance to speak in prime time and spread his regressive message. And he thought he would position himself for the aftermath of a Trump defeat by telling people to vote their conscience – instead of delivering the promised endorsement.

Cruz might think he’s put himself in a position to pick up the pieces. The party will see the error of its ways in 2020 and turn to him, its savior.

But I think the Trump supporters in the GOP and even some of the party faithful think what he really did was try to push Trump over a cliff and claim it was for their good.

If Trump wins, they’ll say he did despite Cruz’s attempt to sabotage. If Trump loses, he’ll be one of the reasons why. They might even start mumbling that he made a deal with President Obama when he traveled on Air Force One to the Dallas police memorial service.

Frankly, I think Ted Cruz positioned himself for a presidential run. In 2032. By that time, the current GOP will have forgotten what it sees as his deceit. He will have had a career as a TV pundit or Internet scowl, something akin to Ronald Reagan. And maybe, maybe, he’ll have been forgiven by then.

But he’d better not wait until 2036. By then, Malia Obama will be eligible to run.

1. It’s Wednesday, July 20, 2016.

2. I was prepared to give Melania Trump the benefit of the doubt.

People write speeches for people like Melania Trump. So how could it be that she was the one who lifted phrases from Michelle Obama’s 2008 convention speech for use as she addressed the barbarians pushing her husband for president?

Not so fast.

The New York Times reports that two pro speechwriters gave her a draft for the speech a month ago. All that was left of it when she delivered it was one line. Apparently, the aspiring orator in Ms. Trump decided it wasn’t good enough.

The result is the fact that people are still talking about it a day and a-half later.

A quick Google search shows plagiarism is also considered a bad thing in Slovenia, Ms. Trump’s homeland. And if she’s not smart enough to know what she doesn’t know, the fault lies with her.

And with a campaign that let that happen. Which speaks volumes about the kind of president her husband would be.

3. The Republicans in Cleveland seem to believe you can prosecute and convict people without facts or a trial.

So despite the fact that the FBI director found no cause to bring charges against her – forget the fact that you need a judge or jury to find guilt – the attendees at the convention keep shouting “Lock her up”  whenever Hillary Clinton is mentioned.

But keep this in mind. While Clinton is no longer being investigated, the Republican presidential nominee is the subject of probes into whether Trump University was a fraud.

Not to mention the fact that he refuses to reveal his income tax records so that we can see exactly how fabulously successful a businessman and charitable a human being he is.

“Lock her up” might be tame to what Trump will hear next week in Philadelphia.

4. You know the guys. The ones who treat women with a wink and a leer.

Who somehow believe they are God’s gift to them. And that women should see their advances and suggestive comments as a compliment rather than an insult.

You keep hoping those guys don’t get far in the world. But sometimes they do. Very far.

So what you hope for, if you’re someone who believes in respect and propriety for all, is that those guys eventually get their comeuppance. That, in one fell swoop, they experience something akin to the humiliation that they’ve subjected people.

It’s never enough. It’s never complete justice. It doesn’t come close to righting the wrong.

But it’s a good start.

Let’s see what kind of day Fox News chief Roger Ailes has. I hope it stinks.

1. It’s Tuesday, July 19, 2016.

2. I wasn’t planning to see the remake of “Ghostbusters.”

That’s because I rarely go to the movies at all. For lots of reasons. The biggest is one I’ll expound on one day – the fact that people have no idea how to behave in a movie theater.

But I will make an exception for “Ghostbusters.” If only because of the weird animus it has generated among some men.

They object to the idea of remaking this comedy with women in the lead roles. And so they’ve gone online to various review sites, such as IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes, to trash the film – even though they haven’t seen it.

That’s preposterous.

So I’m going to go, if only to cast my dollar votes for the idea that women shouldn’t be bullied when it comes to anything – movie remakes or matters much more serious.

I’ll try to keep an open mind. That, in itself, makes me morally superior to jackasses who think badmouthing a movie with women in the lead without even seeing it proves their testosterone level.

3. Social media is buzzing about Melania Trump’s speech at the Republican convention last night, unfortunately for her.

It seems the third Mrs. Trump gave a speech that lifted whole chunks from the one Michelle Obama gave to the 2008 Democratic convention.

Plagiarism is an ugly charge, and in this case it should fall more on the people writing the speech than the deliverer.

Unless the deliverer and her husband decide, as he often has, to double down on a faux pas. That’s what Trump wanted with the neo-Nazi inspired anti-Hillary tweet about three weeks ago – he was mad that his people had withdrawn the tweet instead of letting him defend it.

If they want to defend plagiarism, then they should prepare the reap the whirlwind.

4. If there is any.

Do you think Trump supporters care about plagiarism?

They spent last night wallowing in what they perceive to be the misery of Obama’s America.

When they talk about being soft on terrorism and attempt to exploit the tragedy in Benghazi, why does no one ever ask them the question?

Who was the president who got Osama bin Laden? Who gave the order to go after the bastard in Pakistan?

Why doesn’t somebody ask Giuliani that when he foams at the mouth about the horrors of Obama? He was certainly in line for the pictures when the president went to New York right after the capture to memorialize the victims of 9/11.

Political tradition says that the way to win is to present a positive picture. That’s not how the Republicans are playing it in 2016. That’s why the next two nights of the convention are inconsequential; it’s Trump’s speech and how he frames the election that matter.

I’m sure Hillary Clinton and the Democrats are watching, looking for how to approach the light amid the darkness of this week.