In marketing, has the Left met its match in Trump?

  Am I cynical?
  I watched Obama joke during an announcement of support for Germany given the latest terrorist attack and thought, "That dude doesn't care about anybody but himself."
  Earlier in the day Obama shocked in his conference with the Mexican president by sneering that Trump's vision didn't "jibe with the facts," regardless what people think:

"This idea that America is somehow on the verge of collapse, this vision of violence and chaos everywhere, doesn't really jibe with the experience of most people," Obama said during a press conference in the White House East Room alongside Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto. 

"I think it is important to be absolutely clear here. Some of the fears that were expressed throughout the week just don't jibe with the facts," he said, going on to cite statistics showing crime rates have fallen under his presidency."

  The media immediately leaped to Obama's support with figures to prove that Obama is correct.

  Now, the crime statistics are not what I'm writing about in this post.

  Clinton's campaign immediately (12:59 a.m.) pronounced the Trump message "dark," and the media immediately began parroting it a few hours later and in the morning news.

  Yet the truth is that Obama's vision of America is dark. 

  For years Obama has drilled into the public psyche that Americans are hateful bigots, Americans are cheap and selfish, that Americans should be more willing to "share," that cops are bad, that guns, guns, guns are destroying our society, that America itself has made mistake after mistake on a global scale.

  “People are dying and the constant excuses for inaction no longer suffice,”Obama announced after one "tragedy."

  "If they bring a knife to a fight, bring a gun," he said to "his" people about Republicans.

  "We should politicize mass shootings," he said another time.

  The only time Obama has ever been optimistic about our country was before his first election when he claimed there were no white Americans or black Americans.

  IOW, Obama's message has for years been a dark one and now suddenly he's positing himself as cheerful?
  In reality Obama's government has been working at people for years to make them fearful: listen to the public service ads that are all over radio, television and even billboards.

  Got a little cough? Could be (_____)? Get to a doctor QUICK!

  Air conditioning on? Could be causing (____) in children. Plus you're killing the environment!

  Depressed? Afraid to go outside? Could be (______) which can be cured by (taking this medication). Oh, and you're addicted to (____)? GET OFF IT!

  By the time you're done listening to these often fearmongering PSAs, you can be so paranoid that you DON'T want to go outside. Their production is paid by the government and broadcast free by the Ad Council, which is described here at Reddit:

The ads airing on your local radio station are being aired to fill time because there were not enough real commercials. The Ad Council does produce ad campaigns and distribute ads to basically every TV and radio station in the country. They do not pay for airtime as a typical advertiser would.

  This is the Obama administration's version of something called nudging, which the left wing Politico discusses here:

The president officially adopted the idea last year when he launched the White House’s Social and Behavioral Science Team (SBST), a cross-agency effort to bring behavioral science research into the policymaking process. Now the team has published its first annual report on this experiment.

How did it go? Mostly, the efforts appear to have worked...

  Yes, Obama has a team and an executive order to direct Americans' behavior, better serve the American people, followed by numerous "nudges" to be fearful about their bodies, their lives and their mental health.
  He's been doing it a while, described here at Marketingsociety, which appears to sympathize with Obama's version of what's a lie:

So the campaign team addressed the issue of how to counter rumours, myths and outright lies most effectively. Research conducted by them into countering myths and rumours has illustrated a number of crucial points.

One is that the more we hear a false rumour or myth the more likely we are to believe it to be true, it's known as repetition bias. Our minds make use of heuristics (short-cuts or rules of thumb) and one of our rules of thumb is that things we hear often must be or at least tend to be true.

In addition, in the long term, we tend to remember stuff we have heard or read not in full but only as a kind of truncated word association in which the most vivid elements stick with us and the qualifying expressions get a tad blurry: eg where the initial phrase we might hear or read is actually 'Roberto is not in the Mafia' after a while we'll recall only ‘Roberto’ and ‘Mafia’ inextricably and (perhaps) erroneously linking the two. We seem to forget the ‘not’ or the negative part of the statement over time.[6] Our long term memories are often poor - especially for subjects and facts on the periphery of our interest, which presumably the Mafia is for most readers…! On this basis it's probably wisest to give no air time at all to denials as it's likely this will only serve to strengthen the falsehood in the minds of listeners.

  I find this explanation quite interesting, both in terms of what Obama has done and how Trump is running his campaign. 
  Repetition bias. Crooked Hillary?
  Word association. Giving no air time to denials. You mean like accusations of plagiarism? 
  Hm.
  Maybe Obama--and the Clinton campaign--have finally met their match.
UPDATE: An excellent take down here.