I'm still on the fence on whether this is an ironic self-mocking piece, as that's how I first read it. I mean, I receive a link that's been viewed a puny 500 times on the very day that Cruz and that guy I keep seeing gumming foods in photographs, drop out. So Trump is a given.
As if that hasn't been apparent it would happen for several months now. (Still kicking myself for not betting on it TBH, the odds used to be 9.0, I could have made MONEY.)

The idea is then to replace Trump on these votes with you, yourself. You, you big ego.
Asking the me-generation to vote for themselves just seemed like a self-mocking joke.

We all know that the concept of voting for "not leader", eventually ends up being a vote for the one in the lead.
In Sweden I have voted for a party called "Tomma Stolar", that is empty seats. When empty seats doesn't cross the 4% barrier to actually get an empty seat in parliament, the "lack" of votes helps prop up whomever is in the lead. This is why people who don't vote at all, unintentionally help whomever is in the lead. Voting for the opposition is the only way to trip up whomever it is that you don't want to win. Ten thousand votes for "me", as in ten thousand different individuals is thus not an effective protest - whereas ten thousand votes for specifically "that empty chair" might be (depending on the number of votes you guys need to make a mark). Now, I'm not terribly familiar with the voting in the primaries, but I do know that it's only in specific states that NPP voters can vote in the presidential primary election. NPP meaning "No Party Preference". Like California which has had open primaries since 1996. But having said all that, it's already been settled, and voting for yourself in a presidential primary won't work (everyone gets one vote ie; nobody becomes president).. so .. well. I thought it was an elaborate self-mocking joke.

Having said all that, it seems that it just wants to drag out the lumber-jack-from-Brooklyn generation to figure out how to vote in their primary - except it concentrates on only 'sabotaging' one party. They might have shaken more meh-me people into action if they also encouraged protesting the choice between the devil and the deep blue sea on the Democrat side.

Yes, precisely, good point Planning Lab. The fragmentation of creative service industry has a lot to do with it as clients reach out directly to vendors of certain media and disciplines to commission creative directly, without a lead agency leading the way. This places a lot more responsibility on the buyer, and the marketing department client side. Lets not forget there's tons of startups that have opted to have nimble in house creative units who handle most of their own marketing, only going outside for larger jobs such as branded content or a national commercial campaign.

Come to think of it, Trump even won the republican primary under budget, ahead of schedule.