(Topic Deleted)

[DiogenesLamp]

The problem is that "better than Hillary," is a damned low bar.  A burning case of the clap is better than Hillary.  And in fact I'd rather spend the next four years pissing needles than referring to Hillary as Madam President.

Being better than Hillary isn't making Trump conservative, and principled conservatives recognize that reality.

Nobody believes Trump is a conservative,   but Hillary is F***ing evil.    Evil in a manner we seldom see in modern politics.    Hillary has a massive history of sleaze and psychotic obsession.    She has been up to her neck in unethical and illegal behavior since at least the 1970s.   

She is absolutely merciless to people beneath her and has absolutely no qualms about breaking laws when she feels like it.   

Contemplating the handing of power over to this evil nutjob is tantamount to playing Russian Roulette with five loaded rounds.    Hillary is about the worst of the worst you can find in the modern Democratic caucus,  and people want to compare Trump to Hillary?


Hillary is not the only one that is nuts. 

[DiogenesLamp]

Hillary is ghastly.  Trump is ghastly.  Both of them -- totally unfit for the office.  Is it really necessary to put in the effort of distinguishing between the two, for purposes of not voting for either?

There are differences in degree of ghastliness.    Hillary is about a 90% Ghastly,  while Trump is in the 10-20% range of ghastly.   

Speaking for myself only, I don't hate Trump -- I just find him utterly appalling.  Truly an awful candidate, whose demonstrated behavior issues would make him truly an awful president.

Acknowledging such things does not make one a supporter of Hillary Clinton.

It does when you spend virtually all your time "Acknowledging"  and precious little of it pointing out how horrible Clinton is.   Hillary is a quantum level of difference in awfulness than is Trump.   


We get a choice between fire and a frying pan,   so people need to stop criticizing the frying pan or we will end up in the fire!   


Yah! Frying pan!   

[DiogenesLamp]

The hyperbole in this place has reached epidemic proportions...

The rationality in this place must have ebbed to it's lowest level for people to see the clear truth as demonstrated by the history of Hillary Rotten Clinton,  as "hyperbole."   


She altered official Watergate briefs to deny Nixon his right to Counsel.  She lied to the judge,  she lied to her fellow attorneys.   

She was up to her eyeballs in the "Whitewater" scandal for which virtually everyone else went to prison.   

It wasn't enough that she fired without warning 7 members of the White House Travel office so she could give their jobs to her cronies from Arkansas,  she *MADE UP*  accusations against them and then tried to sic the FBI on them!


And on and on and on and on.   


Hyperbole?   You just don't know the background material.   It isn't hyperbole,  it is an accurate assessment of the threat that psychotic hate-witch represents.   

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

The rationality in this place must have ebbed to it's lowest level for people to see the clear truth as demonstrated by the history of Hillary Rotten Clinton,  as "hyperbole."   


She altered official Watergate briefs to deny Nixon his right to Counsel.  She lied to the judge,  she lied to her fellow attorneys.   

She was up to her eyeballs in the "Whitewater" scandal for which virtually everyone else went to prison.   

It wasn't enough that she fired without warning 7 members of the White House Travel office so she could give their jobs to her cronies from Arkansas,  she *MADE UP*  accusations against them and then tried to sic the FBI on them!


And on and on and on and on.   


Hyperbole?   You just don't know the background material.   It isn't hyperbole,  it is an accurate assessment of the threat that psychotic hate-witch represents.

It's hyperbole IMO. Hillary is just a sleazebag politician, like her husband. Comparing her to Hitler and all this ridiculousness, really makes you look like a kook.

[jpsb]

She altered official Watergate briefs to deny Nixon his right to Counsel.  She lied to the judge,  she lied to her fellow attorneys.   

[DiogenesLamp]

It's hyperbole IMO. Hillary is just a sleazebag politician, like her husband.

All along Mrs. Clinton publicly insisted she had no knowledge of the firings. Then it became barely any knowledge, then barely any involvement. When the story blew up she said under oath that she had “no role in the decision to terminate the employees.” She did not “direct that any action be taken by anyone.” In a deposition she denied having had a role in the firings, and said she was unable to remember conversations with various staffers with any specificity. A General Accounting Office report found she did play a role. But three years later a memo written by David Watkins to the White House chief of staff, recounting the history of the firings, suddenly surfaced. (“Suddenly surfaced” is a phrase one reads a lot in Clinton scandal stories.) It showed Mrs. Clinton herself directed them.

The White House pressed the FBI to investigate, FBI agents balked—on what evidence?—but ultimately there was an investigation, and an audit. …Billy Dale was indicted on charges including embezzlement. The trial lasted almost two weeks. …The jury acquitted him in less than two hours.

Comparing her to Hitler and all this ridiculousness, really makes you look like a kook.

This simply tells me that you are unfamiliar with the methods and tactics Hitler used to acquire power.   


Do you not grasp the significance of the fact she demanded criminal prosecutions of the people *SHE*  fired,  all the while lying about it?     They had never done anything to her,  and suddenly she is demanding the FBI prosecute these people?   


Pathological,  and instinctively evil.   


No,  she won't be a Hitler if she doesn't get power,   but she has all the  characteristics of a Hitler-like individual.   

[Just_Victor]

Nobody believes Trump is a conservative,   but Hillary is F***ing evil.    Evil in a manner we seldom see in modern politics.    Hillary has a massive history of sleaze and psychotic obsession.    She has been up to her neck in unethical and illegal behavior since at least the 1970s.   

She is absolutely merciless to people beneath her and has absolutely no qualms about breaking laws when she feels like it.   

I completely agree with your assessment of Hillary.

Contemplating the handing of power over to this evil nutjob is tantamount to playing Russian Roulette with five loaded rounds.    Hillary is about the worst of the worst you can find in the modern Democratic caucus,  and people want to compare Trump to Hillary?


Hillary is not the only one that is nuts.

Hillary is the worst.  Once again I agree, but Trump is the second worst.

You complain about the comparing to Trump to Hillary, but it's the Trump supporters who keep comparing Hillary to Trump in an effort to say "at least he's better than she is."  It's the principled conservatives who want to look at Trump without comparing him to anything other than our own principled guide posts.  He's not conservative, and as such my support for him is luke warm at best, regardless of how bad Hillary is.

[Oceander]

This simply tells me that you are unfamiliar with the methods and tactics Hitler used to acquire power.   


Do you not grasp the significance of the fact she demanded criminal prosecutions of the people *SHE*  fired,  all the while lying about it?     They had never done anything to her,  and suddenly she is demanding the FBI prosecute these people?   


Pathological,  and instinctively evil.   


No,  she won't be a Hitler if she doesn't get power,   but she has all the  characteristics of a Hitler-like individual.   

Clinton has none of the crucial characteristic that Hitler had and that made him the Hitler the world feared:  charisma.  His ability to give a speech and master a crowd was phenomenal.  Clinton is the anti-Hitler when it comes to that.  There is, however, one person who does have the ability to electrify a crowd, even when speaking inanities .....

[DiogenesLamp]

Exactly.   Hillary does not occasionally stumble into the arena of lawlessness.   She lives there,  and she has lived there for a very long time. 

[Luis Gonzalez]

Well, I voted early yesterday after which I immediately went home and fell to my knees, praying that the individual who received my vote for POTUS would lose so that I wouldn't have to deal with the guilt of feeling responsible for their actions.

#IHateThisElection

[r9etb]

There are differences in degree of ghastliness.    Hillary is about a 90% Ghastly,  while Trump is in the 10-20% range of ghastly.   

My meter stops for both of them at "100% Unfit."  No sense in flapping gums about 'em after that.  But you keep trying to pretend Trump is fit for the office.... which is your mistake and problem.

It does when you spend virtually all your time "Acknowledging"  and precious little of it pointing out how horrible Clinton is.   Hillary is a quantum level of difference in awfulness than is Trump.   

Why should I keep reminding you of something we agree on; i.e., that Clinton is horrible?  Sorry to have hurt your feelings by not saying what you want me to say. 

We get a choice between fire and a frying pan,   so people need to stop criticizing the frying pan or we will end up in the fire!   Yah! Frying pan!

Um.... you know that both of those are bad choices ending in death, right? 

[DiogenesLamp]

I completely agree with your assessment of Hillary.
Hillary is the worst.  Once again I agree, but Trump is the second worst.

I wouldn't go that far.   Nancy Pelosi strikes me as being worse than Trump.  Debbie Wasserman Schultz strikes me as being worse than Trump.   Alan Grayson strikes me as being worse than Trump.   Chuck Schumer strikes me as being worse than Trump.   Elizabeth Warren strikes me as being worse than Trump. 


I imagine there are a lot of Democrats I would regard as worse than Trump,   so I would say calling him "second worst"   is a major exaggeration.   He's like 564th worst or some such.   


He's not good,   but he's not "second worst."   He's a long ways from "second worst."   

You complain about the comparing to Trump to Hillary, but it's the Trump supporters who keep comparing Hillary to Trump in an effort to say "at least he's better than she is."

I don't know what you are talking about.   Every day I see from the usual suspects,  new posts about how bad Trump is.   I do not see these same people posting threads about how bad Hillary is,  or if so,  not nearly so often as they post a "bad Trump"  thread.   


When anyone on the Trump bandwagon makes a comparison between Trump and Hillary,  it's usually intended to contrast how great the differences are,   not to imply they are equally bad. 


That "equally bad"  stuff is nonsense,  yet it seems to be a near constant around here.   

  It's the principled conservatives who want to look at Trump without comparing him to anything other than our own principled guide posts.  He's not conservative, and as such my support for him is luke warm at best, regardless of how bad Hillary is.

 I am right there with you.   Cruz would have been so much better as a choice,  but unfortunately that decision is behind us,  and though it was a mistake,   we now have to deal with the consequences of it. 


We have an erratic and  narcissistic blowhard as our candidate,  but the opposition candidate is a monster.   In the calculus with which we are faced,  @$$hole beats monster any day of the week. 

[DiogenesLamp]

Clinton has none of the crucial characteristic that Hitler had and that made him the Hitler the world feared:  charisma.

She has something he didn't.   Television media.   The news media tell people what to think because people trust them,  and if they say such and such needs to be done,   the lemmings will get behind it. 

His ability to give a speech and master a crowd was phenomenal. 

She has media.   She doesn't need Charisma.   The fact that she was winning demonstrates clearly that Charisma is not a necessity in gaining or wielding power. 

Clinton is the anti-Hitler when it comes to that.  There is, however, one person who does have the ability to electrify a crowd, even when speaking inanities .....

And for which the media will be in constant opposition.   Last I checked,  the media was winning the fight.  Do you have a different take on the power of the media?   

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Well, I voted early yesterday after which I immediately went home and fell to my knees, praying that the individual who received my vote for POTUS would lose so that I wouldn't have to deal with the guilt of feeling responsible for their actions.

#IHateThisElection

So you voted for someone you hoped wouldn't win?


Bizarre.


I have no idea who I will vote for, even still, obviously not HRC. But if my gut tells me not to vote for them, I won't.

[Luis Gonzalez]

So you voted for someone you hoped wouldn't win?


Bizarre.


I have no idea who I will vote for, even still, obviously not HRC. But if my gut tells me not to vote for them, I won't.

My guts told me not to vote for anyone on the list.

[Just_Victor]

I wouldn't go that far.   Nancy Pelosi strikes me as being worse than Trump.  Debbie Wasserman Schultz strikes me as being worse than Trump.   Alan Grayson strikes me as being worse than Trump.   Chuck Schumer strikes me as being worse than Trump.   Elizabeth Warren strikes me as being worse than Trump. 

None of those people are running for POTUS in 2016.  Trump is the second worst candidate on the ballot, period.  And he is certainly the worst GOP candidate in my 52 years.

I imagine there are a lot of Democrats I would regard as worse than Trump,   so I would say calling him "second worst"   is a major exaggeration.   He's like 564th worst or some such.   


He's not good,   but he's not "second worst."   He's a long ways from "second worst."   




I don't know what you are talking about.   Every day I see from the usual suspects,  new posts about how bad Trump is.   I do not see these same people posting threads about how bad Hillary is,  or if so,  not nearly so often as they post a "bad Trump"  thread.   


When anyone on the Trump bandwagon makes a comparison between Trump and Hillary,  it's usually intended to contrast how great the differences are,   not to imply they are equally bad. 


That "equally bad"  stuff is nonsense,  yet it seems to be a near constant around here.
...   

"How bad Trump is" doesn't require a comparison to Hillary, only a measurement to one's own principles.

[r9etb]

So you voted for someone you hoped wouldn't win?

Bizarre.

Well, it is a bizarre election, after all. 

He's far from alone in hoping that neither Trump nor Clinton wins.  If you nevertheless figure you have to vote for one or the other of them, I guess that's what you're left with.

The only possible (remotely possible) upside to this mess is that it may force a political realignment so that the parties are a bit more representative of reality....

[DiogenesLamp]

My meter stops for both of them at "100% Unfit."  No sense in flapping gums about 'em after that.  But you keep trying to pretend Trump is fit for the office.... which is your mistake and problem.

In this election,  the scale is negative.    Hillary is -90% unfit,  and Trump is only -10 -20% unfit.    You keep trying to ignore the fact that one candidate is an @$$hole and the other is a Monster.   

Why should I keep reminding you of something we agree on; i.e., that Clinton is horrible?  Sorry to have hurt your feelings by not saying what you want me to say.

I want you to be objective,   not stuck on this "both are equally bad."    That is demonstrably not true.

Um.... you know that both of those are bad choices ending in death, right?

There is that false equivalence again.    This predicting the future stuff is a contest of probabilities.    Given the known facts,  the probabilities of various disasters are quite great with Hillary.   (She actually has a large track record of disaster.)   

The probabilities of a disaster also exist with Trump,   but they appear to me to be much smaller than those that exist with Hillary.   For one thing,  he is not going to immediately launch us into a confrontation with Russia over Syria.   


Not going to war with a superpower dramatically increases the odds of a non-disaster. 

[DiogenesLamp]

My guts told me not to vote for anyone on the list.

And *that*   is the situation we now find ourselves in.   All choices are bad,   but not equally so. 

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Well, it is a bizarre election, after all. 

He's far from alone in hoping that neither Trump nor Clinton wins.  If you nevertheless figure you have to vote for one or the other of them, I guess that's what you're left with.

The only possible (remotely possible) upside to this mess is that it may force a political realignment so that the parties are a bit more representative of reality....

Well I'd prefer a third party candidate too, even Johnson, even though the guy is a mess.


Worse comes to worse I'd just leave the Presidential option blank. I'd never vote for someone I hoped would lose.


So weird, lol.

[andy58-in-nh]

I see that no one here seems to be making any predictions on this "Election prediction thread", which is somewhat understandable given the current uncertainty, turmoil and closeness of the race.

I'm not prepared to make any final predictions either, but I'll offer this: the race is a hell of a lot closer than you probably think it is. It may not be decided until one or two days before November 8th, or even on that day as large numbers of voters who don't care for either of the main candidates find themselves alone in the voting booth with only their consciences to guide them and the necessity of finally making a choice.   

[Free Vulcan]

I see that no one here seems to be making any predictions on this "Election prediction thread", which is somewhat understandable given the current uncertainty, turmoil and closeness of the race.

I'm not prepared to make any final predictions either, but I'll offer this: the race is a hell of a lot closer than you probably think it is. It may not be decided until one or two days before November 8th, or even on that day as large numbers of voters who don't care for either of the main candidates find themselves alone in the voting booth with only their consciences to guide them and the necessity of finally making a choice.   

That I can get on board with sir. I also believe it's very close and will be an all nite nailbiter, and hopefully not drag on like 2000.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I see that no one here seems to be making any predictions on this "Election prediction thread", which is somewhat understandable given the current uncertainty, turmoil and closeness of the race.

I'm not prepared to make any final predictions either, but I'll offer this: the race is a hell of a lot closer than you probably think it is. It may not be decided until one or two days before November 8th, or even on that day as large numbers of voters who don't care for either of the main candidates find themselves alone in the voting booth with only their consciences to guide them and the necessity of finally making a choice.   

My gut has two feeling now:


1) Fear of Trump
2) Anger at liberals and the media.


Whichever wins is how I'll vote. LOL

[DiogenesLamp]

None of those people are running for POTUS in 2016.  Trump is the second worst candidate on the ballot, period.

Well that is certainly a more defendable statement,  but i'm not so sure Jill Stein would be better than Trump.   You might plausibly contend that Gary Johnson is better than Trump,   but I expect him to nominate Liberal judges because that is what the system is going to recommend to him.   

At least we have a list of judges whom Trump said he would nominate,  and we have assurances (for whatever that is worth)  that he will nominate conservative judges.   

 And he is certainly the worst GOP candidate in my 52 years.

I am of divided mind about this.   I think George HW Bush was a terrible President,    but as a candidate he didn't look that bad at the time.   He just turned out that way.   

But yeah,  other than George HW Bush,  I would have to say Trump is the worst we've ever had.   

"How bad Trump is" doesn't require a comparison to Hillary, only a measurement to one's own principles.

It requires a recognition that those things which matter most to those principles will be less badly served under a Trump  administration than they will be under a Clinton administration.   


As I've said many times previously,   the survival of myself and my family is what I regard as the most important principle.

[Free Vulcan]

My gut has two feeling now:


1) Fear of Trump
2) Anger at liberals and the media.


Whichever wins is how I'll vote. LOL

I was going to vote early, but think I'll wait till election day. The only way I'll vote for Trump and not third party now is if something happens to make option #2 win out.