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.