Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
I'm still uncomfortable with the fact that New Era has claimed to be a college instructor because I've never really seen a case of more aggressive, and ignorant rhetoric on this board.
Not to insult the poster's intelligence, because he clearly knows what he is doing.
To lay this out, so the Clinton tribe can understand, and never misrepresent my views ever again.
Trump is awful. End of story. He will destroy the Republican Party. It's over. That party is going to have to completely rebuild everything - including a great deal of the intellectual capital behind the very notion of the Party.
Clinton is almost as awful because she is clearly just slightly more than a paper candidate, but people, for the sake of being anti-Trump, have set her up on a pedestal that is totally undeserving.
|
I don't know... I don't see many people putting Clinton on a pedestal. For my money she is "just ok." She is a status quo candidate, and is significantly more conservative and hawkish than Obama (which will surprise some democrats if and when she takes office). I don't think she is "crooked" or "a liar" any more than any other politician (am I grading on a curve too? Maybe...) but she is going to continue the economic and domestic policies of Obama for the most part, and will at least avoid nominating a right-wing activist Supreme Court that wants to undo the last 50 years of jurisprudence.
Trump, on the other hand, is such a disaster that the best case scenario for the GOP is that he loses. They already have big problems, but if he loses the intellectual right has a chance to wrest back control of their party and remain the party of business-minded small-government conservatives. If he wins, they are that will be an extinction-level event for that movement in the US.
That, and not some elevation of Hillary, is why I think the choice in this election is so clear. And I'm not even sure you and I disagree on this.