Why "Hillary is Even Worse" Doesn't Cut It.

[TLK Valentine]

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...inton-why-hillary-is-even-worse-doesnt-cut-it

Let me begin by acknowledging that in some respects, it’s the same-old, same-old. Greedy and venal candidates? Trump and Clinton are both bad. But LBJ was just as bad. Narcissistic candidates? Trump’s narcissism is complicated by his transparent insecurity. But I actually find Barack Obama’s serenely untroubled narcissism to be creepier. Candidates with deplorable marital morals? Trump, yes, but Bill Clinton was at least Trump’s equal, and JFK set a bar for reckless personal behavior that neither can hope to match.

Candidates who lie? This is a little more complicated. Yes, many candidates for president have lied. Hillary Clinton has — with stupefying ineptitude — told and continues to tell whoppers. But Trump takes first prize for sheer bulk, averaging one factual untruth every five minutes, according to a systematic fact-check of over four and a half hours of stump speeches and press conferences.

Thoughts?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Another interesting article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...-never-misses-a-chance-to-look-small/?ref=yfp

Trump is far more dangerous than Hillary Clinton in this regard. Clinton may arrogantly defy rules to insulate herself from criticism and evade persnickety conflict-of-interest rules to get rich, but she does not demand critics embrace her nor does she seek to obliterate her foes. To the contrary, her errors stem from excessive paranoia and a sense of victimhood built up over decades. She imagines her foes are far more powerful than they are. Trump, on the other hand, can never tolerate dissent; his ego allows for no dissenters or no-shows. (He attacked Gov. Susana Martinez merely for not showing up to a rally in New Mexico.)

 

[MorkandMindy]

How can anyone be worse than Hillary? Trump doesn't look as bad but only because we know less about him... that doesn't make me any happier.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Great articles, but they won't matter. Trump's appeal is to a shallow, thoughtless vindictiveness, not the kind of ration that would be swayed by this. I'm still waiting for one Trump supporter to give a thoughtful explanation of why he should be president.

 

[iluvatar5150]

How can anyone be worse than Hillary? Trump doesn't look as bad but only because we know less about him... that doesn't make me any happier.

I'm not a huge Hillary fan, but the notion that Trump doesn't look as bad as Hillary is absurd. Trump is a petulant fool who revels in mudslinging and lowering the tone of the greater political conversation.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

Great articles, but they won't matter. Trump's appeal is to a shallow, thoughtless vindictiveness, not the kind of ration that would be swayed by this. I'm still waiting for one Trump supporter to give a thoughtful explanation of why he should be president.

I'm not a Trump supporter but I have the answer: He's not Hillary.

 

[MorkandMindy]

We have a pile of major problems that need to be fixed:

We are at risk of another multi trillion dollar bank bailout, a trillion is a million millions to get things in perspective,

We are running a half trillion trade deficit with Germany, China and various others, I should say a half trillion negative net Current Account balance.

Our medical 'system' sucks up nearly 20% of GDP and works badly, transfers huge sums of money from working people to doctors who make about a million a year each. That could be fixed in a few months by letting Mexican and everywhere else doctors come in and practice here.

Our schools are doing the wrong things, the system having been created around 1915 by the Rockefeller Foundation specifically to produce an obedient dumbed down population which it has been very successful at. Come WW2 almost everyone in the atom bomb project was foreign. And even now the population knows they don't understand economics, yet feel they must vote Republican because they are better for the economy... know they don't know something but still insist they do

And we have big violence problems, five times the murder rate of England per 100,000 people per year and five times the vehicle collision deaths ditto and most of their roads are pretty awful.

And of course the awful schools mean a horrendous ADHT problem though part of that is having commercials on TV, and rubbish TV too, and useless news.

Well that's the start of the list.

The good news is we don't have quite the horrendous class war they have in England, our people cooperate better and work harder and we are not as close to the edge of the cliff financially as they are.

 

[MorkandMindy]

I'm not a huge Hillary fan, but the notion that Trump doesn't look as bad as Hillary is absurd. Trump is a petulant fool who revels in mudslinging and lowering the tone of the greater political conversation.

I'm not a Trump supporter but I have the answer: He's not Hillary.

I'm not sure which one is worse but how did we end up out of the entire country with two awful candidates?

 

[TLK Valentine]

I'm not a Trump supporter but I have the answer: He's not Hillary.

I believe a "thoughtful" answer was requested.

 

[Crusader05]

If the option is Hillary and Trump I will go with Trump without any hesitation.

 

[TLK Valentine]

If the option is Hillary and Trump I will go with Trump without any hesitation.

Suppose the option is Sanders and Trump?

 

[AvilaSurfer]

I believe a "thoughtful" answer was requested.

I see. Because it's an answer you don't like, I obviously didn't think about it. Ok.

 

[Crusader05]

Suppose the option is Sanders and Trump?

Then it's still Trump! No way I'm voting for that socialist fool in this lifetime.

 

[citizenthom]

I'm not a Trump supporter in any way, shape, or form. But the case for him over Hillary comes down to the personal histories of both.

Hillary's husband bombed the crap out of Eastern Europe. I have personally ministered to people suffering from the bombings of Sarajevo, many suffering from blood pressures at stroke levels, their homes, hospitals, and schools blown up by American bombs. As Secretary of State Hillary supported bombings of Syria and Libya and the invasion of Iraq, all of which supported the rise of ISIS.

Trump's history is as a deal-maker. Yes, he projects strength, but strength to him is winning the contract negotiation. He has at least demonstrated an ability to sit down with an adverse party and project power and leverage it to his advantage. Hillary has shown the utter lack of that ability.

Add that to Hillary's agenda for the Supreme Court--overturn key First and Second Amendment precedents, install demographic-satisfying Justices regardless of judicial temperament--are so extremely dangerous for the Republic that any viable alternative must be considered.

I like little about Trump--but Hillary is the sum of all fears as a candidate.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Then it's still Trump! No way I'm voting for that socialist fool in this lifetime.

It comes down to specifics as always. I was in England back when it was socialist and saw the complete transformation into a capitalist greed oriented country that is losing money hand over fist, just like the US is, but it has less to lose and is actually more right wing than even the US.

International Socialists are generally not much good, national socialists like the modern German government are very good for their own country and not too bad for others either. They have a better government than England had even at it's best so that would be the best to follow.

I'm not sure which sort of socialist Bernie is, if he doesn't get a chance to run I'm not going to bother to find out.

 

[SkyWriting]

Great articles, but they won't matter. Trump's appeal is to a shallow, thoughtless vindictiveness, not the kind of ration that would be swayed by this. I'm still waiting for one Trump supporter to give a thoughtful explanation of why he should be president.

He is the "Your fired" candidate, though this is not well understood.
He will not bend to political pressure or interest groups.
He will eliminate any federal program he thinks is not helping
to get the job done. Every stupid comment he makes reinforces
his support, becasue it shows him not to be pandering.

Want proof? Just listen to the pundits say "That comment will
turn the tide." But it doesn't. Supporters are not listening
for politically correct ideas. They are seeking a non-Obama
for president.

I'm not black and I can see he didn't do a thing to step out
of line and help blacks. Obama never steps out of line.
Hilary is just creepy in her predatory drug pricing ad.

 

[Goonie]

It comes down to specifics as always. I was in England back when it was socialist and saw the complete transformation into a capitalist greed oriented country that is losing money hand over fist, just like the US is, but it has less to lose and is actually more right wing than even the US.

International Socialists are generally not much good, national socialists like the modern German government are very good for their own country and not too bad for others either. They have a better government than England had even at it's best so that would be the best to follow.

I'm not sure which sort of socialist Bernie is, if he doesn't get a chance to run I'm not going to bother to find out.

Germany is governed by the social Democrat party. Using national socialist in regard to Germany refers to only to the Nazis.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I see. Because it's an answer you don't like, I obviously didn't think about it. Ok.

Perhaps you should consider reading the thread title?

Or better still, the article linked in the OP?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Then it's still Trump! No way I'm voting for that socialist fool in this lifetime.

Sounds like it really doesn't matter who the opposition is -- you're supporting Trump regardless.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I'm not a Trump supporter in any way, shape, or form. But the case for him over Hillary comes down to the personal histories of both.

Hillary's husband bombed the crap out of Eastern Europe. I have personally ministered to people suffering from the bombings of Sarajevo, many suffering from blood pressures at stroke levels, their homes, hospitals, and schools blown up by American bombs. As Secretary of State Hillary supported bombings of Syria and Libya and the invasion of Iraq, all of which supported the rise of ISIS.

And Trump (his own lies to the contrary) also supported the invasion of Iraq.

Trump's history is as a deal-maker. Yes, he projects strength, but strength to him is winning the contract negotiation. He has at least demonstrated an ability to sit down with an adverse party and project power and leverage it to his advantage.

That's in the corporate world, where his money and brand recognition work to his advantage. In foreign policy, a different skill set is required -- one in which his greatest strengths will not be available.

Once we take away his strengths, his most glaring weakness comes into play -- his complete and utter insecurity. It's plainly obvious that his "projection" of strength is an illusion, because every time he doesn't get his way, he lashes out like a spoiled child.

Look at the rants he's gone on against members of his own party -- solely because they failed to acknowledge his greatness.

He's lashed out against Gov. Susana Martinez simply for being unable to attend his rally. He's lashed out against journalists, fellow GOP contenders, and people whose only sin is to suggest that someone else might be a better candidate.

Trump's projection of strength is nothing but a facade -- one that comes crashing down the instant someone says "no" to his claims of greatness. A weakness that obvious can and will be exploited by everyone Trump tries to negotiate with.

Hillary has shown the utter lack of that ability.

Add that to Hillary's agenda for the Supreme Court--overturn key First and Second Amendment precedents, install demographic-satisfying Justices regardless of judicial temperament--are so extremely dangerous for the Republic that any viable alternative must be considered.

I suspect the reports of Hillary's agenda are somewhat exaggerated.

I like little about Trump--but Hillary is the sum of all fears as a candidate.

You raise a good point about Hillary's foreign policy -- She's a little too trigger-happy for my liking -- But Trump (even when he wasn't reeling from a rejection or imagined slight) has been beating the war drums pretty hard himself (previous lies notwithstanding), going so far as to propose actual war crimes as a part of his policy (expanding torture; targeting innocent civilians in order to "get to" terrorists)... what will he do while having one of his tantrums?

The first article makes a good comparison: Hillary's paranoid, Trump's narcissistic. She thinks her enemies are more powerful than they really are; Trump think's he's infallible.

The difference? Hillary's flaws will mean she'll overcompensate to deal with threats; Trump will rely solely on his own Trumpiness... and heaven help us all every time he's wrong.

I'd rather have an overprotective president than one who's convinced that he's incapable of error or failure.