mrcalzone wrote:CJackson wrote:Knickstape1214 wrote:
Also, Trump is (trying to use/) using his campaign for financial gain. It would only get worse if, God forbid, he won the election.
Trump has been paying himself from monies donated to his campaign.
Unless someone thinks him charging his own campaign triple rent to use space in Trump towers is not self-dealing.
Plus, he used money from charitable funds to buy off an elected official in Florida to the tune of a quarter million dollars.
Between his handing of campaign finances and the thousands he has defrauded through his businesses, the one thing I don't think there is any doubt about is how much worse of a rip-off artist Trump would be as president than Clinton.
It is not even close at this point. The guy has been a brazen thief so long it is all going to blow up in his face now.
Are you excited about Clinton? Or is it a lesser of two evils thing?
Not excited. I've explained this numerous times though.
In short, the lesser of two evils argument or the constant refrain of they both suck is a dumbing down of clear distinctions between the candidates.
I pretty much know what to expect from Clinton. What I like or consider acceptable in terms of status quo for 4-8 years is:
possibility of decisive action on clean energy and climate controls
possibility of reform of obamacare into something more affordable (I know she wants this and it will happen with a dem congress)
appointment of centrist supreme court judges
respect for existence of constitutional principles
granting citizenship to hard-working, tax paying immigrants who've been here for many years and raised families here
not prone to using fears of terrorism to get her way
has clearly addressed need for prison reform, bad conviction laws and need for proper police oversight
competency
Has some actual moral stances I can agree (NO, being a crafty, self-dealing, wheeling and dealing politician does not mean I have to like them personally in order to acknowledge they are on the right side of some issues and that does mean they are right morally in some ways publicly while maybe being a bit shady privately; THAT'S LIFE in the Republic, I'm a realist). She is not completely depraved. Sorry Charlie. She is deeply flawed. Big difference
Would I don't like about Clinton:
Her husband is a very mixed bag (I like some things about him and find him otherwise a despicable human being; I do not think she is Bill though nor is responsible for all of his actions)
may not follow up on closing up corporate tax loopholes (yes, she is too cozy with Wall street)
hoping she is not overly hawkish to the detriment of our country
What I don't like about Trump:
Everything. He is a human dumpster fire of a person and all of his policies are stupid
Incompetent
Completely morally depraved human being
Believes in nothing but himself
Will not govern, but will hand over governmental fiefdoms to countless evil douchebags
He's a fuqqing idiot
Loss of all respect internationally
Tanking of the U.S. economy
Idiot projects like the Wall
Encourages worst behavior in Americans imaginable. Already showing up at the grade school level.
Vengeance politics
Extreme contempt for constitutional law and our bill of rights. He's a fascist