[Clutchpoll 2016] Donald Trump vs. Hillary Rodham Clinton

Nevermind of course that Hillary has actually fought for things not in her self-interest (like raising taxes on the wealthy), while Trump's tax plan is all about cutting his own net taxes. Reality still eludes you these days.

 

First of all, I don't believe that voting Libertarian is "merely not voting", personally I'd be fine with the Republican party dying over nominating Trump and for that to happen, people have to move to a new party. Why not the Libertarian party?

Secondly I don't see Trump as the lesser of two evils, I see him as the greater of the 2 evils so I certainly couldn't vote for him on those grounds. In fact, of everyone who ran for president, in both parties, I see Trump as the worst of all with Christie a close 2nd then a giant gap in between them and everyone else. No actual conservative or Libertarian could ever vote for either of the 2 under any circumstances.

The Republicans made the "lesser of 2 evils" argument when they foolishly nominated Romney and he was a MUCH better candidate than Trump.......see where it got them.

At some point the Republicans will have to nominate someone that people can actually vote FOR rather than pushing garbage on people by suggesting that it is better garbage than the other garbage.

 

Major, you really should read (George Washington) Plunkitt of Tammany Hall by William L. Riordon. All politicians do things that favor their own self interests but for the "greater good." While Hillary supposedly was crying out for raising taxes on the wealthy, she was lining her pockets through her "charitable" foundation, knowing her proposals would never see the light of day.

 

Weren't you Tea Party circa 2010? Now you're making the lesser of 2 evils argument. What happened to make you so disillusioned now?

Anyway, I don't agree. I think the lesser of 2 evils argument is premised on a false notion that you're somehow making the choice for the country. You won't flip the election with your vote. What you're actually doing is lending your infinitesimal strength to one faction as the various factions jockey for influence and power to make the choice for the country. The Libertarian doesn't have to win to have an influence. Just by showing up and showing some strength -- even if it is still in a great minority -- can effect some gravity. Either Clinton or Trump will win regardless of which evil you vote for, or if you go third party, or if you sleep in. But you will lend incrementally more influence to one of the players to bend the political narrative. Why lend it to a player you don't like just because it's powerful? If you like Johnson, lend him some strength and see what he can do to bend policy. He won't take over Washington, but the more votes he has the more he can do. I think Bernie is doing this to great effect today -- collecting as many votes as he can despite losing the nomination so that he can influence the Democratic platform.

 

this is absolutely rich.

After his dumbass comment (which channeled criticism for repubs and dems) you would think that the people on the lower end of the intelligence scale who had not already picked up on Trump, would at least pick up onto his antics now.
Apparently some people are happy with an authoritarian who has yet to accept an ounce of criticism coming his way.

Did you sign up for Trump University as an avid student too?

 

Your thought process is too altruistic. Either Trump or Clinton will win. They will not be influenced to any significant degree regardless of the Johnson or Sanders voting numbers. Also, platforms are nothing more than something to be stepped on. Political winners pay attention to the planks they favor and disregard those they don't.

I'm still an active member of one of the Tea Parties, but that does not impair a realistic approach to political outcomes. Unfortunately, this year I am voting against a candidate, rather than for one, in the only way possible -- by voting for her strongest opponent.

 

Trump. Voter. Naaaaailed it.

 

With the Democratic and Republican candidates finally determined, could there have been a doubt for whom I would vote? I'll vote pompous over overtly corrupt any day.

 

Anyone who honestly thinks Trump is the "lesser of the two evils" in this election probably isn't old enough to vote anyway.

 

Ahhhhhhhh....wishing that were so.

 

Probably not really a doubt for you, thumbs, but some republicans are definitely defecting on this radically strange choice for a presidential candidate. I think many normal GOP voters will have big doubts about this and may sit out this election or even just leave that part of their ballots blank at the last minute.

I think if "pompous" was the worst you could say about him, most of us would not really have such a problem. He invokes the language and even the political strategies of fascism, historically speaking. It's disturbing to some of us, unlike anything we've ever seen in an American politician. (I'm too 'young' to have seen Senator J. McCarthy do his thing.)

 

Trump could realistically do irreparable damage to America, and may very well turn out to be the worst president the USA has ever had. How is Hilary the lesser of two evils, Hilary is actually a career politician, whereas Trump is a nobody with zero experience. You already know what Hilary is capable of and honestly it's pretty inconsequential. With Trump you run the risk of a disastrous president.

I mean, it'd be one thing if Trump was an eloquent speaker or a skilled debater, he isn't. We know that he can't speak to his own policies, and when he gets scrutinized he does not provide adequate explanations.

 

Both Trump or Hillary could realistically do irreparable damage to America and could turn out to be the worst president the US ever had. Both are national embarrassments but IMO Hillary is the slightly better choice. It's like having to pick between voting Steve-O or Snookie as the next president, there's really not a right choice.

 

I understand the concerns over Trump's obvious shortcomings. However, he stands a chance of being a decent President. With Hillary, there is no chance whatsoever of her being a decent President. She has trouble being a decent human being.

 

I honestly don't see how you could have watched Trump speak at any point in the last year and think that he has any chance at all of being a decent president or that he's a decent human being.

I've been fairly outspoken when it comes to pointing out Hillary's obvious flaws, but honestly, Trump has all of those and more. Picking Trump is picking the worst of the 2 liberals you could vote for this cycle.

 

One of the differences for me is the Supreme Court justices Trump said he would submit versus the justice candidates Hillary would present.

 

You do realize that Trump is a billionaire who isn't shy about talking about how much money he has and makes and how much more he can make.

You do also realize how Trump brags about how he's gamed the system to make money. He even had a University that he charged $35K to tell people how to make as much money as possible.

 

I get that, but are you really going on the word of a con artist? Trump has taken every side of pretty much every issue and he's proven time and time again that he can't be trusted. Saying that you want to vote for him because he promised to nominate conservative SC justices seems pretty naive.

By all means, buy the snake oil if you really want to, but you can't expect anyone else to want to.

 

Yes of course the person who brags about how he buys and sells politicians, games the bankruptcy laws and is being sued for defrauding people through a fictional university isn't overtly corrupt.

 

I'm surprised by some of the people who would vote for Trump.