Don't know how to respond to this because I feel like the post you quoted was already responsive to everything you said. As I'd predicted, no one will believe I reached my opinion on Clinton in earnest, assuming instead that I'm either politically opposed or have been taken in by the vast right-wing conspiracy. Meanwhile, Deck, I'm sure you feel you've come to your conclusion to support Clinton earnestly, not because of your own political expediency nor because you've been hoodwinked by Clinton's PR campaign. I'll try to take you at your word. Aside from the electoral college, your vote is one in 130m. One national 30-second ad spot is worth more than your vote. I'm not sure if I believe we'll return to an era of Congressional preeminence, even with a weak president. Since Teddy Roosevelt, the size of the Administration has grown enormously, the reach of federal agencies has increased, and Congress has ceded a lot of warmaking powers to the presidency. If there is a shift of power from a weak president, I would think it would be to cabinet members -- and we probably wouldn't see it. I don't think Clinton is 'nefarious.' I don't even think that quite describes Trump. When I say Trump (and a little bit Clinton) wants to do the wrong things, I mean he has a value set that I don't agree with and that doesn't optimally serve the interests of Americans. He may hurt the country, but not because he's trying to.
