Sunday, August 14, 2016

The conservative case for.....Hillary Clinton?

Here. 

55 comments:

Legion of Logic said...

I really can't agree. She is a pathological liar, corrupt, and likely cares nothing for anyone that doesn't further her ambitions. And even if she herself is not a bigot - highly doubtful - she will cater to all the progressive bigots and race baiters who intentionally divide people along demographic lines, rather than striving for unity.

And beyond that, a progressive Supreme Court will damage this society so badly that it will never recover.

Joe Hinman said...

the propaganda that she's a liar is just absurd.Trump's brain washing. The only thing she actually distorted truth about is the emails and she didn't lie about she spun. All politicians spin, are you insane? Trump is insane. Flip city a nujt case you want to let him be in charge of nuclear weapons? how brain washed could republicans be hat they are willing risk nuclear war just to keep a woman out of power?

Get real. you have no real evidence of her lying. The FBI said she was sloppy they did not say she broke the law and they did not say anything sent was restricted at the she sent it.

Trump is a liar, he says one thing one day then denies he said it vthe next day,several things the major one that comes to mind is knowing Putin. Bu8t there are several other things, IN addition to being a liar he is so thin skinned any criticism iks a "brutal attack." The list is huge,have alist dov you wnat to see it?

Joe Hinman said...

*Trump called for the assassination of opponent he put it in a dog whistle so he plausible deniability.

*His excuse was that he was only calling for political action but the original statement assumed the election was over and Clinton won.

*He said it was ok to kill journalists then tied act coy about it

*Original offensive statement stereotyping Mexicans

*the disrespect he showed to the gold star family

*said McCain was not a hero because he got captured

*Telling his supporters to beat up people who are Protestantism encourage violence time and time again

*let the baby cry what are you nuts get the baby out of here!

*if anyone looks like they are going to through a tomato beat them up, (looks like not if they do think about it)

*Vailed reference to Megan Kelly's ministration as a put down for her criticisms of him

this is just a few things off thecuff, I have a huge list
*

Joe Hinman said...

I really cannot get over the dishonestly of republicans in refusing to confront the fact that their nominee is a nut case he is insane. They really would rather win the election even if it destroys the world rather than let a woman have power.

The guy can't shut his mouth, Every time he tries to reform, lean up his act, and play presidential candidate then he comes right back with stupid bit, Why? because he can't control himself. Because he's a nut.

William Brown said...


Whilst, I agree with just about everything the author had to say about Trump, I believe that she is making Hillary out to be much more benign than most of us conservatives think she would be as president. With statements like this, "It’s true that Clinton will likely pursue some policies as president that conservatives find suboptimal."

Many (most) of us think that Hillary could be the final straw in the destruction of the USA as the last best hope for freedom in the world.

B. Prokop said...

I'm most taken by his reason number six - that she is a Democrat. It rather reminds me of an argument I frequently make to people who say they're not going to vote. I say that as long as you vote, then you have the right to complain about whatever follows.

If you supported the losing candidate, then you can always say, "See, I told you so! You should have voted for the other guy!" And if you went for the winner, you can say, "Damn it, and I voted for this schlub! What a disappointment!"

But if you didn't vote at all, then keep your mouth shut. You have no right to complain.

(And I've said this in previous elections as well - not just this one.)

Legion of Logic said...

"the propaganda that she's a liar is just absurd.Trump's brain washing."

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/statements/byruling/false/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/statements/byruling/false/

Add to that the nonexistent sniper fire and, the most ironic of statements from a liar like Hillary, her claim that she doesn't believe she has ever lied. By any objective standard, Hillary Clinton is a huge liar.

FYI, I'm not a Republican, I can't stand Trump, I've always thought Hillary was a liar, and accusing us of not liking Hillary because we don't want a woman in the White House is so abysmally ridiculous that I dishonored myself by addressing it. Cut the progressive paranoia of bigotry out of your life and you will find your mind is much more in tune with reality.

Crude said...

Short version: Trump says things that the media acts horribly shocked at, and he doesn't apologize. He tells off the press and calls out bias, he insults people who insult and degrade others, how terrible. And worst of all, he's not in favor of unrestricted free trade!

Hillary's a pathological liar, corrupt beyond all belief, leaked state secrets in a way that would land her in jail if she weren't too big to jail, and her defense on practically all points is that she's so incompetent that she can't be culpable. Add in the fact that she increasingly looks to be a senior citizen who needs to be drugged up just to get through the day a la latter days Yeltsin, and the fact that in terms of issues she's absolutely putrid.

Hillary's got a warmongering track record, and a bad one. Trump's a hell of a lot more likely to pull us out of the game of nationbuilding and fighting foreign wars on behalf of others. But I will admit, it is absolutely hilarious to see a prediction come true of mine: that so long as you throw a D in front of the name, many democrats will go all-in for a Wall Street purchased, warmongering hack who the worst of the worst Republicans are cozying up to.

If Hillary wins and starts an idiotic war, may she draft the sons and daughters of everyone who screamed 'But I'm pretty sure he made a joke about a woman's period, we're better off'.

Joe Hinman said...

Many (most) of us think that Hillary could be the final straw in the destruction of the USA as the last best hope for freedom in the world.

I have never yet been able to get anyone vto give a reason for such extreme statements,. don't say"she's a liar."

Joe Hinman said...

LL, "Add to that the nonexistent sniper fire and, the most ironic of statements from a liar like Hillary, her claim that she doesn't believe she has ever lied. By any objective standard, Hillary Clinton is a huge liar.

FYI, I'm not a Republican, I can't stand Trump, I've always thought Hillary was a liar, and accusing us of not liking Hillary because we don't want a woman in the White House is so abysmally ridiculous that I dishonored myself by addressing it. Cut the progressive paranoia of bigotry out of your life and you will find your mind is much more in tune with reality.

August 15, 2016 7:12 AM"

still not a reason, saying her denial is a lie counts a a lie is pointless, why can't you give me a reason

Joe Hinman said...

why can't conservatives make links? think about it, here are LL's links

HERE

and Here


Ilíon said...

B.Prokop: "I'm most taken by his reason number six - that she is a Democrat."

Exactly.

And, to be even more blunt -- anyone who votes for any Democrat (*) for any office at any level of government has committed a grave moral offense. As bad as individual Republicans may be, the Democratic party is officially committed to any number of moral evils. We all know this; none of us will have any excuse when we stand before God in judgment.

B.Prokop: "I say that as long as you vote, then you have the right to complain about whatever follows. ... But if you didn't vote at all, then keep your mouth shut. You have no right to complain."

That works as a general rule of thumb, but not as an absolute/universal rule -- sometimes "the lesser of two evils" is still just evil. Sometimes the only moral option is to refuse to vote for either -- and then to "complain" no matter which wins.

(*) and not a few Republicans

Joe Hinman said...

looi at the kind of BSvthey count as lying,She says Trump doesn't make a thing in America and turns out he makes a few small items, That's just hyperballie like anyone would use, it's a common expression to term lying and put it on a part with not denouncing David Duke is inane,

Ilíon said...

Oh, did I turn "I'm most taken by his reason number six - that she is a Democrat" on its head? Silly me!

Joe Hinman said...

And, to be even more blunt -- anyone who votes for any Democrat (*) for any office at any level of government has committed a grave moral offense.

8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse! Gal 1:8

Joe Hinman said...

If it's a sin to vote for Clinton it's a sin to vote for Donie.

Ilíon said...

^ So asserts the leftist shill for sin and murder and damnation.

Joe Hinman said...

Republicans are rationalization intimidating electing psychopath bully who can't keep his mouth shut and many be a Russian agent, but they have to demonize the opposition in a way they didn't even do with Obama. All the examples you give are petty crap any politician would qualify for,I could show you a list av mile long Reagan did.

Nixon over threw democracy in childlike to hep ATT make investments, got 48,000 innocent people murdered in the deal. But Hillary said Trump doesn't make anything Americana and he makes tie clasps.she lied.

Trump and his campaign manager have ties going back to last decade doing business in Russia and friendships with Putin, New evidence broke today campaign manager took money from Ukrainian pro Russian party. then you make this allegation that Hilary gave away secrets, but the CIA director said Trump may be an agent of Moscow he said it I heard him,

Buitv the FBI cleared Hilary of any secret-leaking, They said sloppy but they also nothing illegal! Nothing illegal. nothing illegal.

Joe Hinman said...

Oh, did I turn "I'm most taken by his reason number six - that she is a Democrat" on its head? Silly me!

August 15, 2016 8:50 AM

so asserts the self appointed guardian of other people's minds.

Hal said...

"Trump says things that the media acts horribly shocked at, and he doesn't apologize."

Trump says things that most sane people are shocked at. He has openly mocked a disabled person for being disabled. He shows a shocking lack of understanding regarding basic constitutional principles such as freedom of religion and freedom of the press. He is ignorant of current events (Ukraine).

It worked great for him in the primaries because he of all the free media attention. He was stupid enough to think it would work in the general election. All the media attention now just reminds people that he is unfit to be President.

B. Prokop said...

"sometimes "the lesser of two evils" is still just evil. Sometimes the only moral option is to refuse to vote for either"

That's why God created third parties (which is how I am voting this time 'round).

Ilíon said...

Hal: "Trump says things that most sane people are shocked at. He has openly mocked a disabled person for being disabled."

Did he, really? I know that that is how the leftist liars in the media (but I repeat myself) presented the incident, or, as the leftist liar in this thread might put it, "spun" the incident.

But does that *really* relate the whole truth? I have no idea.

But, I do know that the media are liars and that they *always* lie for the leftist.

And, I know -- being myself the son of a crippled woman -- that most public solicitude for "disabled persons" is rank hypocrisy.

Joe Hinman said...

id he, really? I know that that is how the leftist liars in the media (but I repeat myself) presented the incident, or, as the leftist liar in this thread might put it, "spun" the incident.

Just incredible how these people have brainwashed them selves., the guy his arms around and shaking going"I can't remember" speaking in a a halting voice just like the reporter does but it's a lie., everything that is not down the party line i a lie,

Crude said...

He shows a shocking lack of understanding regarding basic constitutional principles such as freedom of religion and freedom of the press. He is ignorant of current events (Ukraine).

Hahaha. I love how this is the election where 'freedom of religion' is suddenly a huge concern to the left. In the sense, of course, of 'We think that the constitution guarantees unlimited immigration of muslims, so long as we call them refugees, and also you can't evaluate their beliefs to determine if they pose a security threat or even a cultural one.' Shocking lack of understanding, indeed. Ditto for freedom of the press, which amounts to 'He's revoked press passes from outlets which despise him and said they should be accountable if they lie'. As for Ukraine, twisting Trump's view that Russia won't be taking over Ukraine to 'He didn't even realize they retook Crimea!' ain't impressive. Especially considering routine defenses of Clinton's outright butchery and incompetence hinge on 'She forgets a lot of things that are relevant'.

Pardon me as I'm skeptical about the left's newfound discovery of the standards of decency. Insulting and degrading people is a freaking pasttime for the left - what they can't stand is the mockery and ridicule, and the unapologetic nature of it, coming in the other direction. It's causing them to have blood running out of their eyes, their whatever.

That's what really has people spooked here, which makes the appeals to freedom of speech rich. Trump's demonstrating that a sizable portion of the country has no patience for the ever precious PC routine. 'Gasp, you insulted a -woman-! Hillary Clinton has a big, disgusting vagina, how DARE you question her capabilities!' Lose that shield and a lot of heads are going to roll.

Fight hard, gents. You're losing your sjw privileges.

Legion of Logic said...

"why can't conservatives make links?"

Why can't progressives copy and paste? My links were entirely sufficient.

Attacking Trump is not the same as defending Hillary, who has done nothing to deserve my vote and tons to lose it.

Legion of Logic said...

"Especially considering routine defenses of Clinton's outright butchery and incompetence hinge on 'She forgets a lot of things that are relevant'."

Wiped her server? What, you mean like with a cloth?? Yeah incompetence and ignorance is not the most inspiring defense.

Hal said...

Crude,
I notice you ignored Trump's mocking of a handicapped person. That alone disqualifies him.

In the general election it is the undecideds and moderates that need to be won over. It is those folks who are shocked and upset by Trump's outrages statements. That is why his poll numbers are falling. So go ahead, waste your time raging against the lefties.


"Hillary Clinton has a big, disgusting vagina"

Silly baby talk.


Ilion,
The video and images of his mocking the disabled reporter are readily viewed on the net. Here is a link to the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX9reO3QnUA

Crude said...

Hal,

I notice you ignored Trump's mocking of a handicapped person. That alone disqualifies him.

In what, Hal's fragile world? I ignored it because it's covered amply with 'Trump upsetting you doesn't disqualify him'. The decency ship sailed a long time ago with Team SJW, and it's not coming back.

As for who needs to be won over, here's a little lesson: Trump, despite a nonstop media assault, is still largely polling ~3 points behind Clinton. And I am absolutely delighted with the effect he's having regardless of how the election plays out. The cultural effect is fantastic, and if Hillary were to somehow win, she'd be regarded as a barely legitimate leader - at best.

That'll do.

Silly baby talk.

What, you were permitted to have a baby? Otherwise how would you know?

How dare I point out the fact that Hillary Clinton's having a disgusting vagina doesn't immunize her from charges of incompetence, or render other observations invalid.

Oops, wait, I offended again: I said the d-word, and the v-word, and one of those is *gendered* and the other is a judgement of appearance, and that is disqualifying according to the rules. I'll join the growing list of folks who don't give a crap about 'em.

Ilíon said...

Whether or not Hillary's pussy (*) is "disgusting", that she and her ilk keep waving it in our faces *is* disgusting.


(*) One of the "progressive" smirking-13-year-old-boy hypocrisies is that if you use the medical/scientific term when expressing crude ideas, it makes it not-crude. The hell it does.

Ilíon said...

Hal: "The video and images of his mocking the disabled reporter are readily viewed on the net."

That doesn't -- of course it doesn't -- answer the question I asked: "But does [the media's presentation of the incident] *really* relate the whole truth?"

Look, we *all* know that were that crippled (*gasp* yes, I used that word) gimp (*gasp* and that one, too) a Trump supporter rather than detractor, that the very same leftists who are shocked, Shocked, SHOCKED! that Trump mocked his disability would be doing far worse.

Leftists are liars and hypocrites; every single one of them.

I mean, just recall how they used to mock Sarah Palin's Down Syndrome baby.

Hal said...

Crude,
Is that all there is? Just the desire to be free to not speak decently?

You are being played for a chump by the candidate you support. Here is what he said in his speech today:

"“Those who support bigotry and hatred” will not be admitted to the United States, said Trump. “Only those we expect to flourish in this country and to embrace a tolerant American society should be issued visas.”

Sounds like one of those SJW folks you are wasting your time attacking.

Joe Hinman said...

Whether or not Hillary's pussy (*) is "disgusting", that she and her ilk keep waving it in our faces *is* disgusting.

how old are you? I think I see why Trump doesn't bother this guy

Joe Hinman said...

Hahaha. I love how this is the election where 'freedom of religion' is suddenly a huge concern to the left.

I know religion has been so oppressed since Obavma stole the country rom no9ble Mr Bush only rigged the 2000 eoectiomn for our own good,


In the sense, of course, of 'We think that the constitution guarantees unlimited immigration of muslims, so long as we call them refugees, and also you can't evaluate their beliefs to determine if they pose a security threat or even a cultural one.' Shocking lack of understanding, indeed. Ditto for freedom of the press, which amounts to 'He's revoked press passes from outlets which despise him and said they should be accountable if they lie'. As for Ukraine, twisting Trump's view that Russia won't be taking over Ukraine to 'He didn't even realize they retook Crimea!' ain't impressive. Especially considering routine defenses of Clinton's outright butchery and incompetence hinge on 'She forgets a lot of things that are relevant'.

hey genius the only way Trump could know what Putin will od is if Putin told hm but he doesn'tknow tghie guy right?

Crude said...

Hal,

No, the desire to talk openly and frankly about topics without the perpetually whiny SJW scolds screaming 'disqualified!' or 'racist!' or 'sexist!' and threatening people over Badspeak and Wrongthought. Your ilk aren't suitable to determine what offense is acceptable, and what goes too far.

Sounds like one of those SJW folks you are wasting your time attacking.

I admit, those who support bigotry and hatred really does sound like those SJW folks. Keeping them and their supporters out of the country is fine by me.

This is where I point out that my concern is first and foremost with citizens in this country. Guaranteeing citizenship to anyone and everyone isn't part of the desire.

It's an easy point to grasp, Hal. Any father could explain it to his children.

Legion of Logic said...

"I notice you ignored Trump's mocking of a handicapped person. That alone disqualifies him."

Do you believe Trump being a meanie is worse than Hillary, say, wanting to make gun manufacturers liable for the criminal misuse of their product, which is a horrifying position that every American should oppose? (On a side note, Hillary has also blatantly lied about this topic, as well.)

Even if nothing else, this position she has staked out disqualifies her from being worthy of the office she so desperately wants.

Ilíon said...

Hal, hypocritically freaking-out as only a leftist can: "Here is what he said in his speech today:

"“Those who support bigotry and hatred” will not be admitted to the United States, said Trump. “Only those we expect to flourish in this country and to embrace a tolerant American society should be issued visas.”
"

*GASP* How dare he! How dare he voice some quite minor opposition to the policies of the people (i.e. leftists) who have quite openly -- and for decades -- admitted that the purpose of their open borders policies is to destroy the historic American people?

Those of you who are not willingly shills for the leftists, think about how odd this is --
1) going back at least into the 1980s "liberals" have been churning out those celebratory "browning of America" articles, and eagerly looking forward to the projected time when white Americans would be a minority in their own country;
2) yet, let someone -- no matter what his race -- dare to peep up, "Could we think about that for a minute? Is that really a Good Thing?" and they immediately spray everything with their patented 'Racist!' sauce.

Well, to Hell with that.

Hal said...

Well, I'll leave it there Crude. I don't see anything of substance to address in your last post.

Ilíon said...

^ as if Hal would have addressed anything anyway

Ilíon said...

B.Prokop: "That's why God created third parties (which is how I am voting this time 'round)."

1) So far, it appears that you objection is to the particular candidate, rather than to the party root and branch;
2) And, naturally, the third party you settled on is the Libertarians ... who are just Democrats smart enough to grasp that "Let's make the rich pay their fair share" means themselves;
3) Did you even consider the Conservative party? To ask is to answer, is it not? (Here is their platform, most of which is sensible)

Ilíon said...

^ At the same time, they official endorse the constitutionally disqualified candidate, Ted Cruz (*). I guess it's a good thing they don't call themselves the Constitution Party.

(*) which should be right up B.Prokop's alley: not the endorsement so much as the disinterest in the illegality of a Cruz occupation of the Oval Office.

B. Prokop said...

"Did you even consider the Conservative party?"

Actually, I had never heard of them. I'll check out your link.

Chad Handley said...

Your ilk aren't suitable to determine what offense is acceptable, and what goes too far.

So, ignore the SJWs. What about the many prominent, lifelong conservatives who have also said that Trump is unfit for office?

B. Prokop said...

RE: Ilion's query as to the Conservative Party

Not my Cup o' Tea. There are too many planks in their platform that I can't go along with.

I do not believe that "the United States has contributed more to the political, economic and financial betterment of the human condition than any previous collection of nations." (from the Preamble)

I like the idea of abandoning "comprehensive" immigration reform, and passing incremental laws on the subject.

I believe the key wording in the 2nd Amendment is "well regulated", which allows for sensible curbs on the so-called right to bear arms. I do not believe that the amendment was "designed to protect the people against the tyranny of the federal government."

Although I also believe the ACA ought to be "repealed and replaced", I do so for entirely opposite reasons from the Conservative Party, in that I think the act didn't go far enough. I would rather it had set up a system similar to what they have in Western Europe or in Canada, rather than the mess we now have. I'd like to see the role of Health Insurance Companies greatly reduced.

I don't have much to say about monetary or trade policy.

I love their plank about requiring "plain English" language in bills.

No argument with their stance on Life.

I do not believe our country needs an official language.

I agree with their marriage plank.

I think we need to stay in the UN.

Joe Hinman said...

"I notice you ignored Trump's mocking of a handicapped person. That alone disqualifies him."

Do you believe Trump being a meanie is worse than Hillary,"

the hypocritical insanity of the brain washed republicans, Trump is not a meaning he is a lackie op Putin and he's and he sold out to evil.,

Joe Hinman said...

they so easily dismiss violence, thugism bullying racist, sexism,hatred these the republican stock in trade the evangelicals stupidly assume these are just just political expediency,the "meany" thing says it all, they don't value freedom,justice, fairness.,or love.

These are the worshipers of ideology ,ideology is God ideology is all there could be

Legion of Logic said...

"the hypocritical insanity of the brain washed republican"

Your zealous hatred of Republicans is noted, but you'll have to try harder if you want to insult me. I'm not a Republican.

The political left is overflowing with hatred and bigotry, and until the Democrats denounce this hatred and stop caving to it and enabling it, no Democrat will get my support. Ever. So you can keep on trashing Republicans and Trump all you want, the Democrats are still garbage and their base is still a cesspit of bigotry.

Joe Hinman said...

first of all stop calling the Dems the left, they are Capitalism's B team. Secondly, I am generally "on the let" but I really think ideology sux. Unlike idion I don't worship ideology, I don't believe in let wing christianity I believable in Jesus. I don't think a party line is any substitute for the Gospel, Unlike some who think the party line is the Gospel.

Ilíon said...

Chad Handley: "So, ignore the SJWs. What about the many prominent, lifelong conservatives who have also said that Trump is unfit for office?"

These would be whom? The same "conservatives" who never fail to fall all over themselves out-shrieking the SJW when the leftists have settled on today's target for the Two-Minute Hate?

Is Trump more or less "unfit for office" than Clinton (round 2)? Is Trump more or less "unfit for office" than Clinton (round 1)? Is Trump more or less "unfit for office" than Obama?

By what standard are we judging this unfitness?

Ilíon said...

B.Prokop: "Not my Cup o' Tea. There are too many planks in their platform that I can't go along with.

I do not believe that "the United States has contributed more to the political, economic and financial betterment of the human condition than any previous collection of nations." (from the Preamble)
"

Especially that non-platform belief.

You can go along with the Libertarians -- who explicitly endorse abortion -- but not the Conservatives -- who explicitly call for the abolition of abortion. Face it, B.Prokop, what you don't like about the Conservative party is that it isn't leftist enough (*).

B.Prokop: "Although I also believe the ACA ought to be "repealed and replaced", I do so for entirely opposite reasons from the Conservative Party, in that I think the act didn't go far enough. I would rather it had set up a system similar to what they have in Western Europe or in Canada, rather than the mess we now have ..."

Because evidence and real-world experience never matters in the face of a Good Idea.


(*) whereas I'd prefer it to be more consistently and rigorously rightist; that is, I think that just as with the Republicans, they implicitly accept a whole host of leftist assumptions ... and just don't want to go where the logic of those assumptions demands ... and thus, just as with the Republicans, I believe that they will never pass up an opportunity to fold when the leftists start shrieking.

Ilíon said...

OK, playing it straight this time --

B.Prokop: "I'm most taken by his reason number six - that she is a Democrat. ..."

from the concern-troll article: "If Clinton becomes president, Republicans will be members of the opposition, meaning they can oppose her agenda openly and even, despite this Trump disaster, with occasional credibility. If Trump becomes president, they’ll be the loyal members of a party ..."

Really? The same GOP that never fails to fold when the Dems make a bit of noise -- nor fails to shoot its own members in the back if they too effectively oppose leftism -- is suddenly going to be party-loyal because a New York "moderate" who presently calling himself a Republican, and whom most of them personally despise, is president?

B. Prokop said...

"You can go along with the Libertarians"

No, I can't. In fact, I haven't even read their platform, and know next to nothing about Gary Johnson. My sole reason for intending to vote Libertarian is because I want some, any, third party's vote total to be as high as possible. I cannot think of any other practical way of demonstrating my disgust with our current major parties. Right now, the Libertarians appear to be the ones most likely to get a noticeable percentage of the vote. And since I live in Maryland which will go Democratic no matter what, I am effectively a Free Man. I can vote for effect, without worrying about whether by doing so I might affect the outcome - 'Cause I won't.

Chad Handley said...

These would be whom?

For starters: Ross Douthat, George Will, Bill Kristol, Richard Armitage, John Negropone, Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, Susan Collins.

A real murderers row of SJWs, that.

And let's not forget the 50 former GOP national security officials who signed an open letter stating that Trump is not just unfit for the office but a danger to national security:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/gop-letter-national-security-trump-226801

Is Trump more or less "unfit for office" than Clinton (round 2)? Is Trump more or less "unfit for office" than Clinton (round 1)? Is Trump more or less "unfit for office" than Obama?

Did any of the afforementioned publicly encourage Russia to hack the files of their political opponents? Did they suggest the assassination of their political opponents? Did they make references to the size of their genitalia during national debates?

Trump is in a class by himself. Anybody who votes for him demonstrates that their bedrock principle is nothing more than sheer, irrational hatred of liberals.

You'd proudly vote for the Devil if his opponent was a Democrat.

B. Prokop said...

"You'd proudly vote for the Devil if his opponent was a Democrat."

I'm no Trump supporter, but your comment reminds me of Winston Churchill, who when he was criticized for allying with the Soviet Union against the Nazis after the German invasion of Russia, said something like "If Hitler invaded Hell, I'd at least put in a good word for the Devil in the House of Commons!"

Ilíon said...

^ I was about to post "Do you mistake me for Churchill?"

Ilíon said...

In any event, would it really make any sense for the Devil to campaign against a Democrat?

Moreover, Mr Handley is clearly so enamored of the Party of Crime, Murder and Treason that he can't even see my multiple statements that, "Sometimes, the lesser of two evils is still just evil"

=========
And check this out --

Chad Handley: "So, ignore the SJWs. What about the many prominent, lifelong conservatives who have also said that Trump is unfit for office?"

me: "These would be whom? The same "conservatives" who never fail to fall all over themselves out-shrieking the SJW when the leftists have settled on today's target for the Two-Minute Hate?"

Chad Handley: "For starters: Ross Douthat, George Will, Bill Kristol, Richard Armitage, John Negropon[t]e, Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, Susan Collins."

It is to laugh. These are the "prominent, lifelong conservatives" whose word we are to take that Trump is "unfit for office"!