Email between me an a buddy WRT the election.
As much as I love playing Devil's advocate, we've reached a point where I have to honestly ask if you are seriously believing a single word either side has said in any of this? At first I thought you might be just taking this position to get some kind of hobbit-rage reaction out of <common friend>, but now I'm not so sure.
I admit that some of it is yanking <common friend>'s chain. While I don't believe everything either candidate has said, the sum total of their actions and words is a good indicator of how they'd perform in office. If there's one thing I've learned since 2000 it's that elections have consequences.
George W Bush talked as if he were somewhat of an isolationist during the campaign, stressing the idea that we should avoid needless conflicts and interfering with the affairs of other countries. After Bill Clinton's various interventions, I agreed 100% and voted for him.
My mistake, as I took him at his word and didn't look at the crew he'd surrounded himself with. If I had, I might have noticed all of the neoconservative foreign interventionists in key policy positions surrounding him and been much warier. Despite all of the far left rhetoric about GWB wanting to avenge his Daddy, I don't believe that was the reason we invaded Iraq. What I believe actually happened is that the neocons surrounding Bush used 9/11 as the pretext to launch the invasion they'd been wanting to do ever since Bush the Elder wisely refused to occupy the entire country back in 1991.
I'm not going to author a long screed about Gulf War 2, but I am going to say that it taught me to look at the advisers and confidants a candidate surrounds themselves with, and to be frank, the people Trump surrounds himself with scare the shit out of me.
I'm wary of some of Clinton's people, but she does encourage debate and at least listens to the opinions of others. The wikileaks emails illustrate the internal debates among her top people quite well. Trump tends to fire people who voice dissenting opinions.
Haven't you noticed that even the 'hard-hitting' news shows & reporters don't even bother asking about or covering broken campaign promises anymore? It's expected.
There aren't any hard-hitting news shows any more. Most of the TV programs fall under 'infotainment', while the prominent reporters in both print and video much prefer having 'access' and 'exclusive interviews' to the scut work involved with committing actual journalism.
The best example of this is former Watergate reporter Bob Woodward. He may have become famous due to the hard work put in while investigating Nixon, but he quickly became yet another courtier trading his journalistic integrity for access.
Trump's well aware of this and it's how he dominated political 'reporting' until actual journalists like Farenthold started uncovering his many sins WRT his foundation, taxes, etc.
If Clinton wins, we are going to get another 4 years of what Obama gave us, for better or worse. Not saying that is good or bad, but Clinton bows down to her Democrat masters and follows their orders. There is a greater chance of you being tapped to play the next James Bond than there is of Hillary's presidency playing out any other way.
I'm well aware of this, and if it wasn't illegal I'd be voting for Obama's 3rd term rather than Hillary's 1st. Though I believe that she will be somewhat more aggressive in pushing back on the social conservatives than Obama, which is a Good Thing™ in my book.
If Trump wins, with no support from either party, he will be muffled, stifled, squat upon, and minimized to levels that no one has ever seen in the history of ever. He will be the greatest lame duck President reaching such heights that forever more a lame duck President will be referred to as being a 'Trump' or being 'Trump-ified'. The only good that would come of him being President is that his mouthy outbursts will shine lights in dark corners of government & policy much like he did in the Presidential race.
I Disagree. Trump still has a large base of support in the Republican Party that the 'establishment' is running scared from despite his deeds and actions that would have seen him removed as standard-bearer 20 years ago. Repeated party primary election 'purifications' have driven out most of the moderates, leaving the Tea Party and social conservatives with a huge influence WRT party policy and agenda.
Fear of being 'primaried' by Trump backers will serve to keep most Republicans in line during a Trump presidency.
Republicans are known for marching in lockstep and papering over intraparty disputes. Democrats aren't. WIll Rogers' aphorism about not belonging to an organized political party because he's a Democrat still applies to a large extent.
The other thing to consider is that Obama (and Clinton if she wins) acts as a brake on Congress, keeping the tea party whackjobs and social conservatives from passing some frankly Godawful legislation. Legislation that President Trump would happily sign.
Buying into political rhetoric is for naive high school students and little old ladies who swear FDR never lied to them
Heh..FDR never lied. Just ask Eleanor Roosevelt and Lucy Mercer. :)
--