The Totally Unoffical Phatmass US Presidential Election Poll

[Socrates]

I'm not a fan of either major candidate, though Hillary is definitely the greater evil.  The unfortunate reality is that, barring a death or such, either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton will be our next president.  I'd be tempted to sit this one out or make a protest vote, except for the current critical situation with the Supreme Court justices and federal judges.  With the death of Scalia, even one Dem-nominated justice will tip the SCOTUS in a completely left-wing direction, and with a Hillary presidency, up to 80% of federal judges will be leftist activists appointed by either Obama or Clinton.  Basically, the SCOTUS and federal courts will become nothing more than a rubber-stamp for whatever unconstitutional leftist tyranny the federal government wants to force upon us.  With cases likely to be heard, much of what remains of our constitutionally-guaranteed rights and liberties, including basic religious liberty, may be lost forever.

Mr. Trump has promised to nominate constitutionalist justices, and the "short list" he provided was actually quite impressive.  Can we trust him to keep his promise?  I honestly don't know - nor does anybody, really.   While Trump is not a true conservative, I don't think he's a leftist ideologue the way Hillary is, and probably does not personally care much about who is nominated to the Supreme Court.  He may well keep his promise, if only to save face, at least if he's pressured hard.  At worst, his nominees will likely be less hard-left ideological than Clinton's.

But we can 100% trust Hillary to nominate only left-wing activists eager to rubber-stamp a leftist ideological agenda with no regard for constitutional limits on federal power.  No honest person would dispute that.

In short, I'd rather gamble with Trump than commit certain suicide with Hillary.

In addition to being a leftist committed to an anti-Christian and fanatically pro-abortion ideology (to the point of saying that religions opposed to abortion "need to change"), she's easily the most crooked and corrupt candidate to ever run for President on a major ticket.

Catholics who think she's an acceptable candidate, or even the lesser evil, seriously need to wake up and stop smoking whatever crack Mark Shea and Simcha Fisher have been passing around.

Edited September 10, 2016 by Socrates

[Socrates]

On 9/8/2016 at 1:38 AM, EmilyAnn said:

America: y'all screwed up letting Donald Trump be a candidate. Don't let it go any further.

Yeah, and we screwed up even bigger by letting Hillary Clinton be a candidate.  She belongs behind bars, not in the White House.

22 hours ago, Peace said:

Trump will not defund Planned Parenthood. Nor will he appoint pro-life justices to the Supreme Court.

 

I honestly don't know what Trump will do.  Likely whatever he figures is politically expedient - which means he might respond to pressure from the right.  But you could be right.  I just don't have the power to know the inner heart and mind of Trump, or predict the future with certainty.  I think what Clinton will do is pretty certain though.

 

Quote

I don't see much hope in Trump. But as I wrote before, if you see hope in Trump then I believe that you can vote for him in good conscience.

I don't put a lot of hope in Trump either; I just think it likely he won't be as bad as Hillary.  Do you see hope in Hillary?  I see none whatever.

[tinytherese]

Gary Johnson says that he's personally against abortion but says that it should be up to the mother to decide. Jill  Stein is pro-choice.

[Peace]

1 hour ago, Socrates said:

I don't put a lot of hope in Trump either; I just think it likely he won't be as bad as Hillary.  Do you see hope in Hillary?  I see none whatever.

Not on abortion.

[Peace]

My top issue with Trump is handing him the keys to the US military. Sure, it may sound cliche, but I have serious problems with the idea of the man having nuclear war codes and things of that nature. I doubt that he can even name the president of France.

To me at least, his unpredictability in that area is more of an immediate concern than who will be nominated to the SC. As it is now, it seems that the GOP will hold the Senate, which puts some limits on the damage that Hillary can do there.

[Seven77]

2 hours ago, tinytherese said:

Gary Johnson says that he's personally against abortion but says that it should be up to the mother to decide. Jill  Stein is pro-choice.

 

No one should vote for either of them.

[little2add]

Clinton is the best thing money can buy

[little2add]

https://americanlookout.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/13729782_1660468680939896_988798534_n.mp4?_=1

 

[Socrates]

On 9/10/2016 at 6:58 PM, Peace said:

My top issue with Trump is handing him the keys to the US military. Sure, it may sound cliche, but I have serious problems with the idea of the man having nuclear war codes and things of that nature. I doubt that he can even name the president of France.
 

So you think we'd be better off giving keys to the US military to Hillary Clinton, who disregards security rules and illegally keeps classified emails on a private server (then lies about it ad nauseum)?  Or who refused to authorize military support when the U.S. embassy in Benghazi was under heavy siege by terrorists, then repeatedly lied to everyone about it, in order to keep a propaganda line for Obama to get re-elected?

Clearly, for her, politics and personal expediency take precedent over national security and American lives.

 

And perhaps I'm being naive, but I'm really not worried about Trump nuking everybody or other such wild scenarios.  He at least consistently expresses respect for the military, and has indicated that he would pursue a considerably less hawkish foreign policy than Bush.

 

Quote

To me at least, his unpredictability in that area is more of an immediate concern than who will be nominated to the SC. As it is now, it seems that the GOP will hold the Senate, which puts some limits on the damage that Hillary can do there.

The damage that could be done by Supreme Court rulings will likely take generations to undo, and we're in real danger of losing much of our first and second amendment rights, as well as any hope of defense for the unborn.

And the GOP Senate has shown all the backbone of an amoeba in standing up to Obama, so I can't trust it to be more effective against Hillary.

 

Edited September 12, 2016 by Socrates

[Peace]

3 hours ago, Socrates said:

So you think we'd be better off giving keys to the US military to Hillary Clinton?

Yes.

3 hours ago, Socrates said:

The damage that could be done by Supreme Court rulings will likely take generations to undo, and we're in real danger of losing much of our first and second amendment rights, as well as any hope of defense for the unborn.

 Perhaps you are correct. Or you could just be another paranoid conservative who says the same thing anytime any Democrat is elected. Time will tell.

3 hours ago, Socrates said:

And the GOP Senate has shown all the backbone of an amoeba in standing up to Obama, so I can't trust it to be more effective against Hillary.

Do you mean besides gutting the public option from his health care bill, refusing to even hold a vote on Garland, and shutting down the government just for the hell of it?

[EmilyAnn]

On 09/09/2016 at 9:30 PM, dUSt said:

Racism is evil.
Sexism is evil.

Abortion is more evil, more racist and more sexist than Trump.

I feel I should clarify that I am English and life issues are not an election issue in this country so whether or not candidates are pro-life or not is rarely mentioned in coverage here and so I tend not to think of it when looking at US candidates. Do you vote based on life issues, no matter what a candidates other policies are? (just wondering because like I said, it's not an issue for us)

I would still never support Trump just because he claims to be pro-life because his other policies disgust me. I don't like Hilary a lot either to be honest, but I get the impression she's more liked here in Europe than she is the US.

In elections here I have never voted for a major party. I doubt that would be much different if I lived in the US and had to seriously think about who to vote for.

[little2add]

the refugee crisis in the middle east, promotion of abortion, bribery (clinton foundation) are all trademarks of the current status quo.   The world is going hell in a hand basket under the current leadership and voting for clinton will be like going from the frying pan into the fire.

racism, distrust, social unrest/disharmony and class envy are on the rise

Edited September 12, 2016 by little2add

[LittleWaySoul]

3 hours ago, EmilyAnn said:

I feel I should clarify that I am English and life issues are not an election issue in this country so whether or not candidates are pro-life or not is rarely mentioned in coverage here and so I tend not to think of it when looking at US candidates. Do you vote based on life issues, no matter what a candidates other policies are? (just wondering because like I said, it's not an issue for us)

I would still never support Trump just because he claims to be pro-life because his other policies disgust me. I don't like Hilary a lot either to be honest, but I get the impression she's more liked here in Europe than she is the US.

In elections here I have never voted for a major party. I doubt that would be much different if I lived in the US and had to seriously think about who to vote for.

A lot of people do vote solely on life issues, yes. However I think it's getting harder and harder to vote for an authentically consistent life ethic politician because of matters like the death penalty, euthanasia, race relations, and war crimes/so-called "carpet bombing."

Trump scares me because of the shocking way he's spoken of foreign action, such as when he said he'd make the military kill the families of terrorists (a war crime). He also seems to show little respect for military veterans (here I'm thinking of his awful comments about McCain, a former POW: "I prefer people who didn't get captured"; or how he disparaged the sacrifice of Captain Humayun Khan and his family). Not to mention that I think a Trump presidency could kill whatever respect remains for the Republican Party, pushing us all towards a more leftist system as people distance themselves from him. Then again, maybe that's a good thing. Who knows.

As for Clinton, while I hate that she's pro-choice, I have trouble seeing how she's ~*~SO~*~ much worse than any other democrat ever and she'll take away all our rights. I see her as a fairly cookie cutter democrat, and in desperate times through history there have been many who have voted for the party they dislike in order to prevent someone even worse from getting in office (though I honestly don't identify with either party tbh). 

All this being said, the Supreme Court decision is so crucial that it stops me from immediately resigning myself to Clinton. That's why I'm tempted to protest vote by voting third party (though I dislike them too) or writing someone in. I think the months leading up to the election could be telling and I'm hoping they'll provide some clarity on the matter. 

Edited September 12, 2016 by LittleWaySoul

[Ice_nine]

the status quo is bad, but it would get considerably worse. I think Trump might be more dangerous. I'd prefer not to be called delusional because of that but hey.

[KnightofChrist]

Hillary Passes out at 911 Memorial memorial

If she were a Republican the calls for her to drop out due to health would be a lot louder.

Those here 'defending' Hillary over Trump helps explain how so many Catholics every election year rationalize voting for those that support ramming a pair of scissors into the back of a child's skull and vacuuming out her brains.