So let me start off by saying that not one of the candidates can be described as a good candidate. I don't want to vote for any of them. But not voting is silly because there is a candidate who is appallingly bad and who I believe would make things much worse for us in the United States, and possibly in other countries as well. That person is Trump.
Donald "Drumpf" Trump
This guy is the most terrifying commentary on the United States since religious lobbies tried to fight against legal equality for people with different sexual orientation and identity. I know that's not long ago. It's still happening. And Trump's running mate wants to set us back again on that score. Also on women's rights. Jebus where do I begin. These two are just awful people who make our country look bad for even considering them.Trump proudly talks about groping women against their will (assault). He called himself smart for not paying taxes during a presidential debate, and claims to have a plan to help the middle class. He seems to fail to understand that his lack of paying taxes means that the middle class is having to carry his burden. Legal action was taken against him when his housing developments refused to rent apartments to black people. He insulted Mexican people by stating (again on national television) that they are murderers and rapists. He wants to exclude people from this country based on their religion... specifically Muslims. The first amendment that so many people hold so high in regard and support (and rightly so) includes the freedom of religion. So Trump is saying we should ignore one of the fundamental aspects of our country in order to discriminate against people based on their religion.
And then even with him having said much of this stuff a day before, he'll deny he said it.
Let's look again at the middle class thing. I'm trying to figure out how anyone can believe he'll be good for the middle class. He's filthy rich despite having gone bankrupt multiple times. He seems to get there by stealing the money from people he dupes into investing in him. He'll try to build a hotel, get investors, let the hotel flop, and keep the money. He's admitted to not paying taxes, and keeping his money safely offshore. His original money comes from a trust fund. He's not a good businessman... he's a crooked one that benefits from climbing over the bodies of everyone around him. And do you think he wants to part with his money? Of course not. So do you think he'll support any changes to law that would favor the middle class over the rich people in the country?
Back to him making fun of people: On national television he made fun of handicapped people with an offensive mimicry. On national television he made fun of Gold Star Families (families of soldiers in our military who gave their lives in service). On national television he made fun of veterans.
His lack of respect and humanity is shocking.
He's also being sued almost constantly, and not in the "frivolous lawsuit" kind of way. Go ahead and search for "lawsuits against trump". Right now several news outlets support the assertion that he has 75 ongoing lawsuits against him. Seventy-five! Is that normal for business men?
More importantly, is any of what I've pointed out reasonable for a president of the United States? Let's add one more thing a president of the United States shouldn't be cavalier about: Using nuclear weapons. I understand that there is a weird balance right now, and lots of nukes exist... but... saying we should use nuclear weapons in Europe because "it's a big place" and you want to what? scare people? Kill people? What kind of human being thinks it's okay to disintegrate hundreds of thousands of people?
https://thinkprogress.org/9-terrifying-things-donald-trump-has-publicly-said-about-nuclear-weapons-99f6290bc32a#.svuvbhn5y
The guy is a menace. He should never be given any kind of power anywhere. It's scary that he has power in the form of money already.
Gary Johnson
The only third party candidate that is coming anywhere near close enough to make a dent is Gary Johnson. I voted for Gary Johnson in the last election. I very much like his record as governor in New Mexico, and I completely agree with his effort to legalize marijuana. I don't use marijuana at all. That's a personal choice. But given the information we have, it's not as bad for you as smoking cigarettes, and not any more mind altering than alcohol. But we have people in prison for marijuana possession and use. It's kind of stupid really. It's costing the tax payers a lot of money. And the only organizations that are against the legalization are big alcohol companies that don't want the competition, and the private prison industry that wants to keep getting that tax payer money to house the "criminals". So I was really happy to see support for legalization in a presidential candidate.On top of that, I was very happy about the idea of changing the tax system. I'll go ahead and admit I'm not even close to an expert on how the economy works or how it's broken (but I do know it's broken). Gary Johnson proposed (at one point) the dismantling of the IRS, and switching to a consumption tax system. Instead of the government taking part of our pay, they take part of the profits when we buy something... like a yacht. It strikes me that in that way, when rich people spend their money, they're paying taxes. Hiding it overseas doesn't help. Buy a house? You're paying taxes. Buy a Ferrari? You're paying taxes.
I honestly don't know if it could work better than our current system or not, but it sounds interesting to me, and I've had enough people argue with me that it wouldn't work, so I'd need to do a lot more research to understand. What I'm trying to do is explain why Johnson seemed interesting to me last election, and the beginning of this election.
But then Johnson started fumbling. I still like the way he thinks, and I agree with his apparent philosophy of less government and less inefficient government spending, but he started with Aleppo. I didn't know what Aleppo was when it happened either. I knew Syria was in trouble, but I didn't know Aleppo was a city in Syria, or that it had become the center for the tension between the US and Russia in Syria. So I didn't really blame Johnson. By my own experience, it wasn't hard to miss.
But as he continued, I started to realize that a person who wants to be in charge of the country and its relationships with other countries should really be paying attention to what's going on. And while it was kind of a weird ambush, Johnson couldn't name a foreign leader that he liked. I personally like Germany's prime minister Angela Merkel. Despite the common complaint in Germany about how accepting all those refugees is becoming a burden they can't handle, I think she did the right thing in trying to help people in desperate need. Of course, it really does seem to be turning into a bad situation because the refugees are behaving in an entitled way, and not bothering to try to get on their feet... just living off the charity they have. But I'm going off topic. Johnson lacks knowledge that I think a president should have about foreign countries and our relations with them.
It gets worse though. And this is one I should have brought up for Trump too. So I'll go for a two-for-one. Neither of them think Climate Change deserves any attention. Trump thinks it's a Chinese conspiracy (what a moron), and Johnson thinks it's not actually a problem, and that the cost of doing anything about it would be too high anyway. Neither of them has valid scientific knowledge. This is something I consider to be essential to being the president. Especially when we have politicians that think intelligent design should be taught alongside evolution (which is offensive and mind boggling).
So Gary Johnson lost my vote when I found out that he doesn't actually have the information he needs to effectively run the country.
Hillary Clinton
The email scandal is there I guess. But the articles contradict each other, and Clinton hasn't been arrested, so I tend to think the ones saying she's in the wrong might be missing something. So I'm putting that aside.My biggest complaint with Clinton is the shady stuff that seems to have gone on during the primaries. I've seen people try to discredit it poorly, and I've seen far more to suggest that the DNC did everything in their power including manipulation of voting center locations to help Clinton win against Bernie Sanders. So my opinion of her includes the dislike of how she got the nomination. Shady politics. I very much dislike it.
My second biggest complaint with her is the worry over her possibly going after gun rights. I keep hearing "common sense" laws, but that is far too vague a term, and I believe we have all the laws we need, but that enforcement of those laws is the real problem. I recently had someone convince me that in a household with children who can't protect themselves from irresponsible parents, it should be required that the guns in the house be kept in a way that the kids can't get to them. At the same time though, we need laws to protect children from irresponsible religious parents who say medicine is against their religion or that vaccines don't work... but I'm digressing. As a side note... there are gun locks that with the right key can be removed with practice in under a second... I'm okay with that.
I will never support gun legislation described only as "common sense". That's stupid. But I will consider specific laws if presented to me. And I would love to see people support efforts to actually deal with the real problem: people. It's people that are doing these bad things, and in many of the examples we had signs and cries for help that the people around them ignored. I'm not saying I have a solution... just that I think there's room for improvement that's not related to restricting access to firearms more.
I guess I'm also a bit worried about her being the normal politician with ties to Wall Street too. I figure with her shady support from the DNC, her ties to Wall Street, and her long experience in politics... she's probably a bought and paid for politician who won't really represent us... just the big money organizations that pay for political support. Trump is obviously going where the money is too. Gary might have stood up against them a bit. Who knows? Maybe Hillary will surprise me.
But considering these things I've mentioned... they aren't as scary as Trump (who is truly terrifying) or as scary as Johnson (who really needs some foreign policy and science education). The gun rights thing isn't even that scary with Hillary because the gun lobby is powerful. I mean... I hate the lobby system and think it needs to be dealt with across the board so our politicians can start representing us instead of the big money organizations, but I AM grateful to the gun lobby for protecting us from people who are using a fear reaction to try to deal with guns in ways that won't work and are offenses against our rights and freedoms.
And of the three, Hillary has the most experience in politics that would give her the needed skill set. She has the most foreign relations experience. She did pick up some of the platform ideas that Bernie Sanders introduced. There's a little bit to be happy about. A little. This isn't to suggest that I think she's a great or good candidate. She's just leaps and bounds better than Trump, and a lot better than Johnson with respect to scientific knowledge and acceptance. So she has my vote begrudgingly.
