Let me start with the first thing that jumped out at me, the idea that we shouldn't say Trump's policies are bad without looking at the alternative. I agree. However I feel a slight error in your post is implying taht all the positions are equal to me (or to you for that matter), with the exception of the one area you gave Trump a +2 in, which seemed more like emphasis than the point I'm trying to make. If I could scale my priorities on this one it'd be:
+500 Clinton (Climate change)
idc - the rest.
idc is an exaggeration, but the extent to which I care on those issues is minimal compared to the amount I care on not having someone who is a proponent of anti-intellectualism. Rejecting the overwhelming scientific consensus on matters like that is something that instantly disqualifies a candidate, by my view. Because not only is that an important issue, it speaks greatly to a character flaw that will probably exert itself in other situations as well, that being a refusal to listen and take the advice of experts in a given field.
I'm a globalist who generally would like, one day, for there to be no nations, just the human race. I've spoken out against patriotism on this forum in the past, and would gladly do so again if it came up. As such, my views align much more towards Clinton than Trump. That being said, I know I'm in a small minority of people on this issue, and that it is not a particularly popular one, especially when people are trending towards an anti-globalism viewpoint nowadays. My view comes down to this: What is the intrinsic value that my neighbour has that makes them a better person and more worth caring about than someone in Africa, or a refugee from Syria? And extending past just my neighbours, whom I get along with, what makes the people in London worth more to me than the people in Paris/Berlin? A chance of birth. Not a good reason to favour one group of people over another as far as history is concerned.
As for Syrian refugees (credit to you btw, you didn't make the same mistake Trump has by saying there are a significant number of ISIS supporters there with no factual basis) some of them are economic migrants looking to mooch. I feel that accepting those few is a worthy price to pay for alleviating the suffering of all the other thousands of people. I try to place myself in their position, fearing for my life and with a completely uncertain future as I flee the only place I have ever known as home because of bombings and civil war that is surrounding me against my wishes. Now is there a problem with the doctrine of islam? Yes, but it's one shared by almost all religions, and if you don't persecute those whom practice Christianity for the Bible's misogyny and horror (anyone with a daughter I can buy?) then the fuel behind the fire of doing it with islam is one that I question. There are legitimate reasons to be more wary of those claiming to be muslim, I dont know of any Jihadist Christians for example, but that does not mean we should ignore the hundreds of thousands of innocents suffering for something that has nothing to do with them.
As for the topic of defence: which could be worse, an idiot with no clue what he's doing, or someone smart who is mistaken about their beliefs, but knows the risks and will do their upmost to avoid them. Clinton has made mistakes, and admitted them, and while some of her topics I am unsure on (No Fly is highly dependant on negotiation and I'm not sure how effective that will be, nobody wants to start ww3 with the russians over that (to elaborate, no Clinton does not want to start ww3. Nobody wants to. And I dont think that she would either)), I trust her to not misuse the nuclear weapons America has. I cant say the same thing about Trump, the very thought of him being capable of unleashing the weapons that could doom the human race fills me with dread.
As for the other things, a few brief comments. Trade Deals: TPP was a bad final deal, yes, but NAFTA is a good deal that hasn't harmed the people. I dont generally take popular opinion as gospel on these sorts of issues because it's incredibly nuanced and generally not something that the public has a solid enough grasp on to trust general opinion. Looking at the opinion of experts and economists, NAFTA was good.
Regarding abortion, Trump has pledged to appoint a Supreme Court Justice who will work to overturn Roe v Wade. That doesn't seem like it's a matter of him leaving it be, he would enable states to discriminate at their leisure.
The other things I would say fall under the blanket of this statement: Clinton isn't perfect, however her path is a step in the right direction. Obamacare isn't perfect, and Clinton will take steps to improve it and set it on the right direction. If you're on the no fly list you wouldn't be allowed to purchase a gun under Clinton. That's a step in the right direction (as far as my position on guns is concerned, along with things like the Charleston loophole and background checks). And on a whole heap of other smaller issues, while Clinton is not the perfect answer to all of the problems, she is a step in the right direction as far as I am concerned.
Now as for the scandals, while Clintons are bad optics, the FBI chose not to pursue criminal charges. The claim she personally deleted the 33000 extra emails is a bit weird considering it was her staffers who did that, and while I am personally sceptical that Clinton had no knowledge/input on that decision, there is also a dearth of evidence and we do not convict people without evidence. And as for the DNC members supporting her over Bernie... duh? Was that not obvious? They support the 30+ year Democrat who is well known and well liked in the Democratic Party over an independent using the Democratic Party to run because he knows that Independent Parties cant get shit done. Much wow. And the DNC's job is not to allow everyone to run to potentially be chosen as president, it is to select the party that they feel has the highest chance of getting elected. Superdelegates are not democratic, but they serve the purpose of the DNC, and now the RNC are considering implementing them to prevent something akin to what has happened with Trump happening again. Bernie was not considered electable, and there is a significant amount of shit that can be thrown at him that Hillary didn't that republican TV ads would have done (All women want to be raped would trump Trump's grab them by the pussy if implemented correctly). And independent sites (like 538) were predicting the New York Primary to go heavily in Clinton's favour, for good reason considering her 8 years of service there, and if memory serves she was massively ahead in the delegate count already by that point.
So moving onto Trump and his scandels. First of all, lets start with women. 9 people claiming he acts the way he says he does, a serial adulterer, I'd date my daughter, my daughter is a fine piece of ass, miss piggy... These are all indicative of him not thinking that women are equal to men, and that would show in his policies and could potentially show in his choice as supreme court judge, along with him having a worse effect on the younger generation, who always consider the president to be someone worth emulating. Would you be fine with 12 year old boys going around grabbing their classmates by the pussy, because they heard the president say he does it? His comments paint a picture, his actions support it, and that picture is one I find grotesque when it comes to the treatment of women. And that's not going into the case of the claim he raped a 13 year old girl that is due in court this December.
Next, his comments about foreign people, or almost foreign people. Here I'm putting 3 people, the Mexican Judge and the Gold Star Family. His comments towards both of these groups suggest at either supreme Xenophobia or racism and the fact that he sees no need to apologise for either of these comments worries me more, because he might well simply think that the comments he made are just and are perfectly fine to be made in a civilised society. I could go on here, but frankly it'd be a waste of words, the last two sentences sum up this scandal perfectly, and that's without going into the "they're sending rapists" thing.
Next, Trump University and the Trump Foundation. Trump University was a sham, and existed only to fatten his pockets and exploit people trying to take steps towards improving the quality of their life. The Trump Foundation has bought a life-size portrait of Trump, and funds from the Trump Foundation were used to pay off his lawsuit. This suggests a complete lack of empathy for those who are struggling in the world, be it those who are trying to improve their life by going to university and getting qualifications, or those who are incapable of helping themselves and need the charity of others to prevent them from starving to death. Not a great quality in a leader.
TLDR: Trump refuses to take responsibility for his own actions, and his anti-intellectualism, lack of ability to take criticism or advice, dangerous rhetoric and general cluelessness make me think he is a candidate I could never vote for.
+500 Clinton (Climate change)
idc - the rest.
idc is an exaggeration, but the extent to which I care on those issues is minimal compared to the amount I care on not having someone who is a proponent of anti-intellectualism. Rejecting the overwhelming scientific consensus on matters like that is something that instantly disqualifies a candidate, by my view. Because not only is that an important issue, it speaks greatly to a character flaw that will probably exert itself in other situations as well, that being a refusal to listen and take the advice of experts in a given field.
I'm a globalist who generally would like, one day, for there to be no nations, just the human race. I've spoken out against patriotism on this forum in the past, and would gladly do so again if it came up. As such, my views align much more towards Clinton than Trump. That being said, I know I'm in a small minority of people on this issue, and that it is not a particularly popular one, especially when people are trending towards an anti-globalism viewpoint nowadays. My view comes down to this: What is the intrinsic value that my neighbour has that makes them a better person and more worth caring about than someone in Africa, or a refugee from Syria? And extending past just my neighbours, whom I get along with, what makes the people in London worth more to me than the people in Paris/Berlin? A chance of birth. Not a good reason to favour one group of people over another as far as history is concerned.
As for Syrian refugees (credit to you btw, you didn't make the same mistake Trump has by saying there are a significant number of ISIS supporters there with no factual basis) some of them are economic migrants looking to mooch. I feel that accepting those few is a worthy price to pay for alleviating the suffering of all the other thousands of people. I try to place myself in their position, fearing for my life and with a completely uncertain future as I flee the only place I have ever known as home because of bombings and civil war that is surrounding me against my wishes. Now is there a problem with the doctrine of islam? Yes, but it's one shared by almost all religions, and if you don't persecute those whom practice Christianity for the Bible's misogyny and horror (anyone with a daughter I can buy?) then the fuel behind the fire of doing it with islam is one that I question. There are legitimate reasons to be more wary of those claiming to be muslim, I dont know of any Jihadist Christians for example, but that does not mean we should ignore the hundreds of thousands of innocents suffering for something that has nothing to do with them.
As for the topic of defence: which could be worse, an idiot with no clue what he's doing, or someone smart who is mistaken about their beliefs, but knows the risks and will do their upmost to avoid them. Clinton has made mistakes, and admitted them, and while some of her topics I am unsure on (No Fly is highly dependant on negotiation and I'm not sure how effective that will be, nobody wants to start ww3 with the russians over that (to elaborate, no Clinton does not want to start ww3. Nobody wants to. And I dont think that she would either)), I trust her to not misuse the nuclear weapons America has. I cant say the same thing about Trump, the very thought of him being capable of unleashing the weapons that could doom the human race fills me with dread.
As for the other things, a few brief comments. Trade Deals: TPP was a bad final deal, yes, but NAFTA is a good deal that hasn't harmed the people. I dont generally take popular opinion as gospel on these sorts of issues because it's incredibly nuanced and generally not something that the public has a solid enough grasp on to trust general opinion. Looking at the opinion of experts and economists, NAFTA was good.
Regarding abortion, Trump has pledged to appoint a Supreme Court Justice who will work to overturn Roe v Wade. That doesn't seem like it's a matter of him leaving it be, he would enable states to discriminate at their leisure.
The other things I would say fall under the blanket of this statement: Clinton isn't perfect, however her path is a step in the right direction. Obamacare isn't perfect, and Clinton will take steps to improve it and set it on the right direction. If you're on the no fly list you wouldn't be allowed to purchase a gun under Clinton. That's a step in the right direction (as far as my position on guns is concerned, along with things like the Charleston loophole and background checks). And on a whole heap of other smaller issues, while Clinton is not the perfect answer to all of the problems, she is a step in the right direction as far as I am concerned.
Now as for the scandals, while Clintons are bad optics, the FBI chose not to pursue criminal charges. The claim she personally deleted the 33000 extra emails is a bit weird considering it was her staffers who did that, and while I am personally sceptical that Clinton had no knowledge/input on that decision, there is also a dearth of evidence and we do not convict people without evidence. And as for the DNC members supporting her over Bernie... duh? Was that not obvious? They support the 30+ year Democrat who is well known and well liked in the Democratic Party over an independent using the Democratic Party to run because he knows that Independent Parties cant get shit done. Much wow. And the DNC's job is not to allow everyone to run to potentially be chosen as president, it is to select the party that they feel has the highest chance of getting elected. Superdelegates are not democratic, but they serve the purpose of the DNC, and now the RNC are considering implementing them to prevent something akin to what has happened with Trump happening again. Bernie was not considered electable, and there is a significant amount of shit that can be thrown at him that Hillary didn't that republican TV ads would have done (All women want to be raped would trump Trump's grab them by the pussy if implemented correctly). And independent sites (like 538) were predicting the New York Primary to go heavily in Clinton's favour, for good reason considering her 8 years of service there, and if memory serves she was massively ahead in the delegate count already by that point.
So moving onto Trump and his scandels. First of all, lets start with women. 9 people claiming he acts the way he says he does, a serial adulterer, I'd date my daughter, my daughter is a fine piece of ass, miss piggy... These are all indicative of him not thinking that women are equal to men, and that would show in his policies and could potentially show in his choice as supreme court judge, along with him having a worse effect on the younger generation, who always consider the president to be someone worth emulating. Would you be fine with 12 year old boys going around grabbing their classmates by the pussy, because they heard the president say he does it? His comments paint a picture, his actions support it, and that picture is one I find grotesque when it comes to the treatment of women. And that's not going into the case of the claim he raped a 13 year old girl that is due in court this December.
Next, his comments about foreign people, or almost foreign people. Here I'm putting 3 people, the Mexican Judge and the Gold Star Family. His comments towards both of these groups suggest at either supreme Xenophobia or racism and the fact that he sees no need to apologise for either of these comments worries me more, because he might well simply think that the comments he made are just and are perfectly fine to be made in a civilised society. I could go on here, but frankly it'd be a waste of words, the last two sentences sum up this scandal perfectly, and that's without going into the "they're sending rapists" thing.
Next, Trump University and the Trump Foundation. Trump University was a sham, and existed only to fatten his pockets and exploit people trying to take steps towards improving the quality of their life. The Trump Foundation has bought a life-size portrait of Trump, and funds from the Trump Foundation were used to pay off his lawsuit. This suggests a complete lack of empathy for those who are struggling in the world, be it those who are trying to improve their life by going to university and getting qualifications, or those who are incapable of helping themselves and need the charity of others to prevent them from starving to death. Not a great quality in a leader.
TLDR: Trump refuses to take responsibility for his own actions, and his anti-intellectualism, lack of ability to take criticism or advice, dangerous rhetoric and general cluelessness make me think he is a candidate I could never vote for.
