Why is it considered ‘scary’ that Donald Trump might become President, but not Hillary Clinton?
via Quora – Mar. 15, 2016
“The scariest thing to me was Trump’s comments about McCain. John McCain could have returned back to the U.S. after being confined and severely tortured after six months, because his family was very influential and made a deal to have him returned. He declined and stayed. For many more years. He has had injuries that have lasted his entire life. He said he wasn’t going to use family influence to get out of prison while his fellow prisoners were going to remain and suffer.
Some have asked me for a reference to this – I’m quoting mainly from History.com — American & World History;
“…His captors soon learned he was the son of a high-ranking officer in the U.S. Navy and repeatedly offered him early release, but McCain refused, not wanting to violate the military code of conduct and knowing that the North Vietnamese would use his release as a powerful piece of propaganda….”
“…McCain eventually spent five and a half years in various prison camps, three and a half of those in solitary confinement, and was repeatedly beaten and tortured before he was finally released, along with other American POWs, on March 14, 1973, less than two months after the Vietnam cease fire went into effect. McCain earned the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross….”
John McCain – Facts & Summary – HISTORY.com” – by Kevin Carothers
_ _ _ _ _
“Trump is a huge question mark with demonstrated fascist tendencies. Whatever he may personally believe, he has publicly degraded women (half the population!), Muslims, Mexicans, immigrants, and any other group it suits him to denigrate for votes. He has zero interest in the skills and nuances involved in governing a nation. He is famous for being famous, a reality TV star made famous by bluster and the absence of normal filters. There is ZERO reason for thinking he will be an effective president IMO.
Clinton is a mainstream establishment politician seeking a mainstream political job. She has unsavory qualities–as most politicians do–but is well-qualified for the job she seeks. She promises a continuation of Obama’s time in office, which has been a marked and demonstrable turn-around for the country from the multiple disasters of his predecessor’s time.
The problem with Trump, ultimately, is not HIM; it’s US. It’s that his fascist, content-free bluster works. He is what a large chunk of this country wants to see when they look in the mirror (and they wish to see that in the White House as well). If we can’t see where his ascent is leading, we were not paying attention in history class.” – by Bill Stachour
_ _ _ _ _
“You’re coming from a false premise to begin with. What right conclusions has Trump come to, other than ones that were universally known? Of course money is a corrupting influence in politics and the Iraq War was absolutely a terrible idea.
But beyond that? What are Trump’s right conclusions?
For starters, let’s look at foreign policy. Trump has said that we should absolutely torture. Setting aside the fact that this is a violation of the Geneva Conventions, torture has been proven to be a terrible interrogation method. Successful interrogators don’t use torture, instead they form a bond with the prisoner. When you’re tortured, you’ll say anything to end the torture, even if that information is false.
Trump has also said that we should start killing the families of terrorists. This is not only wrong, it’s a war crime.
Trump has said we should ban Muslims from entering the country and also has talked about creating a Muslim database. This brings to mind things like the Chinese Exclusion Act and Japanese internment, both despicable actions that the US has rightly apologized for.
Trump has also talked about charging countries for US defense. It’s a stupid move because this weakens US influence, particularly in Asia. It will enable China to gain strength, forge alliances with South Korea, and it will cause Japan to lose its influence in the region. Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric is also likely to alienate other southeast Asian nations, which have heavy Muslim populations.
His policies would only fuel ISIS’ recruitment efforts. Remember, ISIS wants all Muslims to believe that the west wants Islam destroyed. If an Islamophobe like Trump becomes President and starts targeting people based on religious beliefs, that would prove ISIS right.
There’s also Trump’s trustworthiness to consider. According to Politifact, 78% of Trump’s statements have been rated mostly false, false, or pants on fire, with 41% rated as false and 20% rated pants on fire. Only 1% of his statements have been rated as true (Donald Trump’s file).
Clinton, on the other hand, has had 46% of her statements rated as mostly false (14%), false (13%), or pants on fire (1%).
So how can you trust a guy who spends 78% of the time lying?” – by Perry Constantine
_ _ _ _ _
“Without examples of Trumps “right decisions” it hard to answer your specific point as to why we should find him less scary because of them.
As for why he is scary;
He claimed thousands of Muslims were dancing on the streets during 9/11 – one of the biggest lies in history and incredibly raciest on a highly sensitive moment in history………..yet still he gets support.
He claimed Obama wasn’t a US citizen and hounded the issue for a long time (cited unnamed “inside sources”). He still hasn’t backed down on this claim, or gave any evidence for it…….yet still gets gets support.
He claims he owns business’s he does not (even challenging the press to investigate them). The press investigates, finds he doesn’t own them……..yet still he gets support.
He claims Americas GDP is at zero…..yet still he gets support.
….(and many,many other examples.)
Trump is scary because it doesn’t matter what mad thing he says or does, his supporters just don’t care. Trump may be delusional, a liar, or highly manipulative. Any of those things is bad in a politician, but to the extreme Trump is doing it puts him very much into the scary category.
oh, that and he wants increased use of torture, and is happy to kill family members of terrorists – something Id classify under barbaric but he gets cheers for. So, yes, scary. Terrifying, in fact. -by Thomas Wrobel
_ _ _ _ _
“I actually do not believe this question is being asked in earnest.
But in the unlikely event that it is…
1) Donald Trump has on multiple occasions slandered Mexicans, Muslims, the working poor, and all of his opponents.
2) Mr. Trump is a largely failed business man who claims he has been and is a great success. (Check Forbes for details).
3) Mr. Trump has encouraged his supporters to eject and mistreat Black people and people who appear to be Muslims in his audiences who were not being even slightly disruptive. This has in several cases led to violence (perhaps criminal violence), which Mr. Trump witnessed and did not attempt to stop or control. In one case he asked people to throw someone out of an event into sub-zero weather, telling to keep the person’s coat (theft and potential manslaughter).
Given 20th Century history these behaviors so closely resemble events that took place in the lead-up to WWII that most people find them “scary.”
Secretary Clinton is often alleged by her adversaries to have lied, committed criminal acts, and been incompetent in performance of her official duties. Dozens and perhaps hundreds of official government and independent criminal investigations have not provided proof of even a single such act.
Under many hours of digressive interrogation by Congressional bodies, she has yet to have a single irrational or even angry outburst or to encourage her supporters or staff to physically assault anyone.
I am unaware of even a single time when Secretary Clinton has slandered any group of people by contending they are immoral or engage in criminal acts. -by Jeff Redman
_ _ _ _ _
“Because the vast majority of people disagree with you that Trump has made the right conclusions. In fact, I’d say exactly the opposite. Some examples:
*Things aren’t easy for the average American? Mexico and China did it, and we’re going to force them to pay for it (you know, somehow).
*Economic growth seems tepid? Let’s massively cut taxes and hope that this increases growth despite our recent experiences with tax cuts and against the advice of every credible economist.
*Foreign affairs in the middle east are tricky and terrorism remains a fear? We’re going to straight up ban muslims from entering the country and keep close tabs on the ones already here!
This guy takes rational problems and blows them up to irrational, almost insane levels. He has no idea how to solve the nation’s problems because he seems to have an almost pathological inability to identify the scope of the problem and propose a proportional solution.
Donald Trump’s proposals are scary because they’re ill-informed to the point of being counter-productive. If he were to get his way, America would change greatly for the worse.
Hillary Clinton on the other hand is a mildly progressive candidate that is proposing modest reforms in a number of areas, but nothing overly drastic. Credible economists don’t predict her policies will blow up the budget or cause severe problems. America is likely to remain the same and possible get incrementally better under her administration (or incrementally worse, depending on your view…but “incrementally” is the key word). -by John-Paul Wilson
_ _ _ _ _
“I was a soldier for 21 years. In the 1960s, we expected we’d have to fight Soviet forces in Europe, and this showed in our training. Part of that showed up on the rifle range; we were trained to deliver accurate rifle fire while squatting on our heels – a remarkably unstable position. Why? Because, in the event that came to pass, the ground would probably be too radioactive to lay down on to fire more accurately.
Now imagine a man such as Trump, with Trump’s temper, sitting in a desk in the Oval Office, considering how to retaliate for some international slight, incident, or insult while holding the nuclear release tables in his hand. Improbable? Yeah, likely it is – but a man with that kind of temperament doesn’t belong where it could ever happen. -by Cortland Richmon
_ _ _ _ _
“Trump’s “right conclusions” are simple lies. He promises what people want to hear, so of course they like what he says. But his promises cannot be delivered. For example “build a wall and get Mexico to pay for it” – how on earth is he going to do that? Mexico would not pay for it, and even if he went to war over it, all he could do is destroy Mexico and make it unable rather than just unwilling to pay for it.
Is it “right” to promise to kill the families of terrorists, a war crime that Nazis were tried and imprisoned for committing? It sounds assertive, but as well as being totally immoral it would be counterproductive. Experience shows that just makes terrorists of the rest of the population.
Clinton is realistic. Her policies may or not be the best for the country, but they can be delivered. Trump is basically promising to cut taxes, increase spending, and balance the budget. It is simply fantasy promises. But too many people believe is complete idiocies.” -by Alex Cawley
_ _ _ _ _
“Because Trump has terrible ideas and his proposals suggest that he has no idea how politics or our government works. Trump would be an abject failure as President. Also, he’s a racist, fascist asshole as are the vast majority of his supporters.
I loathe Hillary but I can’t honestly say that she’s a jackass of sub-human-intelligence with an ego the size of the USS Carl Vinson who has no idea how to do the job and has coasted through life on his daddy’s money and hubris…but that would be my briefest assessment of Donald Trump as a human being.” -by Jamie Gordon
_ _ _ _ _
“Disclaimer: I don’t favor either of these candidates. Nonetheless, Hillary has shown herself to be presidential. Under pressure — relentless pressure — she’s able to remain calm, focused, and explain her positions. Maybe you don’t like her responses. Maybe you have an issue with why she’s having to explain herself — Whitewater, Standing by Bill, Healthcare, Benghazi, Emails, whatever. But you know where she stands, and why she stands there. She’s shown she can hold her nose and make compromises when it’s pragmatic to do so, and she doesn’t back away from her choices once she’s made them. Voting to authorize war in Iraq?
She takes the heat for that now; explains what she’s learned from it, tries to put it into context of what she thought at the time, etc. But she doesn’t dissemble, point fingers, or pass the blame. It’s on her. She takes responsibility for her choices. Republicans see her as a threat; this means they take her seriously. This is a form of respect, begrudging as it might be.
Make a joke about Trump’s hands? He loses his sh!t and turns a debate on the issues into a drunken frat boy melee. Ask for clarification about why he’s quoting a fascist dictator or extolling the virtues of a KKK grand wizard? He dissembles and/or pretends not to know. Ask for details about his domestic positions? He gives nonsense answers — I’m going to make America great because I am great at doing great things and will make it great. Some support Trump because they like him — but even his own people can’t explain where he stands on the issues and how he’ll realistically follow through on any of these promises.
He’s disrespectful to his own people; are you ready for the sh!tstorm internationally when he says he wants to punch Putin in the face? I mean, if anyone deserves to be punched in the face, it’s Putin. But alpha male board room talk and reality TV catch phrases don’t have any place when you have diplomats holding dire situations together by a ragged thread. What kind of speech can a President Trump make at the next national tragedy to bring people together. How is he going to calm a nervous stock market with either empty rhetoric or a complete lack of empathy?
He makes off-hand comments about things like torture to sound like a tough guy without any understanding of how these comments put Americans abroad in harms way (much less publicly stating he plans to commit an illegal act both domestically and internationally). Trump is simply not presidential on any level.
In 2008, as she started losing the delegates she needed, Hillary ran the “3 AM Phone Call” political ad. At that time, it was a little shady and desperate, but it did force Obama to establish his credentials. I think that ad is more than relevant in the context of a Hillary vs. Donald contest.
How safe would you feel with Donald Trump, the guy that can’t handle a joke much less make one that isn’t cruel, getting the 3 AM crisis call? “You’re Fired” takes on a pretty frightening new meaning in that context.” -by Mitch Schorr
_ _ _ _ _
“looking closer at Donald and getting more bemused
Trump avoided the draft during the Vietnam war. OK, many people did that back then. Then he has the nerve to denigrate John McCain who was being tortured in a POW camp at the same time he was living the high life and dating models in New York and benefiting from his father’s wealth.
He is a con artist.
He used to be a Democrat, now he is a Republican. But that is not all, he has switched sides on policies between debates. He is making it up as he goes along, and gets his ideas on foreign policy by watching the morning talk shows.
He could not enact some of the things he wants to do like building the wall and making Mexico pay for it or rounding up 11 million people and deporting them, but if he could it would be a disaster. His trade policies would lead to a trade war and probably a world wide recession.
Hillary has some baggage, but she also has a pretty solid record of public service. On balance, there is no comparison.
-by Kevin Carothers
_ _ _ _ _
“Trump has made many right decisions in his lifetime, but being president may not be one of them. Is he more likely to side with the military’s assessment, or would he go with his gut instinct? It’s scary to think, what he would decide. He wants to go beyond waterboarding, which most Americans view as torture. That’s scary.
He wants to build a wall along the Mexican border, paid for by Mexico. Would he start a trade war, in order to try and get his way? He sounds as if he is willing to start a trade war with China. If Trump becomes president, I’d expect the stock market to drop 1500-2000 points. Trade wars with China and Mexico would start a Second Great Recession. That’s scary.
Hillary Clinton is a known entity. I can’t think of one thing, that is scary about her. Then there’s the Republican led Congress. She would be hard pressed to do anything scary, with them around.” -by Doug Hilton
_ _ _ _ _
“Perhaps the #1 reason that some people are not frightened by Hillary Clinton as a candidate is this: She knows how to behave like a statesman, to conduct herself with appropriate decorum, and to speak respectfully about people of diverse socioeconomic, religious, and ethnic backgrounds. Trump strikes out in these and so many other ways that have to do with public communications and interpersonal conduct. As someone recently said, the only adult running for the Republican nomination now is John Kasich.
For those who are more concerned with positions on issues of importance, Trump appears to be too liberal for many Republicans and Clinton appears to be too conservative for many Democrats. So, each is a little scary to their own party.
For those who are more concerned about quality of character, neither one of these candidates would win a meritorious conduct award. Apparently, Democrats are coming out for Sanders as a result of this reality. It’s not clear why Republicans are strong supporters of Trump (though many pundits have offered theories that are not kind to those supporters). -by Patricia Collins
_ _ _ _ _
“The POTUS needs to be a lot of things and know a lot of things. It is impossible for a single person to know everything that is needed about everything. Much of the stuff that needs knowing and needs doing can be addressed through the use of advisers. The ONE thing that can not be delegated is POLITICIAN. We have made politician sound like a dirty word, but it’s a collection of skills that allow us to get along together both as an individual country and as a citizen of the world.
Donald Trump proposes a weird combination of isolationism and global economy. Basically, he wants a world where the US is in charge, and everyone else does what we say. They are to do business with us on our terms. They are to accept our business on our terms. They are not to piss us off, or we will come after your family and your personal economy.
Business, not governments, will make policy and run the world. There will be no eco issues. There will be no human rights issues (that aren’t specifically about US Citizen human rights – assuming you are the right kind of US Citizen). There will be an arms race like we haven’t seen in a VERY long time as other countries, including our allies, start worrying about who we will turn on next.
This can’t work and would set world relations behind by at least a century. It’s “Roller Ball” times 10.” -by Ed Gioja
_ _ _ _ _
“Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump both have favorability ratings in the deep negatives. Neither should be really trusted. Mrs. Clinton is deeply corrupt and having a number of controversies, perhaps even a forthcoming indictment over the email fiasco. However, this is not assured. Many registered Democrats are abandoning her in favor of Bernie Sanders, whose largest donors are from unions, though a vast majority of what his campaign has drawn in is from individual donors who donate on average 35$.
When it comes to Donald Trump, it is true we’ve had businessmen in the past, such as Calvin Coolidge as our presidents. However, there are many signs that he is neither going to be a good statesman nor that he is a worthy businessman. For instance, the resistance against unionization and utilization of undocumented workers. (In other words, illegals-the very same ones he rails against.)
He has been seen several times in bankruptcy proceedings to escape creditors. There is a well known venture fund investor from Saudi Arabia who stepped forward and claimed that he had bailed Trump out of debt and that was when he truly began being successful. The man, due to the fact that he is well known in the business for doing just that with several other businesses is fairly credible.
Mr. Trump lacks a discernible body of political beliefs. His off-the cuff statements are often self-contradictory as well as holding positions that are arguably non-conservative, such as a single-payer system to replace Obamacare. His suggestions, such as incautious use of nuclear weapons and building a wall on the Mexican-American border would not just cost more than he thinks (unless he uses illegal, undocumented workers), it would unravel most of America’s alliances and international reputation. Most European countries are deeply concerned at the very concept of him being nominated, let alone elected.
His planned human rights violations and flagrant first amendment abuses are even worse, especially with the anti-Muslim rhetoric he spouts, there is an oft-forgotten fact. One of the first American allies-the first to acknowledge the United States as a country was Morocco, a majority Muslim state. The fact that he has advocated torture and the return of waterboarding, which is universally banned worldwide may be a hint as to how far he would go.
Hillary would be a poor-to-average president-but Donald Trump would be both an embarrassment and a complete disaster as president. Ironically, Ted Cruz as president would be even worse. (Though that’s for another Q&A.)
-by Cassandra Lone
_ _ _ _ _
“Hillary is scary – but less scary than Trump. That’s why Trump is so useful to the woman he has given contributions to in the past.
Consider the “Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem: which was developed to better understand the impact choice sets have on outcomes. While bearing in mind that these types of dynamics are studied in detail ad nauseam by campaign advisers and strategists and when finally accepting that the fake left right paradigm drives the fake choices offered up to the public, campaign finance and the ridiculous country club styled electoral process it becomes clear that Trump is there precisely to make Hillary less scary.
If Trump was absent Hillary may be too scary to elect. Trump’s presence hands Hillary the election which is what the power in the USA really wants. The power wants Hillary. The people don’t. An intervention was required – Enter Trump. The Media play their role making this ridiculous proposition float. If you cannot see the electoral process for the sham it is now – you probably never will. In which case – Happy voting! -by Simon Hansen
_ _ _ _ _
“If what I’ve heard about Hillary is correct, she’s well-respected around the world for her statesmanship. Donald Trump is mocked and laughed at around the world.
Hillary has actual, real-world foreign policy experience and domestic congressional experience. Trump has neither.
Hillary doesn’t scare our friends. Trump does. A United States with Trump at the helm would be seen around the world as a loose cannon, not to be trusted. Trump mystifies people with his stupidity on foreign affairs, but foreign affairs is one of the most important aspects of presidential duty. Trump would be a disaster in that respect.
Trump doesn’t respect or understand the Constitution of the United States, nor does he understand or respect international law. In that way he’s on par with his Republican fellow presidential candidates, but this is about Trump, not them.
Hillary has some baggage, but but a vote for Trump is a vote for making America not great. With Hillary we at least have someone with legitimate political and foreign-policy credentials, and that makes her the obvious best choice between her and Trump.” -by DS Martin
_ _ _ _ _
“First, I want to preface my remarks by clearly stating I do not want either Hillary or Trump to be elected President. Both would be a huge mistake for the United States, especially after 8 years of the horribly-depressing Obama Administration.
Now, a review of both candidates:
Hillary is a strange, automaton-type of character, who feeds on her own self-derived worth, who unashamedly touts herself as destined to become the first woman president, as if that alone is most important in this day and age. It is not; the years of the 1960s and ’70s are long in the past – we are already living in the age of the renaissance of Womanhood, for better or worse as that may be. She has had two political jobs, one as a Senator, which she did not win of her own merit, but rode in on the coattails of her husband’s presidency, as flawed as it was. First as a carpetbagger Senator of New York, and then as Secretary of State, which she bartered with Obama for in exchange for pulling out of contention for the 2008 Democratic Convention in order to avoid a brokered nomination. Upon reviewing her evaluation in both jobs, it is quite obvious she performed poorly. She was basically invisible as a sitting Senator, and there is a great deal of evidence that, while Secretary of State, she was not really in command of her position, and this is probably why she appeared “asleep at the switch” during the Benghazi debacle, where four men where left unsupported, and allowed to be slaughtered unnecessarily and ruthlessly. And there is that persistent story about Clinton, floated by a person in Obama’s own secretarial pool, that she, upon hearing that a high-level foreign policy meeting was called, one to which she was not invited to, or informed of, she asked, “Can I come?” Does that sound like a person in charge of the top foreign policy of the nation? Then there is that other group of stories dating back to the Clinton administration, statements from former lower-level Clinton administration aides, in which they were instructed that, whenever they saw Hillary coming down the hall, they were to immediately stop in their tracks, stop talking, put their backs to the wall with their heads facing downward (and NEVER make eye contact), until she completely walked out of the hallway.
In addition, she has been caught in a probable federal crime with having an illegal personal server, separate from the official government server, probably in an effort to hide her secret negotiations with Middle East and Chinese “big pocket” donors (and others) in order to pad her luxurious lifestyle and her Presidential campaign war-chest since her husband left office. There is also evidence that she spent the majority of time during both positions preparing for her run for the Presidency, and not performing her public duties in any more than a halfhearted measure. There is no reason at all to believe that any of these types of behavior would stop if she became President. Lastly, she is very calculated in her lying to the public, all in a singular effort to gain the Top Office. It’s hard to believe she was on the congressional staff to find “dirt” on “Tricky Dick” Nixon in order to get him impeached, when she herself has played the same game in the little time she has been in public office.
Now, the Donald. There has not been a more strange and visceral reaction to a Presidential candidate since before the Civil War. Over half the citizens have been yelling “no mas” at the Congress and Supreme Court, and “have had it up to here” with the nonsense coming out of this Presidential administration, pushing it down the throats of a hundred million citizens a whole load of manure-laden, politically-correct, progressive agendas. The People are done with this twenty-five year long obsession with stirring up religious, racial and ethnic strife for the express purpose of distracting the populace from what really is going on in the federal government, which is a covert attempt to destroy the power of the Constitution. That is why this non-politically-correct persona which Trump is portraying seems so appealing to people, and I must admit that I, myself, find it appealing. His Gothamaic, bombastic style of repetitious, non-politically correct utterances fascinates the public, and you can’t blame them. It also seems to figure well in with the statement-grabbing twittering news of today. Most importantly, though, the meaning of this is obvious: the People want a leader who says what he means, and means what he says – very similar to the populist wave that drove Ronald Reagan into the Presidency in 1980.
However, let’s look under the hood (or rather, the toupee, in this instance), shall we?
Donald Trump is not Ronald Reagan; he touts himself as a conservative, which he is not at all – his public record, as chaotic as it is, clearly indicates he is deep in the the liberal spectrum, probably as far left as Hillary Clinton. This is clearly not what Republicans want. He touts himself as the consummate businessman (he is hardly that); in reality, he has had as many failures as successes. A study was done showing that he could have done better with his father’s fortune by simply investing in a T-Bill than playing businessman, but that is not the Donald’s style. And don’t get me wrong – you would expect this from any middle-to-high level businessman, because it’s all about power, not riches.
I am just critical of anyone who continually touts himself as the “greatest businessman in the world”, as well as someone who states he has all the answers, like he does. It comes across as narcissistic, self-congratulating drivel, at best. Now, unlike Hillary, he acts like a very wounded individual, who trades childish insults for any criticism coming his way. I remember my mother advising me when I was a young adult that if I don’t have anything of substance to say, don’t say anything.
Apparently, Donald Trump has never been given this advice from anyone. This is, without a doubt, his greatest weakness, and would very likely repeatedly get him in hot water both on the US and world stage, to the point where he would not be taken seriously. The result would be a completely ineffective presidential administration, which would likely weaken the US position more than than it already is under the Obama administration.
So, to review, the choice is between an underhanded, prestige-seeking, money-grubbing, self-serving automaton like Hillary, or a self-appreciating, crony-coddling, money-grubbing, self-serving, celebrity-loving, spotlight-chasing bombast like the Donald, who have both been often criticized and ridiculed by the NYC press, the location which they call home.
Tough choice; I may just sit out the election altogether, but if were forced to put pen to ballot, I think Clinton would be a slightly better choice between two evils, only because I believe Hillary may be viewed as a little closer to the middle-left than Trump, and although she would be a real terror to work with, she would be less likely to say something radically stupid to get herself, and the US, into trouble.
But, I personally support either Ted Cruz or a Mitt Romney draft for the Republican nomination and subsequent election, and I would even seriously entertain a late convention draft for Rudolph Giuliani, as a solid, more middle-of-the-road choice. John Kasich would also be a sensible choice, albeit a “Dark Horse” one. Marco Rubio
is out because he made a fool of himself playing the same game as Trump, and got burned for it. He is definitely in need for some political rehab. However, I think any of the above would be far better choices than either Hillary or the Donald, both who our very self-serving individuals, and not at all what the US needs as a leader right now, after the stumbling, hesitant, and often incoherent progressive messages coming out of eight years of the Obama administration. It must be stated, however, similar to seeking out a marriage partner, we often get the leadership we are looking for — incoherent, bombastic, self-serving, celebrity-loving… perhaps this is what the People are looking for at this time…
However, as a Bible-believing Christian, I will only vote my conscious; how will you decide? It’s your choice, America. I urge you, however, not rush to side with any candidate, but spend some time on making the right choice for yourself, your family, your friends, and your country.” -by Mike Castrova
_ _ _ _ _
” To be frank;
Donald is a racist, yes, but he and Hilary are both a part of the elite class. They go to special dinners, business meetings (council of foreign relations), and do things that set them a part from regular working people.
I just think that media is doing a fantastic job in portraying Trump as a sadisitic asshole but fail to disclose anything about Clinton & her husband. Both the two, they deregulated Wall Street, increased incarceration rates among African Americans, HRC supported Bush going into Iraq for WMD’s.
If she is elected president, we’re going to be expecting more crony capitalism. It’s all a game to her really, she’ll throw her friends in office from Wall Steet, Lloyd Blankflein probably, and she’ll continue with this pace of pointless wars and more Americans and innocent children will be casualties.
I just can’t support Hilary, despite her “readiness,” she isn’t a leader. During her debates and her tirades, she sounds scripted and I can’t connect her with her on a emotional level.
It’s all facade quite honestly, I’ll pay attention to local elections, but if Sanders doesn’t get the green light. I’ll be voting for whoever the independent is, even if it’s the guy from The Rent is Too Damn High Party. -by David Payne
_ _ _ _ _
“Hillary, despite all the accusations, wild and otherwise, against her, is basically a status-quo oriented professional. Her policies are unlikely to diverge much from the policies of the professionals in policy and economics or from previous presidents. Indeed, this is essentially Bernie Sanders’ main critique of her: that she will only make incremental changes as president. Hillary also has a deep understanding of the many ways that one policy change affects another and its effects on the economy, people and foreign affairs.
Trump, on the other hand, has a number of shortcomings. For one, he doesn’t understand policy or the interrelatedness of most proposals. For example, prosecuting economic sanctions against China, for whatever percieved reasons, would cause greater military tensions, less internal Chinese support for IP protections, and would likely be against the law according to long-standing treaties. And much more.
Combined with this shallow understanding of how things work, is the problem that Trump perhaps stands at the epitome of the Dunning-Krueger pyramid: he really does not understand his own shortcomings. He claims he is the best businessman, negotiator, etc., despite the facts and the opinions of people who have dealt with him directly. As part of this, he is resistant to the facts and opinions of experts who might lead him in the right direction.
The upshot is that Trump says and does things that are mind-bogglingly stupid and counter productive. His racist pronouncements against Muslims, for example, exacerbate tensions, making it harder to work with Middle Eastern countries on defense and items of mutual interest, encourage dislike of the US and potentially would lead to more attacks on US interests, and more problems for US companies doing business in foreign countries.” -by Drew McCormick
_ _ _ _ _
“Donald Trump openly supports religious discrimination (his ban on all Muslim entry to the US), crackdowns on the press (“opening up” libel laws against news crtical of him), possible racism (deporting Syrian refugees already legally in the US), committing war crimes (killing terrorist’s family members, the use of torture), and his talk about being a “strong leader” as he has also described Vladimir Putin as a “strong leader”.
When asked what he would do if the military refused orders he just said that they wouldn’t because “that’s what leadership is” despite the military being duty bound to refuse an unlawful order. Hillary Clinton has not openly advocated committing war crimes and seems to be more pragmatic and would likely think things through. Donald Trump gets easily agitated, is egotistical, and comes off as much more impulsive and given the above reasons I feel he appears to many (including myself) as more dangerous than Hillary Clinton.” -by Sean Shirvan
_ _ _ _ _
“First off, right and wrong decisions in politics are very much a subjective matter.
That being said, the reason I find Trump a little scary is from the amount of unknowns that come with him. So far, what I see is a candidate who has zero political experience besides buying off politicians from both sides and offers very few, if any specifics on how he will govern. But, I guess we do know that he will “get the best deals” and “make America so great it will make our heads spin.”
What I do see of him, though, is a man who freely uses insults to gain an advantage over his opponents: we rarely see him argue a policy position in anything resembling an intellectual manner. He seems to attract some very undesirable groups and supporters. The actions of some of his supporters are aborhent and Trump does nothing to discourage them. He even encourages it sometimes. This gives the impression that he has no respect for protest.
Given all of this, I just don’t know what kind of President he will be.
Hillary, for all her faults, is known and she has proven herself to be able to lead. People may not like her politics, but they do know how to fight against her. She is a stereotypical politician that can be understood and you pretty much know what she will try to achieve in office.” -by Tim Bridge
_ _ _ _ _
“People are afraid of Trump because they don’t agree with you that he has come to the “right conclusions”. He has very little in the way of real policy solutions just slogans. His debate performances have been atrocious with regard to substance. And many of his positions can change in a matter of days, even hours
I don’t agree that Hillary isn’t considered scary. Even the Democrats rate her very low in honesty and she is underwater in favorability. They are caught in a box between somebody with a real possibility of either entitlement or very damaging actions without indictment, and an avowed socialist.
The general is going to have large sectors of disaffected voters in both parties. If Hillary is the nominee, that gives her a pretty big advantage because she is the “the devil you know”. -by Warren Suggs
_ _ _ _ _
“In some cases, yes. He’s come to the “right” conclusions, if you’re willing to be forgiving on details. He’s been “in the ballpark” sometimes.
What’s scary to me as I’ve listened to him over time (and this includes listening to complete speeches, not just sound bites) is that I don’t get a sense that he respects our system of government. In that sense I see him as similar to Obama. He’s called “the people in Washington” “stupid,” without often naming names. He just pans the entire institution. He claims that he’s going to “fix it,” which makes it sound like he’s going to try to do it by himself, and his people that he will appoint. He’s made no mention of who he will work with in Congress, that I’ve seen, even though he repeats over and over, “I get along great with people.” Yeah, I bet calling them stupid really wins them over…
Secondly, I have no idea what he’s going to do, if elected. For the longest time he’s given the most vague non-answers to such questions that I’ve heard from any presidential candidate in my lifetime. For example, “I’m going to make great deals,” and that’s his entire answer to a question. Even when he does get specific, like building a wall on the Mexican border, now he says he’ll be “flexible” on immigration, even sounding approving of the Gang of 8 bill that many Republicans opposed a few years ago, which allowed the DHS to not restrict immigration at all, and to be very lenient on illegal immigration, at its discretion.
It didn’t address securing the border, leaving Congress to deal with that “later” (ie. never). So now his “wall” sounds like something he’s willing to throw away. This isn’t surprising to me. He’s telling people what they want to hear so they will vote for him. It’s not complicated. He’s repeating back to voters what they’re already thinking, and they love it! That doesn’t mean he’s going to do any of it. He’s focused on winning the nomination, and then the general election, which to him means getting votes. Period. He doesn’t care how he gets them. He’ll worry about what he does with presidential power after he’s elected.
He tries to make people anticipate that, “What I will do will be SO good! You’re going to love it!” Your mouth is almost watering at how good it’s going to be, but he basically says, “You have to elect me to find out what it’s going to be.” That’s the same answer Nancy Pelosi gave about the Affordable Care Act, “We have to pass it so that you can find out what’s in it.” In other words, “Trust me.” I have a hard time doing that with him when he has absolutely zilch for a resume in government service. He hasn’t had to deal with a large committee of hundreds of members in crafting rules for a federated structure.
He’s effectively had a cabinet within his companies (executives), and a small board, and that’s it, and pretty much what he says goes. That’s not how our federal government works. So, he’s applying for a job that will be an alien environment to him, and more than likely, given his personality, if he’s elected, he’s going to try to do things that fit the structure he’s used to until he runs into some resistance from Congress and the courts.
I’ve come to the conclusion that Trump is the Republican version of Obama. He doesn’t sound like him, but his celebrity appeal is much the same to Republican voters: I don’t have an ideology. I’m not tied to the old order. Don’t think (leave that to me), just believe, “We’re going to make America great again” (“Yes we can”).” -by Mark Miller
_ _ _ _ _
“1 simple answer: Trump does not have tact. He’s a steamroller who doesn’t know when to shut his mouth and listen. Imagine him meeting with Russian or Chinese leaders… The US is already not the most respected country globally (we tend to force our opinions/beliefs on the rest of the world) and Trump has no respect for ideas/opinions that are not his own. That is scary because he could easily damage relationships with no regard for the consequences (war, trade sanctions, etc.).
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a Hillary supporter (or supporter of any US Presidential candidate really) but she at least she would be able to recognize if she’s pissed someone off and have the capacity to work towards a resolution.” -by Andrew Motter
_ _ _ _ _
“Hilary is way more scary than Trump due to the fact that she is a proponent of “free” trade, as hawkish as Bush Jr, and completely bought and sold by Wall Street. She will continue the upward transfer of wealth as well as ensure that any type of campaign finance reform will not happen. The only pro she has over Trump is that she would most likely nominate a better Supreme Court justice than him if Congress continues its hissy fit about Obama nominating one.
Actually, I would like to see Hilary nominate Obama to the Supreme Court.
This election is really exciting, I mean, I’m a Bernie supporter but Trump actually has more platforms that I agree with than Hillary does.” -by Andrew Bennett
_ _ _ _ _
“They are both scary, just for different reasons. Look at any question on Quora about donald trump to find out why he is bad. It seems to be a little harder to find out why Hillary is scary
Here are a few: Hillary is a liar, Hillary has no idea what it means to have a real job, Hillary went out of her way to destroy the lives of the women that her husband preyed upon, all while spouting off on how she fights for women’s rights, Hillary deliberately misled the american public and the families o fthe victims of the attack on the Embassy in Benghazi (yes, I said it), she willingly put the country’s national security at risk by using a private email server, Hillary shifts her position when it is politically expedient – gay rights, free trade, war, bailouts.
Those are all verifiable. It doesn’t even scrape the surface of the clinton foundation which seems to have simply been a shell to funnel money for favors from the Clintons (particularly for governments that have an absolutely terrible record on human rights). Then there is Vince Foster, Ron Brown, James McDougal and other who have met untimley demises. Yes, Hillary is scary. Somehow, people seem to be simply blind to these things about her, but happy to slurp up anything about Trump.”-by Jamison IO
_ _ _ _ _
“Because he isn’t endorsed by either of the two major parties which scares many people. He also does things that deviate from the norm which seems scary even if the norm is worse. For example, Trump said he wanted a ban on Muslims immigrating to America and many people went completely nanners.
Many of those same people are fine with Hillary even though voted for a war that killed a half million to a million Muslims. I think what Trump said was ridiculous and was meant to target people’s fears but not allowing someone to not enter your country isn’t as scary as blowing them up.
We are accustomed to America bombing countries so someone voting to kill a bunch of people is normal therefore not scary. A major political figure saying directly I don’t want to live with “These people” hasn’t been done since the early seventies. A deviation from the norm therefore more scary.
Both of them are frightening but we survived Bush and we will survive the next one.” -by Michael Burrows
_ _ _ _ _
“Clearly some people think that it would be scary for Hillary to be president. Speaking as someone who does not, but who does find the idea of President Trump to be horrifying, it’s because I think he is presenting as a fascist and a whole lot of people seem to like it.
In short, it is scary because he is giving voice to deeply reactionary sentiments that are much more commonly held in the U.S. than I ever appreciated before. He is doing gangbusters by appealing to the worst in us. He is holding up a mirror to us and reflecting back the ugliest we can be for the whole world to see.
If it was just him it wouldn’t be scary. It’s scary because apparently a huge number of people share his xenophobia, racism, Machiavellianisn and penchant for dangeous bluster. I am sure the Hillary haters out there are scared of the thought of her winning too. I just don’t relate to that.” -by Josh Kershenbaum
_ _ _ _ _
“Trump is the republican protest vote. The “Red” version of Bernie Sanders. (Haha!) He’s not supposed to win, and people are so pissed right now that he’s running away with it. On the other side, Hillary has resorted to filthy tactics (yet again) to maintain control over “the dreamer”. Whatever else she may be, she is the only “safe”, establishment candidate leading.
Establishment=Business as usual. No drastic changes. We’ll only continue on this 50 year gradual decline. Drastic change is scary, and Trump and Sanders are the drastic change candidates.” – by John Harris