I voted for GWB twice. As a thought experiment lets say he is running against Hillary this time around, pretending it's allowed.
In good conscience I could not vote for him. Knowing what I know now I realize he is as detrimental to our nation as Hillary. Nothing more than a globalist who wants to see the progressive agenda instituted more slowly than the Democrat timetable. I would have to either note vote or cast a protest vote. Bush was a disaster in my view and my having voted for him makes me feel partially culpable for that disaster. I could not vote for him even with the specter of a Hillary presidency as the alternative.
For weeks now I've been trying to rationalize a vote for Trump but I'm not there...yet. On paper Trump is just not qualified to be President and my fear is that with his shallowness of knowledge he could be led astray by wormtongue type advisers. On the other hand his instincts seem to be pretty good and he is surrounding himself with people that indicate he is serious about his main policy goals, goals I agree with.
Ultimately it is up to Trump to win over the fence sitters, not me.
I am with you regarding Bush(es). I don't want to see another one in political office. I voted against Jeb's son (George P) as Tx Land Commissioner for that very reason.
Lots of reasons to vote Trump. HRC seems to provide more every day. One big one to emerge after the conventions is HRC's and the globalists/cosmopolitans beating the war drums against Russia (and China). We know from history that a Clinton is not above "wagging the dog" to distract the electorate.
The best reason to vote Trump is that Trump will give Americans a bit more time before the collapse. He can't prevent it as it it is too far advanced, but his stated policies also won't accelerate it the way HRC's will.
I would agree with you on GW. The main point in favour of trump isn't what he says, it's who he answers to- his only constituency is voters, literally. The rest of the centres of power HATE him
That latter bit is key. The people with the greatest influence who have manipulated America and the global system to their advantage despise him. This indicates Trump may indeed upset their rice bowls and the rest of us might catch a few grains before being tread into the mud by swine.
By poll-data it's a just about a statistical 3-way tie in Utah between Trump (30%), McMullin (I) (29%), and Clinton (28%). Results will be interesting. I'm not voting for Clinton, I'm not voting for Trump.
I'm not 100% compatible with McMullin's views either, but it's a lot closer match for me than Johnson. In the meantime, I'll continue to smile and nod when one person tells me my vote is really a vote for Clinton, while another tells me it's really a vote for Trump.
As for "It's the Supreme Court, stupid!", that's far from a sure thing. This sums up some of my concern on that matter:
I'll acknowledge that a Clinton presidency guarantees a liberal court, and a Trump one is at least moderately likely to be less liberal. But it's just not enough for nose-holding to be sufficient to give him my vote.
McMullin exists only to be a Trump spoiler. Utah would have zero chance of going HRC without McMullin.
Also, McMullin manages to embody the absolute worst *let's not go there* tendencies.
if you live in a state where it's not close, it's dumb NOT to vote for the libertarian candidate.
Hitting that magic threshold opens up automatic ballot access and FEC money.
That would cause them to have much greater resources to get support, and potentially shift the balance of power
The humor of upper-case-L Libertarians seeking the government cheese is evergreen. You can't make this stuff up.
I have to point out that it's generally not the weed that prevents many conservatives from voting libertarian. It is an "Oh and also" kind of issue, but the most important objections are either unfettered murder of the unborn and/or unfettered immigration (in the face of a massive welfare state).
Ayup, but don't forget the contempt. Hard to ally with folk who are so blatantly contemptuous of one's sort.
That's a BIG part of politics. It's identity politics... for many many people it's not so much a matter of policy or ideology, but one of identity. Not that different to fealty to sports teams, or various subcultures identified by tastes in music or how one dresses.
And it also explains Trump from another viewpoint. Simply the GOP wasn't doing a heck of a lot for the people who identify with the GOP, or at least it seemed that way. And Trump either managed to tap into that identity and to a plurality of them represented it better, or perhaps he managed to create a similar, but new political identity people were willing to accept.
ALL Democrat Party politics is identity politics. The only thing that holds the coalition of the fringes together (its KKKrazy Glue) is hate for whitey, the desire to milk whitey of resources, and grind whitey's face into the muck. The GOP and most white folks have been fighting an identitarian struggle with weak ideological weapons. Muh Constitution, the non-aggression principle, peaons to MLK & color-blindness, and appeals to Russell Kirk are a surefire way to lose.
Trump simply does not explicitly despise white folks and want to seem them abased. All else is of lesser importance.
There's a fairly large contingent of pro life libertarians.
And, your parenthetical is the salient point. Libertarians are not for open borders without attacking the welfare state as well.
Then again, the current GOP candidate has evolved a few times on abortion, and also has some very Hillary-like positions on entitlements, student loans, minimum wage...
The pro-life libertarians are as powerless in the L party as pro-life Democrats are in the Dem party.
Nope, the L party is perfectly suicidal regarding open borders. They would let in folk by the millions who will never hold L values. The L party ensures its other preferences will never come to pass.
Indeed, Trump has made gestures toward the GOP base, indicating he does not hold them in contempt. He proposes some very un-GOP policies, but manages to keep his contempt for the socons under wraps (if he has contempt for them). The L party not so much.
