Name:   copperline - Subject:   My take on Hillary Date:   10/17/2016 9:24:17 AM

At this point in the election, we have a choice between two candidates.  When the election started, I was a Sanders supporter although I never thought he could win the nomination.   Now, it's down to these two and I have to give  full-throated support to Clinton as the only reasonable choice.   I don't have any regrets about doing so.

My take on HRC is that she has been thru the wars in DC for 30+ years, and has the scars to prove it.    She also is the most vetted candidate in modern history because of that.   She has had numerous allegations made and investigations carried out ... and none of them have revealed the kind of criminal activity that her opponents continue to believe in....in spite of the lack of evidence & repeated findings. Much of what is alleged to have been done by her is simply exaggeration or the continuance of charges that have been disproven.   When people complain that she is evasive, defensive on some issues, I believe that A) she is a trained attorney  and B) she has learned from experience that attacks come constantly and she would be foolish to be anything but cautious in her statements.   Over a 30 year career, she has been close to many crisis situations that can now be scrutinized with the benefit of the rear view mirror.   Any number of those can be dredged up and slung back at her.  But on balance, and with the proof of history, she has come out on top.

Some of what is alleged to be horrible about her is just the way life has to be.   When a woman's husband cheats on her, I really don't expect her to embrace the other women as victims & protect them from criticism.  I guess people think she should have divorced her husband, but that was her choice to make.  

So her background of work experience makes her the most qualified candidate by a mile.   

Is she 'the establishment candidate'?    Yes, she is, ......sort of.    I feel that the conservative agenda has dominated US politics since Reagan very effectively... while a progressive agenda has made few shifts in our domestic policies that are very dramatic over that same period of time.  

This presidential race could be competitive if not for the outlandish choice of Trump by conservative voters.   It was outrageous to think that an untrained, untested guy who made his bones as a rich & arrogant playboy during his youth... then as a deceptive & unscrupulous real estate mogul who hid behind ample lawyers to get over on his investors & business associates, and finally as a larger than life TV game show host.   Conservatives bought a slickly packaged media creation in Donald Trump and convinced themselves that they were voting for their savior.   His appearances on Howard Stern and as a professional wrestling character didn't seem particularly disqualifying to them.   The fact that he keeps his taxes a secret, makes unfounded & poorly thought out statements, and is prone to make angry threats doesn't raise red flags to true believers either.   All of that is evidence of denial, double-think, blind devotion or just having given up on rational thinking in my opinion.

Here is a final thought:   supporters like Trump because they think he will "disrupt the system" and this will automatically bring about a refreshing change in the way US politics works.    I think electing someone who promises to create chaos while having no plans (or experience) for what comes next is flat out foolish.   It's like invading a country & removing their government without a strategy for what happens when we do so.   (oh, yeah, we did that.....)

But we have a history of impulsive choices based purely on emotion in this country.   I say that anyone who wants 'disruption' without thought to what comes next is dancing on the edge of a cliff.   Too much is at stake here to vote for anyone except Hillary Clinton.