Here is my candidate, and my rationale, what say you?

[printcraft]

I'm voting for Pence - he'll be president shortly after the impeachment begins in May.

President Pence will take out the trash.......

NRA rated A+

 

[gopher]

I'm still undecided on who I will vote for. My indecision boils down to this: does "The Donald" have a chance to win?

If Trump has even the slightest chance of winning (in my mind) then he'll get my vote if only because Hillary is significantly more odious than Trump. My belief is that Hillary has a 100% chance of implementing pretty much every policy that I find wrong-headed and offensive while Trump has something like a 50% chance of implementing policies that I find wrong-headed and offensive (I won't stand for a gold TRUMP sign on the White House, just to be clear). Perhaps that is only due to the fact that Hillary has a long history in politics and therefore a voting record that pretty clearly shows where her priorities lie and what her thinking on many issues boil down to. Trump, on the other hand, has no voting record of any kind to provide a "litmus test" for what he might do when in office only his past political statements as a private citizen, which frankly don't do much to shore up his conservative "bona fides". Flip a coin: he might govern wisely, he might be a complete buffoon or he might be a combination of the two.

If Trump doesn't have a chance of winning (in my mind) then Evan McMullin will get my vote as a protest against the "establishment" and to "stick it to the man" (this won't be more than symbolic unless many more do the same, but it will make me feel better in any case :-)). McMullin seems to follow nearly all of my political leanings. However, I don't think he has a snowball's chance in hell of winning if for no other reason than he seems more like a "regular guy" than the long line of craptastic candidates we have had for President since Reagan (and some would say that it could be argued that Reagan *appeared* to be a craptastic choice before he actually won and did a pretty decent job of being President).

Far more important is that Republicans retain the Senate so that the Supreme Court isn't further shifted to the left with subsequent dire consequences for Constitutional governance and liberty. The House will also be important to at least keep something of a "foot on the brake" of spiraling debt and excessive spending that ALL politicians seem subject to.

I have no idea who will win the election. However, my prediction is that the Republican party is pretty much done as a major political party after this election (unless the RNC gets their collective heads out of their asses and implement some HUGE reforms; snowball's chance...). I'm not sure what will rise up to supplant the RNC (Libertarians, Tea Party as full-fledged political party, ?), but it will be a party committed to personal liberty, freedom, small government, fiscal restraint, personal responsibility and accountability and, most importantly, a party of the people that eschews politics as a "profession".

The need to return to "citizen politicians" has become very clear to me as neither the Republicans or Democrats have any interest in any meaningful reduction in either the spending levels or size of the federal government. Both parties are feeding at the teet of the people via ever-increasing taxes to support more and more duplicative, non-functional, inscrutable and, in many cases, plainly corrupt bureaucracies.

The time has come to end the era of "professional politicians" as their incentives are to forever increase the power and spending of government. Only by imposing term limits on EVERY political office can we return to true governance "by the people and for the people" that our great republic was founded on.

My $0.02...

 

[Dan35]

I'm still undecided on who I will vote for. My indecision boils down to this: does "The Donald" have a chance to win?

If Trump has even the slightest chance of winning (in my mind) then he'll get my vote if only because Hillary is significantly more odious than Trump. My belief is that Hillary has a 100% chance of implementing pretty much every policy that I find wrong-headed and offensive while Trump has something like a 50% chance of implementing policies that I find wrong-headed and offensive (I won't stand for a gold TRUMP sign on the White House, just to be clear). Perhaps that is only due to the fact that Hillary has a long history in politics and therefore a voting record that pretty clearly shows where her priorities lie and what her thinking on many issues boil down to. Trump, on the other hand, has no voting record of any kind to provide a "litmus test" for what he might do when in office only his past political statements as a private citizen, which frankly don't do much to shore up his conservative "bona fides". Flip a coin: he might govern wisely, he might be a complete buffoon or he might be a combination of the two.

If Trump doesn't have a chance of winning (in my mind) then Evan McMullin will get my vote as a protest against the "establishment" and to "stick it to the man" (this won't be more than symbolic unless many more do the same, but it will make me feel better in any case :-)). McMullin seems to follow nearly all of my political leanings. However, I don't think he has a snowball's chance in hell of winning if for no other reason than he seems more like a "regular guy" than the long line of craptastic candidates we have had for President since Reagan (and some would say that it could be argued that Reagan *appeared* to be a craptastic choice before he actually won and did a pretty decent job of being President).

Far more important is that Republicans retain the Senate so that the Supreme Court isn't further shifted to the left with subsequent dire consequences for Constitutional governance and liberty. The House will also be important to at least keep something of a "foot on the brake" of spiraling debt and excessive spending that ALL politicians seem subject to.

I have no idea who will win the election. However, my prediction is that the Republican party is pretty much done as a major political party after this election (unless the RNC gets their collective heads out of their asses and implement some HUGE reforms; snowball's chance...). I'm not sure what will rise up to supplant the RNC (Libertarians, Tea Party as full-fledged political party, ?), but it will be a party committed to personal liberty, freedom, small government, fiscal restraint, personal responsibility and accountability and, most importantly, a party of the people that eschews politics as a "profession".

The need to return to "citizen politicians" has become very clear to me as neither the Republicans or Democrats have any interest in any meaningful reduction in either the spending levels or size of the federal government. Both parties are feeding at the teet of the people via ever-increasing taxes to support more and more duplicative, non-functional, inscrutable and, in many cases, plainly corrupt bureaucracies.

The time has come to end the era of "professional politicians" as their incentives are to forever increase the power and spending of government. Only by imposing term limits on EVERY political office can we return to true governance "by the people and for the people" that our great republic was founded on.

My $0.02...

WELL SAID SIR! Very well said.

 

[SSGSAD]

I haven't backed off from voting for Al Bundy yet. But I have to admit that the Veritas videos are helping to create some significant space between Trump's and Clinton's character.

Clinton, doesn't have ANY character ..... EITHER one of them !!!!!

 

[ATM]

I can't think of a human I'd consent to place into such a position of illegitimate power to rule us all. Not the 2nd most evil, not the 3rd, not even the 10th most evil.

I wouldn't cast my consent for the least evil human among us to rule all the rest, let alone any of these folks actually vying for their shot at the position.

What is the consent of the governed? I'd suggest that its real power, our real power, is only recognized in the withholding.

There's my rationale. I have no candidate.

 

[jamil]

I can't think of a human I'd consent to place into such a position of illegitimate power to rule us all. Not the 2nd most evil, not the 3rd, not even the 10th most evil.

I wouldn't cast my consent for the least evil human among us to rule all the rest, let alone any of these folks actually vying for their shot at the position.

What is the consent of the governed? I'd suggest that its real power, our real power, is only recognized in the withholding.

There's my rationale. I have no candidate.

The president wasn't supposed to be a ruler. The president is supposed to be the chief executive. He/she doesn't have a crown. Coronations notwithstanding.

 

[churchmouse]

The president wasn't supposed to be a ruler. The president is supposed to be the chief executive. He/she doesn't have a crown. Coronations notwithstanding.

I am sure Barry has one in his desk that he wears when no one is looking.

 

[ATM]

The president wasn't supposed to be a ruler.

Correct.

The president is supposed to be the chief executive.

Correct.

He/she doesn't have a crown. Coronations notwithstanding.

Correct. Yet my assessment remains fairly accurate. How is that?

I am sure Barry has one in his desk that he wears when no one is looking.

Very likely.

 

[printcraft]

The president wasn't supposed to be a ruler. The president is supposed to be the chief executive. He/she doesn't have a crown. Coronations notwithstanding.

I am sure Barry has one in his desk that he wears when no one is looking.

It's true. Not a crown so much as a tiara for that princess.