To be dreading the US election.

[savedbythebell]

I've never before been too bothered at the outcome of an American election, but this one just fills me with dread. I don't want Trump to get in, I don't want Clinton to get in.

It's just awful, both seem truly awful options, and I'm a bit appalled that a country the size of America couldn't have come up with better than these two.

Trump is awful, he just seems crazy, but Clinton wants to take on Russia and send the world to war. The awful thing is, there's absolutely nothing we can do about it. Is there any light at the end of this tunnel?

I was disheartened by the paucity of choice for either party in this election, none of the candidates struck me as worthy of holding the office of President but I think the reason for that is the fact that money (and a hell of a lot of it) is the deciding factor in who can run for President in the USA not character, capability or intelligence.

I hope Hillary wins, Trump is a disaster waiting to happen although if he does win he won't be able to wield the power he thinks he will, nor will he be able to do a modicum of what he has promised to the electorate and will therefore end his term as an ignominious failure in their eyes. He may well fall foul of the old adage 'Be careful what you wish for'.

Taking on Putin is not the same as going to war with Russia. Clinton definitely a criminal? Where's the proof of that?

Trump on the other hand is a nasty, self-seeking piece of work. He is no statesman.

I was happy to vote for Clinton. She is not a crook or a warmonger. I really think that a lot of people who say these things about her aren't very well informed. There's an awful lot of misinformation out there.

Sadly I think there is probably a sizeable chunk of the electorate in the US who won't vote for a woman. Otherwise Trump's attitudes to women would have buried his campaign.

speaking as an american citizen, for me there is no debate. Clinton has more understanding of what being president actually involves than any other candidate ever (First Lady, Senator for NY, Sec of State), has spent 30 plus years working in public service, weathered all sorts of accusations, threats and biases about her, her family and her choices, and still wants to put herself through 4 years of being in one of the most high profile positions in the world.

Trump is a sexist, racist bully, has no clear policies (other than building a wall and asking another sovereign government to pay for it and preventing a whole religious group from entering the US), has consistently lied on the campaign trail about things he has said and done as well as what his opposition (both Republicans and Democrats) have said and done. To say hes not fit to be president is an understatement.

I also agree about it being almost impossible not to watch, I hold my hands up and say I don't really understand much of it/US politics in general but Trump scares me and Clinton seems a bit dodgy (but is perhaps the lesser of two evils?). But hey, what do I know. I shall though be interested in the outcome.

This was posted on another thread:

www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/10/clinton_vs_trump_whose_crimes_are_worse.html

Tbh, Op, I don't know what you mean by Clinton wants to take on Putin and Iran. What would you like her to say to them?

The equivalence arguments really annoy me.

She is streets ahead of him both as a politician and a human being.

If both were men or both were women these discussions wouldn't even be happening.

As for third candidates FFS, split the HRC vote and let Trump in. Idiotic.

If both were men or both were women these discussions wouldn't even be happening.
I can't speak for anyone else but that's certainly not the case with me. It's just two bad canditates running for president, I'm not both red in the slightest that ones a man, the other a woman. I think though I'd go for Clinton rather Trump.
Birdy what I meant by Clinton taking on Russia or Iran or even both was that I just think she's more hawk than dove. The state of the world right now needs someone who would rather follow the avenues of peace, who wouldn't be too likely to provoke a war?

And you think Clinton is more likely than Trump to provoke a war?!?!

That's madness.

Well I don't know birdy, I'm going off what I read, everything I've read up to now suggests this. Maybe he would, who knows. The stuff they say leading up to an election is usually a load of bs anyway. All I know is Putin wants Trump to win, so that must mean he's less likely to stand up to him. I'm no expert so I might be wrong to just go off that.

Im with the OP, from the outside it certainly seems that both of these candidates are loose lipped, inconsistent, corrupt, untrustworthy and a downright threat to global stability, as for sexual abuse and treatment of women ... well it certainly seems (allegedly) that neither Trump nor historically the clintons have their nose clean there . I am soooo glad I dont have to make this choice. But I do accept that whatever the result we will all feel the consequences outside of the US. I genuinely feel (and never usually sanction this as an option) that I would have no option but to abstain If I were facing this choice. Awful situation.

Can someone tell me in really simple terms, for a political lightweight, what makes Clinton a criminal/why she is 'crooked', please? I keep reading this and not finding the backup for it.

I read an article that said trump is far from starting a Warwick Russia and is actually in cahoots with them, so far less chance of war than Clinton.
I will see if I can find it.

Staggering.

Hillary knew that taking top secret e mails onto a private server was wrong and illegal. She chose to do it anyway, despite having signed a document saying that she would not.
This is a crime that has seen lesser mortals sent to jail for infringements far far less severe than those by Mrs Clinton, and yet she has faced no sanction.

Hillary systematically lied to the people to the FBI and to officials that she had committed the offences

Then she sort of admitted to doing something, but denied that anything serious (material-wise) was involved

She then claimed to have cooperated fully in resolving her "mistake"

I understand that it then becomes clear that not only was the content of the e mails of a far more serious (secret) level than she had previously admitted to, but also she had strenuously sought to cover up those facts even as she was at the same time claiming to be cooperating fully with official investigators

I understand that the extraordinary efforts that she and her staff went to in deleting tens of thousands of mails and secret files are viewed by many voters in the USA as prima facie evidence as to her dishonesty, her hubris and her being unfit for office.

In short, it's not just a few e mails and a bit of a mistake on a choice of server. It's law breaking on a grand scale, knowingly, wittingly undertaken and her repeated lies on the subject have only served to reinforce the view that some Americans have of her and the strong dislike (hatred?) than many Americans feel for her.

birdy what is staggering?

I had such high hopes for Clinton, but she has made what should have been a walk in the park, possible the worst defeat in American politics.

South Park has been amazingly on point about the whole thing. He is in too deep and all she had to do was keep her head down and not draw (negative) attention to herself. I fear Wednesday will be a dark day indeed.

I agree with newyorker

Except for the bit about being an american citizen

Apparently Clinton is ahead in the polls as of four hours ago. Things can easily change though.

I don't think Hillary is a 'warmonger'. But if there was a decision to be made she'd make it based on political or socio-economic grounds and she'd take into account the opinions of her Cabinet and advisors. If Trump was President we'd find ourselves with a 'leader' who would make that same decision based solely on his own ego or the fact that XXX country or leader had said something that he disagreed with. He's already shown that he can't take criticism, advice, or the mere suggestion that he may be wrong about something.

I have given up worrying about it.
Neither Clinton or Trump can be a dictator and make decisions on their own so hopefully there are enough sane politicians in the Senate to block any stupid decisions whichever one of them make.

I don't know much about politics but I find it crazy that you have to be a millionaire to put up for president. It rules out a lot of decent more appropriate presidents.

If it helps you relax the president actually has very limited powers, nothing compared to the PM in the U.K.....

How can a country with as many intelligent people as the US end up with two such questionable characters as candidates for President?

Hope Clinton does it though.

Hope you're right lottie.......