I was never a fan of Hillary Clinton. I think when I saw her
defend her husband over his MANY sexual transgressions when she knew full well
they were true, made me think of her not as a real woman or wife but a hard,
ambitious politician that would do anything to reach her political goals; this
was a flawed individual as far as I was concerned.
I do not deny that she is smart and can hold her own with
any man she came up against including Trump. I think she has loads of
experience and would be the “safe” candidate for the presidency mainly because
she would step into the role as if she never left it.
I say she would be the “safe” candidate because as president
she would not “shake” anything up but continue in the footsteps of her predecessor.
If Congress remains in the hands of the so-called Republicans, it would mean
another four or eight years of stalemate.
She appears to be the presumptive Democratic nominee and
will battle Trump in the fall. Her victory is not assured as she is not a very well-liked
woman and she is after all a woman, which in itself carries a lot of negative implications
for some male voters and believe me, Trump would definitely play that up as
much as possible.
If it was her against Trump, would I vote for her? She is
the safe candidate with a verifiable history, Trump is not and we know next to
nothing about him and his “real” agenda.
Would Trump be a disaster for the nation if elected? I don’t
think so and in fact he may bring fresh thinking to a stagnating government.
The fact that he is not really a Republican or Democrat actually is a plus for
the nation which has seen nothing but dirty party politics for way too long.
A strong third party candidate could change everything. I
kind of expect the GOP or what is left of the core party, to try and run a
candidate on the Libertarian ticket.
No comments:
Post a Comment