Abraham Lincoln, if he were alive and brought up to speed. However, here and now we get to choose between Trump and Clinton. There are no other choices, and if you are able to vote, whatever you do—vote, don’t vote, vote for a splinter party candidates, or write in someone—will help either Trump or Clinton win, given your own situation.

This time around we’re in an unusual situation because the best candidate of the two for liberals is Clinton, but the best candidate for conservatives is also Clinton, who’s also the best candidate for moderates.

This is because the Republican candidate lacks both the preparation and the temperament required of a President. Whatever you think of Clinton, you know she can do the job. There probably has never been a candidate for the American presidency who understands exactly what the job entails as well as she does.

For moderates it’s a no-brainer, because she’s a moderate.

For liberals Trump is an abomination—a swindler and con artist and thin-skinned bully who’d be the bull in the china shop, so for them it should also be a no-brainer.

For small-c conservatives it’s painful. Their rational choice among this year’s Republican candidates would probably have been Jon Kasich, but he’s not available.

And for them I’d say Clinton is a more conservative choice than Trump. I mean, face it—she’d be presiding while the House remains firmly in Republican control, so not one of her policies will be implemented if it needs legislation or new funding. But at the same time she’d prevent the runaway spending that happened the last time a Republican President had a Republican Congress and Supreme Court.

In terms of social policy, remember that we’re electing a President, not a monarch. No President can pass laws single-handedly. Or appoint judges. Even if the Senate goes Democratic, it won’t have a filibuster-proof Democratic majority, so Supreme Court nominations wouldn’t fly unless they as moderate as someone like Judge Garland, who even Chief Justice Roberts approves of, and he’s certainly a conservative.

And from a small-c conservative viewpoint, you know that Clinton wouldn’t do anything startling. She’s a steady-as-she-goes type of politician. Whereas Trump seems capable of anything, as his mercurial moods strike him. It’s not surprising that he admires Putin, who’s a similar personality type.

I’ve never seen so many conservatives—from grassroots up into Washington DC Republicans—who are as opposed to the Republican nominee as they are to Trump, and it’s centered on nonpartisan things. His temperament. His grasp of the job. The likelihood that he would damage the Republican brand severely if he won.

I have not in my lifetime—and I’m old—seen a presidential candidate of either party who seemed so unsuited to the job, and whose background outside politics gave so little “outside” source of confidence in him either.

Clinton is imperfect but she’s in the ballpark. Trump isn’t in the ballpark.

That’s what it boils down to.

Source: https://www.quora.com/Who-do-you-thi...next-president

Perfect Money/Payeer/Epay/Neteller/Skrill: www.ituglobalfx.com.ng