The simple way of looking at this is to just vote your conscience......It is not complicated at all.

If you don't vote your conscience then you will get what you deserve. If you do vote your conscience and still get evil, at least you can live with yourself in peace.

I agree. I sat on a dental board in my state for some years, and I repeatedly would say, we don't have the power to do that, and we shoudn't!! then the other members would proceed to outvote me, even once deleting my comments from the minutes. I got to see how intoxicating power is to little people, even in that small board. I HATE government as it is today

Excellent point, Ed. If there is a recurring theme in my life over the last 8 years, it has been "there's not a thing I can do about it!" And I hate it.

She is the worst in the running now. I think Trump is next, because he will make the US a laughing stock. Then Sanders, then take your pick (Bush, Rubio, Carson). Cruz is the best unless you count the distant Paul.

In rebuttal: history 1985-2015.
If enough people like you stuck to ethical principles and voted for the third party the statist party would lose, and individual liberty and free markets would be resurrected.

It is like Jumbo Shrimp! Doesn't make sense!

I would like to present my case for always voting for the "lesser of two evils".

Here's a scenario: Suppose that, not counting my vote, the Democratic candidate and the Republican candidate received an equal number of votes. Suppose also, that I really don't want a Democratic president. Now which of my four choices would result in NOT electing a Democrat? Answer: only one of them - my voting for a Republican. ( My other three choices - voting for a Democrat, voting for a 3d party candidate, or not voting at all - will result in a Democratic win or a tie. )

This is why voting for "the lesser of two evils" is the proper choice. Granted, my scenario will most likely never occur. But if enough people vote like me, it certainly will make it a lot less likely for a Democrat to win.

I'm afraid that the decline has been going on for a lot longer. Obama is just the latest in a long line of Constitution killers.

Without a doubt! Those in order least fit to rule are; 1) Hilary Clinton, 2) Bernie Sanders, 3) Barak Obama, 4) Lindsey Graham, 5) John McCain!

Of course there was a reason. Bill Clinton needed to divert the attention of the American public away from the Lewinsky scandal.

I didn't say it was a good or logical reason. ;)

Well said.

That's not business, it's looting. In business, both parties gain value from a deal.

What have Trumps investors lost in his four bankruptcies? Billions. And he laughed at them the whole time.

Trump is out for Trump, but he doesn't represent what I want in a leader.

I agree, not fit to be our POTUS but I would argue she couldn't be successful as a ruler either. As an example, she could not even manage Benghazi.

Sad, but true.
Very true. They are outa their heads. If they are under 40, they've been massively conditioned in school, in the media, by comedians and movies. The amazing thing is that there any rational younger people left. I shudder to think what will happen when the over 50s are gone.

In the kingdom of the blind ...

Hi, JB:
She is fit to rule. She is not fit to be an American President. Actually, she is not fit to be a free citizen. If I did what she has done, I'd be writing this from prison -- if they'd let me.

Trump's "drive" is for personal power with no ethical constraints whatsoever. In that respect he is no different from the rest of the candidates. Trump will say anything to become king,

And who rules the ruler?
Ever since there have been rulers, there have either been power brokers pulling the ruler's strings or wannabes vying to take the ruler's place. Add to that the discontented citizens who realize that they are being ruled and don't like it and you are suddenly illuminated as to why the king, dictator, socialist-in-charge, keeps a loyal army that eliminates dissenters by whatever means they can get away with. Is Hillary fit to "rule?" Yes, as a ruler. Is she fit to be the president? Absolutely not, and for the above reason for starters. One of the things liberals remind me of can be found in "The Walrus and the Carpenter" a poem from "Alice In Wonderland." The Walrus cried for the demise of the poor oysters as he ate them all up.

You define salesmanship in a negative light to make excuses for Trump. He is conducting his biggest con yet as a candidate for president. If he was a good manager and had solutions to the "problems" of Americans, then present those problems and solutions in a businesslike, rational way. He hasn't. He won't. Because he is just another looter politician who seeks power.
Most sales people sell a product that is more than a negative sum game. Trump has "produced" casinos that overtly steal from its customers, and Trump has overtly taken assistance from other looters. Another "lesser evil" is still evil.
I'd rather have an honest small business merchant instead of Trump. He represents the worst view of business. I wouldn't trust Trump as dog catcher.

I agree, Mamaemma. I think Gulchers, as humans, are just as susceptible to corruption by power, but do not pursue power over others for its own sake. Being able to reason makes a difference, and it must take precedence over the temptations afforded by power. Concentration of power in government is a vile mistake that must be avoided.

Brainwashed by decades of propaganda in media and "education."

You have voted to support those rules every time you cast a vote for "lesser evil." You have sacrificed your principles; they are the rules promulgated by those you voted for; they are your rules. Take responsibility for your actions.

You and others like you are responsible for the evil that has controlled and expanded the fedgov. Like Janet Reno you claim to take responsibility for your actions and then you keep voting for statist evil ignoring the continual betrayal by every politician you voted for.

+1 for "Hildebeast"! lmao!

A lot of "business" is using what could be called "con man" skills (also called "salesmanship"). Nevertheless, he's demonstrated positive achievements that have improved the quality of life for thousands, if not (in aggregate), millions. What have the other candidates achieved? Climbing slimy political ladders, is all.