See and though I am leaning towards Trump or Cruz, these arguments are very valid as well. This will most definitely be a very difficult choice for those of us who are still able to think freely, honestly they all stink, but find me a politician who doesn't. It's all a power struggle and they'll say whatever to gain the power then do what they want once they get that power. Obama is a prime example.

I don't either.

I agree with you. While Trump does set off my red flags, I have a funny feeling that he could do great things for this country and for the deficit, but I could also see him being a behind closed doors communist, or becoming one to speed the process along. I fear the power will quickly go to his head. And even if I am wrong on these ideas, it could set in to motion celebrities in the white house, that could end very badly. For instance, could you imagine Tom Cruise in the white house, my mind cannot even create that sort of carnage.

Thanks
I may and up in that block of people who stay home, but I meant to talk about people who will end up cast a vote.
One scoop of shit or two? I'll pass.

IMO you missed the most important block in your summation and the block that few even realize are interested. How many eligible voters are just so disgusted, angry and disinterested in the entire political process that they just stay home on election day? How many who have never bothered to watch a Primary Debate have tuned in in mass? How many who have never showed up for a political rally of any sort are packing stadiums just to hear Trump say what no others dare? This block, IF, and it is a big IF, they show up at the election booth then all bets are off and all the other blocks will be inconsequential. Trump is a dentist who has exposed a nerve, a very raw nerve, and he keeps poking it in all the right places to awaken a sleeping mass with a major toothache. So what if he turns out not to be all that he claims to be, has any of the others ever been?

I'm not really the kind to name call - its just that the idea that Trump is seriously being considered by any party, let alone a major party, is so surreal that I literally can't wrap my mind around it.

My reaction to his candidacy was the same as my reaction to the news that Kanya West announced his intention to run, or Colbert, or Scrooge McDuck.

I seriously can think of few personalities in the public eye that are less suited to be the leader of the western world. Its not hyperbole when I say that he reminds me of Caligula, who thought himself a living God - who berated, then beheaded anyone, including elected roman senators, for no other reason than they displeased him, let alone criticize or dare to challenge him. His name calling of women, minorities, and anyone who dare question him is so patently infantile that, this alone should disqualify him to deserve the admiration, let alone the elegance of any fair minded objectivist (which SHOULD be redundant). The entire philosophy it about finding the truth about the world and the people who live on it. Can anyone in this forum or beyond say that they objectively agree with "Trumps Truth?"

As Ayn said, we should only follow others if they truly reflect our values, principles and ethics. To do otherwise is a contradiction of logic, and a betrayal of oneself. Does anyone here want to say that Trump is even a remote reflection of their own ethic? Does his sense of life comport with yours?

Yes, I know, I know, he is supposedly the poster boy for the disaffected - those who are so frustrated with the do-nothing political system, that they want a bomb thrower who will blow it all up.

He also is locking down the Chicolina vote. (For those of you who don't know, Chicolina is a porn star who was elected to the Italian parliament by a constituency the wanted demonstrate what a farce the Italian ruling body truly was). As far as I know, Trump has not appeared in any porn movies, but his public rants and embarrassing "dancing monkey" antics before any camera, are just as obscene.

By Objectivist standards, he is worse than a man with the wrong values and ethic, he is man with opportunistic personal principles... in other words, he is consciously unprincipled and void of any ethical standards. I think Ayn would call him the height of hypocrisy and evil.

He is the worse kind of fraudulent dealer who panders to the fear and confusion of minds that are truly defenseless, because they lack the acumen to see Trump for the fraud he is.

Another historical parallel is Sen. McCarthy who road runaway fear and conspiracy theories to public prominence in the 50s. Ironically, his underlying opposition to socialism was justified (Ayn actually testified before his committee), but it became abundantly clear that McCarthy lost sight of the "cause" and became a demagogue whose means were perverted to one end, his own power and aggrandizement.

Trump marks the return of the kind contagious McCarthyistic disease... the symptoms of which are defined by the kind of mass insanity that needs a figurehead to be the embodiment of their deepest frustration and fear.(and ignorance).

But just as McCarthy had his Edward R. Morrow - a man who had the common sense and bravery to point out that the "Emperor has no clothes", so the National Review is a least attempting to call us back from the brink of the abyss that is "The Donald."

I note with interest, but not surprise, that the media, including much of the conservative media (read Fox), have betrayed their primary role as gate keepers who are charge with exposing the absurdity of those who are delusional enough to aspire to the most powerful position in the free world, yet totally lack the temperament, skill, or even a modicum of good will toward the people they, in theory, should represent. The Trump, people are pawns, whose only purpose is to play the role of surfs in his imperial Presidency.

Why have the press not been savaging him for his truly ridiculous behavior as the buffoon he proven, time and again, that he is?

Answer is obvious, Trump virtually guarantees a Clinton presidency. This is true if he gets the Republican nomination or not. If he fails, it is clear that he intends to run as a third party candidate, splitting the "right of center vote." Hillary walks into the West Wing, giggling at the stupidity or her opponents (the ones she said on national TV were her enemies - i.e.Republicans).

What do we, the sane, do to stop any of this nightmarish reality from coming to pass. No scenario looks promising. Hillary or Trump? Hillary vs. who? say Cruz, when the only way Cruz could win is to buy Trump off with a major position in the Administration. Vice-President? Sec of Estates, er, I mean State?

Talk about picking your poison. Either option leaves us just as dead.

Agree. He is just right wing, not conservative. He'd be so happy to whip the Walmart lemmings into a nationalistic frenzy like Hitler.

Check your premise

Someone to drive the short bus?

Spoken like a true collectivist.
You have no options because you don't have the courage to run without the flock. BaaaBaaaa

Unless you have a way to leave the planet you're on this bus.
Maybe you are old enough to be thinking you will be gone but for me I plan to be here awhile yet.

JEOPARDY QUESTION OF THE WEEK:

THE CLUE:

This presidential candidate has been variously described by the use of these adjectives, all of which start with with the letter "B":

Buffoon, Bully, Braggadocios, Brash, Bankrupt, Bald-faced, Belittling, Boar, Baby, Bitter, Baffled, Baffling, Beginner, Back-Stabbing, Back-Handed, Back-tracking, Backward, Bitchy, Benedict Democrat, Bias, Bigoted, Blow-hard, Bozo, Botched, Blathering, Basher, Bleeding-heart, Bloody, Besmircher, Besmearer, Bombastic, Bad-mannered, Belligerent, Bellicose, Blasphemous, Bickerer, Big-Mouthed, Balderdash, Boob, Badgerer, Bamboozling
Bandit, Babbling, Batty, Bag-man, Bawdy, Bad-mouther, Bedeviling
Baulker, Bawler, Bazaar, Barker, Begrudger, Berater, Boot-strapper, Bewildered, Botched, Byzantine. BAD.

The Answer is: Who is ****____?

(and that's just the "B"s)

Ok... partly tongue in cheek but I challenge you to make a case against the appropriate application of any of these adjectives. If even half are true, is this really the man an Objectivist could vote for with a clear conscious. My question. What would Ayn say? What would she do?

Who's we? I'll be waving goodbye to ya'll, while you are staring out the back windows crying. You not only got on the bus willingly, you paid for the ticket.

The peashooters can sometimes win if their ideas are powerful enough.

Seems to me that like it or not we are all on this bus together, and I would LOVE nothing more than to turn this bus around. Until we can get a driver willing to go in the right direction, I will support the slowest driver.

So I ask for your opinion as to who you think might turn this bus around? Cause without a person to back slowing down is the better option.

Very well said.

The other option is not to let anyone carry you to Hell, quickly or slowly. Sounds like you have gotten on the bus and waiting for it to leave the station, and missed the going away party. You get to decide if you will cooperate with the collective.