- E's Moriarity
I'm not interested in voting for someone who supports eliminating corporate income taxes (while I realize that corporations legally get out of paying taxes, they're people, right? They should pay their fair share towards the "general welfare" of the country and its citizens). And while nobody loves paying their taxes, taxes are the cost of civilization. Abolish the IRS? No thanks. He also supports abolishing ALL income, capital gains and payroll taxes, with revenue to be generated by a sales tax. Guess who pays the most for that kind of taxation? The poor and middle class. and services go out the window.
I'm not interested in voting for someone who supports the private prison industrial complex.
I'm not interested in voting for someone who supports robbing public education to pay for vouchers.
I'm not interested in voting for someone who doesn't support student loans.
I'm not interested in voting for someone who opposes the rights of workers to form a union.
I'm not interested in voting for someone who believes that "sharia law" is infecting America. He actually supported banning burqas until he "rethought" that position.
I'm not interested in voting for someone who believes that if clubgoers at Pulse had been armed, the outcome would have been "less horrific."
I'm not interested in voting for someone whose opposition to KXL was simply the problem of eminent domain. He's fine with a pipeline in and of itself.
I'm not interested in voting for someone who called the ACA "a torpedo in a sinking ship."
I'm not interested in voting for someone who believes that K-12 public education can only improve if schools "compete" against each other, and are measured by testing. It shows a complete ignorance of the real issues involved in education and the challenges our students and teachers face.
His stances on immigration seem quite common-sense, his drug policy opinions are quite common-sense, and he's not bad on abortion although the idea that the government shouldn't fund stem cell research but private corporations can is a head-scratcher. He's not hawkish but has a simplistic understanding of international relations.
So all-in-all, NOPE.
- E's Moriarity
There are a lot of policy positions she has that I don't love. Some of the things she did as SoS I don't love (but also understand that they are part of a larger foreign policy that has been shaped by the Bush Wars and Obama's foreign policy, as well as the work the past S's oS did over the years). Some of her votes as a Senator I don't love.
But "horrible human being?" Horrible on what level? Pol Pot - there was a horrible human being. Pinochet - another such. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin? Yep, they were horrible human beings. I cannot stand George W, he lied us into war with Iraq, helped crash the economy and plenty more, but he isn't a horrible human being. He's a bad amateur painter, but he isn't a horrible human being. He was probably one of the worst presidents in the history of this country, but he isn't a horrible human being.
- For the Love of Pigs
Libertarians are a funny (no so funny) amalgam of left & right. Good IMHO on social liberties, but not for the "freedom" to make as much money as you can no matter who you step on, squish, screw in the process. My mom used to say, one person's freedom goes only as far as the other person's nose.
And ditto: in what way is Hillary Clinton not qualified to be President of the United States? She's not my favorite person; has her share of personal and professional flaws. Who doesn't? But I can't really think of anyone who is better suited right now to handle that job, both in terms of experience and temperament.
- E's Moriarity
Aleppo? Never heard of it!
Name a world leader? Ummmm..... ummmm.... maybe one of the guys from Mexico, but I can't remember which one!
One of the world's most dangerous despots? I think there is a guy in North Korea who is kinda bad, but dang! Can't remember what he calls himself!
Global warming? Naah, the earth will hit the sun in a few billionty years, so why worry?
Even his vice-presidential candidate (who really excelled at naming favorite world leaders, mentioning Shimon Peres who had just died, no doubt planting the name in his mind) thinks HRC is the most qualified candidate, and is working to keep Trump from winning.
- Supporter 2004-2017
- Supporter in '11
So, for the reasons Snowflaky outlines so well, as well as for Johnson's political position and even more for climate change position, he would be terrible. Animals don't fare well under governments that pride themselves on not restricting people's behavior. He's a bad choice.