Scruples

[supergee]

Today’s cheering thought is that while many progressives are wondering if they should stoop to voting for a mere liberal like Hillary Clinton, the other side has similar issues. A number of conservative Christians have noticed that her opponent is “a bully, who made his money by casinos, who has had several wives and several affairs.” I would strongly encourage them not to endanger their immortal souls by voting for such a man.

Comments

[johnpalmer]

That may be true but to me, it seems like they've gone further down the rabbit hole with each election, and even if they won a Supreme Court pick, they may have damaged themselves further with their embrace of teh crazy.

But I could be wrong - the media is bound and determined to report on the horse race and on he said/she said, and to post lots of clickbait. With enough message discipline, they can probably ride out even more crazy.

Still: a resounding defeat would be good for them and for America. Especially if exit polls show that people were inexorably drawn to the only competent adult on top of a ticket. "Yeah, I wanted Trump, but when I got in the voting booth, I realized that, no, this *matters*."

[wild_irises]

Of course I don't support the position that an anti-choice, anti-marriage-equality Supreme Court is a good goal. I am still hoping for a resounding defeat to the forces of evil, though what keeps me awake at night is how we have any chance of reconciling the deep gulf in "facts" that underlies how polarized we are right now.

[johnpalmer]

Oh, I didn't think you did want the SCOTUS pick to go to the Republicans. But what I'm thinking is more along the lines of, even at the cost of giving up replacement of Scalia, the Republicans should realize they've gone too far and it's time to admit that, no, Hillary is *not* that bad, and Donald Trump is TERRIBLE.

My fear is that they could end up not damaging their immediate prospect regardless. Face it, they could shut down the government, and get completely smashed on their next debt limit tantrum, and the media still gives them a complete pass. Why should things change? As long as they have tight message discipline, the media is willing to fearlessly and cluelessly report what they say, as if it's a legitimate policy position.

I think the best hope for a reasonable two party system is if people admit that they went into the voting booth supporting Trump and while they were in there were forced to admit that we *need* a grown-up in the oval office, and the exit polls showed a blistering defeat for Trump because he's a big worthless idiot.

I hope that happens, but I'm not very hopeful... not yet. If the first debate didn't prove Trump is not Presidential material, I'm not sure what will. (But we may find out, lord help us.)