Fun_HillzBluez

I don't normally care about politics, but I refuse to condone in any way that orange garbage bag, who makes a mockery of my country, its honor, history, future, and its very being. I voted for Hillary Clinton Yale Law '73 not because I'm a fan of hers--I'm indifferent (under normal circumstances, I trust either major candidate to endeavor to act on behalf of the country's best interests)--I voted for her because that disgusting clown sack cannot win, and because she is clearly the most qualified to be President among all the candidates.

Obviously she has some character flaws, but I don't care about likeability--that whole "who would you want to grab a beer with" metric is absurd. This is the presidency of the United States of America, not a pageant. I can't stand it when social ineptitude is held against otherwise qualified/able people. I've absolutely lost out on things throughout my life because I'm not good at being chummy with people, and it sickens me that this very thing is being held against Hillary Clinton. Granted some people will vote against her just because she's female or because of her last name, and these are of course also idiotic reasons to vote for her opposition. She has put in the time and work to prepare for the job, I cannot fathom how this is not a reasonable person's conclusion.

After multiple bankruptcies and villainous business practices including failure to pay workers and using donated funds for personal use, the orange buffoon she faces is demonstrably incapable of being a successful business or private leader (his primary ethos), let alone President. Hillary Clinton has proven she is perfectly capable of being a leader, making difficult and sober decisions across her career in the Senate and as Secrery of State. I can tolerate some secrecy and cloak and dagger stuff, because the President of all people should without question be aware of some number of things we as citizens may well never know about. That's part of the job.

Obviously lying about emails reflects poorly on her character (though the FBI just announced that in all those digital reams emails, there's nothing of criminal relevance), but what on Earth else can you hold against her qualifications for President? As Secretary of State (which, fun fact, traditionally used to be seen as a stepping stone to the White House), she's already been in the line of succession, and her career has already surely ever-more prepared her for this ultimate office. It's a mockery of reason to act as if she isn't qualified.

I trust she will make proper and difficult decisions when it comes down to it. That fraudulent toad she faces can't give a speech without contradicting himself; no decision he makes should merit any trust or weight responsibility; he has earned nothing. His sham is so obvious, his abuse of the trust of those who believe in him so blatant, there is no overlooking his shortcomings.

At present, I'm absolutely prepared to vote elsewhere in 2020; I can easily see her being a single term President. But until then, I do look forward to four solid years of exquisite, biting comedy fodder, as she is sure to have at least streaks of an adversarial relationship with satirists, unlike the pretty much unimpeachable nature of the Obama presidency (which is good for the country, but not terribly funny for comedy fans). Of course if the Republicans continue their cartoonishly obstructionist behavior, we may just get four more years of mocking them instead and merely commiserating with the new President they refuse to work with. But regardless, for now, she is the neon-sign-blazing obvious choice. And that disgusting, saggy cartoon clown mask is a footnote.

Reuxben