Ariod: and if there is one thing Bernie has made clear to us, from the start, and consistenly throughout the campaign, is how he feels about Donald Trump. And to put it kindly, that would be something in the ballpark of "piece of shit".
MaximumBunny: He only thought slightly better of Hillary though, and letting her and the DNC "Bern" him while still supporting them was pretty bad. I expected more fight from him to be honest. :P
Oh he is no fan of Hillary either, I agree on that. However the fact that he has thrown his support behind her now, even after getting unfair treatement during the primary, I think speaks to just how much he dislikes Trump. I'm absolutely certain he doesn't give a shit what the "party elite" think of him, since they more or less gave his campaign the back of their hand from the start. So this is completely his choice, if he considered both candidates equally bad I sure doubt he'd be on the road stumping for Clinton.
Ariod: But one thing that ignores is the difference in terms of experience, temperment and intelligence, which leaves me with zero confidence that Trump would actually go through with anything he's tallking about.
MaximumBunny: If you thought that he would, would your views of him change towards the positive (as a candidate at least)?
Well of course if I thought of he was as committed to his policies and agenda as Sanders is, for instance, well yeah that could only help for any candidate. But still in Trump's case I don't generally like a whole lot of what he says he wants to do anyhow, so it is a bit of a moot point.
MaximumBunny: If Hillary had Trump's policies I'd be voting for her. That's how little I care about the candidates and how much I do for the policies. And contrary to popular belief, Trump is actually a very nice person. Hillary isn't that nice of a person off of the cameras. It's like they're reversed. So I don't think temperament or intelligence should be considered factors (they're both intelligent with tempers in varying situations).
Hey I can respect voting based on policy, normally I would as well - the trouble with doing that while deciding between *these* two candidates is I think both would be willing to say a whole lot in order to get elected, which they may very easily "forget" once in office. Given that, before I even think policy I have to think "character" - which yes, certainly includes temperament.
And I judge character based on actions - overall actions for the person, for their whole life. Clearly the newest things are the most relevant, but it's all part of the equation. And the overall impression I get from Trump's actions dating back to when I first heard of him in the early 90s or whenever, is that he is out for his own glorification more than anything else.
Oh but completely disagree on one point there - intelligence is a critical factor for a president . You have to be able to digest the facts and come to correct solutions based on that. Otherwise you're just throwing darts in the dark. This is especially important for the president, more than a senator, etc - I mean when a crisis hits this is the person who has to make quick, intelligent decisions. And here, after listening to both speak, Clinton wins out overwhelmingly every time for me.
MaximumBunny: Trump has a history of giving money to disabled children and plane rides to veterans returning home
Ok now *that* seems to be a bit of a stretch. I'm aware of one plane ride to veterans. But not a whole lot of charitable giving. I haven't even heard his most vocal supporters, who are on the news constantly, trying to paint a picture of "Trump the philanthropist". In fact that's gotta be the first time I've heard or read that phrase I wrote there, hah... If there is a "history of giving" here on the level of other rich philanthropists, well, that would be the best kept secret of the election. I don't buy it - the news-show surrogates would have been working that angle all along.