You believe that fundamental corruption is acceptable so long as the corrupt office holder bribes you with policies you support. That's what Hillary is doing as it relates to gaining your support. You accept her "appearance of impropriety" in using a foundation to accept donations from foreign and domestic entities she engages in the course of her public service activities. There is beyond doubt a conflict of interest. There is beyond doubt a comingling of activities between her foundation and her public office. You accept this trade off because the policies you cherish are being implemented.
I hold that policies are only so good as the fidelity of the system those policies direct. The best policies in the world will mean squat when executed by a corrupt system. In another thread you agree that the execution of well intended policies in the US has been poor. This is the reason they are as poor as they have been. We accept that the political reasons watering down policy is acceptable. Sometimes this is honest horse trading of support for good ideas. Other times execution of policy suffers because of corruption.
Corruption that Mrs. Clinton will more deeply imbed into the already corrupt system we have to deal with. If no one is willing to sacrifice the policies they hold dear to maintain the fidelity of the system, then we will no longer have any hope of an honest system. As I said, I would have voted for Bernie over Trump, even though I would have shared more values with Trump's stated policies. I do so because I agree that trump is also corrupt. Bernie would have been an ineffectual idiologue, but he would have tried to remain honest.
Yes, reasonable people can disagree. Ask yourself this: how many Hillary supporters are being pilloried as an irredeemable basket of deplorables? How many Trump supporters are being characterized as reasonable? Not the candidate, but the supporters. So, the questions suggest to me that a significant portion of Hillary supporters do not believe it is possible to be reasonable and not vote for Hillary. Perhaps it is better to say it is unreasonable to vote for Trump.
Bottom line is that you are free to believe that greater corruption is better for the country so long as the price for that corruption is the continued support of certain policies. My contention is that corruption undermines the value of ALL good policies. It is better to root out corruption than to pay it Danegeld.
But of course reasonable people can disagree.
Here's another perhaps reasonable view of voting Trump.
https://youtu.be/pADHLsECWxY
WeirdlyWired wrote:PeterZ wrote: For anyone that believes Hillary is either guilty or even may be guilty of crimes, voting for her as she uses political influence to avoid prosecution is tacit acknowledgement that the Elites are entitled to use political influence to ascend above the laws that govern everyone else. I simply cannot do that. I will not and will fight the establishment of the Elites ability to facilitate that. I would rather vote for Trump, whom I find distasteful in the extreme, than vote for Elites to be able to avoid being prosecuted for crimes. I've already said I would vote for an honest socialist before voting to make Elites above the law.
Here, hopefully is where reasonable people can reasonably disagree. The Elites of the Fundamentalist Christian Community have no problem holding their noses and urging their congregations support Trump. If they can swallow their higher moral values than I, a mere Liberal, can ever hope to aspire to for the sake of greater principles like Supreme Court Justices willing to overturn Roe v wade, Griswold v Connecticut, etc. , Then I can swallow yours for the same but opposite principles.
