
Originally Posted by
LDAHL
In Trump, the Left finally gets the cartoon villain of their dreams. He's crude, boorish and not particularly committed to truth. He gets his strongest support from those bitter clingers in iron oxide flyover country. He's not even ashamed of being rich. He respects none of the established pieties. What's not to hate?
On the Right, he's the demagogue who seems to be hijacking the Republican Party and re-branding it into something resembling one of those nasty little European ethno-nationalist parties. What's worse, insofar as he has any coherent policies at all, he's nothing more than a big government liberal. Probably to the left of Clinton in many areas once she gets the nomination and quits needing to pretend she's a less nutty version of Sanders. Once again, what's not to hate?
I can't see any reason to support the guy outside petty spite and a sadly ignoble strain of nihilism.
On the other hand, Clinton has raised political hackery to a point that makes satire redundant. From the faux southern accent she affects when she wants to appear folksy, to the crude identity politics, she seems the very picture of self-serving insincerity. Is her greatest appeal as the lessor evil? That is sad indeed.
As someone who wants to think of himself as a principled conservative, I find myself in a quandary. Neither front-runner seems even remotely acceptable. At the top of the ticket, I could either vote third party or write in Calvin Coolidge, and support the down-ballot Republicans who can be counted on to oppose principle to sleaze in the bitter years to come.