[Charles Martel]

I get it. Our candidates suck LONG and HARD... so we’re counting on manipulating the electorate by somehow predicting which one on the other side will be the LEAST electable — and then rooting for them?

That is a factor in all presidential elections, regardless of whether our candidates suck. Sizing up the probable rival candidates is part of the game. Do we hope for the most flawed and divisive among them to wind up with the nomination? Damned straight.

[Nervous Tick]

>> Do we hope for the most flawed and divisive among them to wind up with the nomination?

Hope is one thing. (Or prayer, which I think is more effective than mere hope.)

Deluding yourself into thinking you can CAUSE it is another.

Actually, the whole business of predicting which candidate is “worse” or “less electable” is delusional as well.

Good luck with that, if that’s what you think this election should be about.

Me? I’m going to cast my lot based on what I think is best for the country. Not on what the GOP and its shills tell me is best for the *party*.

That means NO HILLARY. NO CLINTOONS EVER AGAIN IN THE WHITE HOUSE. PERIOD. NOT HILLARY, NOT BILL, NOT CHELSEA, NOT THEIR FLEARIDDEN PETS, NOT THEIR GOLDFISH.

I hope I’m clear on that!