Who represents the least amount of radical change?

At this time in the American story we are seeing unprecedented movements for radical change, from the Trump platform of forcibly removing 11million people, to sanctioning, and thereby alienating Mexico in order to build a wall. To the civil unrest that permeates the Donald Trump movement and rallies. The bellicose and far right nationalist rhetoric that in my opinion is NOT conservatism, and truly is a force of radical change.

Then you have the socialist platform of Bernie Sanders, the ideas that extended to the 320 million citizens would cause massive debt,(not that we don't have it already) and a unprecedented redistribution of wealth. The fact the republic is not ready for a full socialist state (not that it isn't headed that direction or that we shouldn't become more socialized, at the pace we can sustain ) The SJW's who surround the socialist movement, who wish to engage in revisionist history, who apologize for Islam and the very real threat that fundamentalism carries with it. The violent protesting and civil unrest that corresponds with these peoples ideologies, the idea that we need SOCIAL CHANGE even if it means the destruction of smooth transition of power and revolution.

Then you have hillary Clinton a criminal, someone who is not trusted in a position of power because her track record is wanting. I don't want to vote for ANYONE of these candidates, but I wish to posit a question.

Who of these three candidates will offer the least amount of radical change, and who will best be suited to maintain smooth transition of power in the republic? From what I see, and I am in no way advocating voting for Hillary she represents the least amount of radical change and subsequent civil unrest if elected.

Though many may disagree with my positions on both sides, please answer the question as well as responding to my points, thank you..

a reply to: TechniXcality

Bernie will not get the nomination so there is no reason to consider if he would be better for the US.

Clinton will represent team blue and Trump will probably represent team red.

Clinton would be status quo with a few changes we wouldn't notice and Trump wouldn't be able to do the things he claimed, but congress just might pull together for once and bypass him with a bunch of legislation with 2/3 votes.

In good conscience I can't vote for either so I am going team Libertarian which I hope will be Garry Johnson. I do not think he will win, but I hope he gets 5% of the votes so next election it will not be a two party system.

a reply to: Grimpachi

good reply thanks brother

I'm surprised more aren't discussing this..

a reply to: TechniXcality

if you dont like the candidates then vote for me and i will be sure to keep my promise i will hate all of you equally so jump on the malevolent wagon ..... well anyways sorry was a joke to be serious i dont think ill vote for any of them, its like trying to pick lesser of too many evils

a reply to: Grimpachi

Libertarian is the only real choice left for me.

I am at the point where I believe that even if everyone voted 100% for a 3rd party candidate we would still end up with Hilary winning somehow. Now that voting machines and the media are so controlled nothing we do matters.

Hillary is the ultimate Status Quo insider. she rails about the banks and takes tons of $ from Wall Street. She will do nothing that doesn't benefit herself and the dem party.

Sanders won't get anything done/changed. too extreme, esp wi a Republican congress.

beyond the bluster I don't think Trump would be much of a difference maker, aside from a few foreign policy things (like the Mexican border).

wild card is Supreme Court. Hillary or Sanders would nominate left-wing nuts who will trash the Constitution. Trump will probly nominate moderate conservatives. the dems would love to ban guns and a stacked SC would do that...which could lead to a genuine rebellion, because millions of Muricans are NOT giving up their guns.

realistically, it's almost certain to be Hillary v Trump. I'm not a huge Donald fan but in this contest he gets my vote for sure.

Unfortunately, it looks like Hillary is the only safe choice. I would strongly prefer a Republican but the problem with Trump is he truly represents the more authoritarian streak in the Republican party and seems to really not know what he's talking about half the time. The man is not an intellectual.

Sanders is crazy. He represents that moonbat that just comes out of every liberal when they feel like it's safe for them to just be themselves. The scary part is that his supporters don't have to care how things look anymore. Things have degenerated to that point where people have forgotten why they should care.

Clinton certainly will wreak havoc in the Supreme Court if she gets in there but I don't know what other choice we have. There's no guarantee that Trump would put people on the court who would be of any benefit at all to those who are interested in freedom and the Constitution.

Personally, I think the political left is just dictating the political conversation in this country and there really isn't any serious opposition. Donald Trump (if he represents anyone at all) represents a small portion of the right and most of them are extreme. He claims he would get rid of Obamacare but I don't believe him. He said he was for the mandate and then changed his story a couple of days later. Don't know what that was about. Clearly we're stuck with that damn mandate no matter who wins. I don't believe for a second Trump will get rid of it. I don't believe anyone will.

Obamacare opened the door for the government to really get a firm grip on the healthcare industry and they're not going to let that go now. They might rearrange the furniture but they will remain firmly in charge. They really have us by the balls now.

Watch for any mention of "mental health" in the "debate". That will be the red flag. In the future, if you resist, you will be deemed mentally ill and there will be nowhere to hide because the government will own the mental health system.

a reply to: TechniXcality

Depends on where you think this country is and where it's going.

Depends on what you mean by radical change.

Trump would be a radical change, simply by wanting to reverse some weird schnit of the past 20 yrs and put America first.

Bernie and Hillary, not so much because they would just be moving the country in the same direction as now, only a lot faster.

Hillary shouldn't be in politics at all, let alone running for potus, btw.

Trump 2016.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Hillary shouldn't be in politics at all, let alone running for potus, btw.

Hillary should be in an orange jumpsuit with a number on the front and back
Or , one of those one size fits all shirts (with no sleeves)

a reply to: TechniXcality

On Trump. He's not a conservative OR a liberal. He's a willow tree, swaying in the breeze, taking the positions and saying the words that he thinks will make him more popular and more money, then backtracking when he discovers how ridiculous his words are. He would bring about radical change (an increase in racism, hatred and fear), but it would only escalate the fall of our once-great nation.

I would love to see Bernie win and implement that "massive redistribution of wealth" from the elite to the people, where it once was. But I don't think those elites would let that happen. They have too much invested in the original redistribution of wealth into their pockets AND they have power in (greedy) Congress which would mean that Bernie probably would get nothing done. I still support him.

Hillary would be the person to keep the status quo and offer the least radical change AND transition a smooth transition of power. People say "she's a criminal", but I don't say that about people unless and until they are found guilty of a crime. I am not advocating for her, but will probably end up voting for her or not voting. I simply don't know yet what I'll do anymore.

a reply to: TechniXcality

Who of these three candidates will offer the least amount of radical change, and who will best be suited to maintain smooth transition of power in the republic? From what I see, and I am in no way advocating voting for Hillary she represents the least amount of radical change and subsequent civil unrest if elected.

Man, one of the best OP's ever, or at least its one of my favorites. That's a fantastic question.

I "think", meaning my guess is, that Clinton will be the least radical of the candidates. My guess is, as well, that the way to test that is to see who Wall Street backs, because Wall Street is all about continuity. Wall Street seriously suffers in times of uncertainty and chaos.

So, again, my guess is Clinton for several reasons. First, Clinton hasn't had an original thought in forever. She's a complete cynic and will say anything to get elected. So for example today she's talking about dismantling the gun industry........but its all talk, she's just playing to the base. She talks big about immigration reform, but she won't take any significant action other than offering up token legislation ideas which will get crushed in the House. So, she'll do what Democrats have done for the last 70 years, i.e., ignore the borders and tell Border Patrol to look the other way.

My concern about Trump is that as a stumble bum with no real core, Trump could accidentally be the most radical because he has no idea what he's doing. He could easily start a trade war with China which means the Walmart shelves would be bare; he might scare the Russians into invading Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Ukraine as a pre-emptive strike. Trump is just plain dangerous.

I suspect if Trump or Cruz is a candidate in the general election, a lot of people like myself will simply sit this one out. I can't vote for Clinton on moral grounds, so..........I'll just sit at home and watch the MSM elect Clinton.