posted on May, 1 2016 @ 11:47 PM
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..