Which is Worse?

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump should be President of the United States.

Clinton is a congenital liar, doing everything possible to obscure, misdirect, or confuse when the truth hurts her political ambitions—and she has done this for over 30 years with relative impunity. Trump is a fabulist. He makes stuff up because it sounds good (to him) and serves his needs. When he doesn't have a grasp of the issues, he wings it with "facts" that he fabricates on his own.

Clinton is corrupt—not just a little, like all politicians—but a lot. Her tight association with the Clinton foundation while Secretary of State indicates that she has parlayed government favors for massive donations that flow not to the needy, but to her and her husband. And often, the "donations" come from foreign entities who are not our friends. Her actions often cost the taxpayers money, sometimes a lot of money, and if it weren't for her star celebrity among Democrats, her actions are indictable as criminal offenses. Many, many politicians have gone to jail for much, much less. Trump is unscrupulous, often screwing small business who have provided services to his many companies, declaring bankruptcy when convenient, and otherwise bullying business associates. There is nothing criminal in what Trump has done, but there's plenty that is unethical.

Clinton is incompetent. It is laughable that she claims impressive foreign policy "experience." America's foreign policy on her watch was an unmitigated disaster with failures in Eastern Europe, throughout the Middle East and in Asia. In fact, she herself is hard-pressed to name a single verifiable accomplishment (because there are none). Trump is unschooled. He appears to have no in-depth understanding of foreign policy, tends to shoot from the hip, and is, at best, one question deep.

The current meme is that Trump does not have the temperament to be president. That may be true, but there is clear and compelling evidence that Clinton is vindictive, mercurial, and two-faced, projecting an artificial calm that belies the rage of political entitlement.

Of late, Clinton has been questioning Trump's businesses and his business leadership, suggesting that if he can't run his companies, he can't run the country. The irony of this contention is delicious. Hillary has almost no private sector experience (and the experience she has is tainted by scandal). She has never run a company, never produced a product, never met a payroll in the private sector, never dealt with the regulatory maze. Over the past eight years, her party has driven the economy into the gutter, has stifled the growth of small businesses, has accelerated "income inequality," has crushed middle class wages. And she has the gall to suggest that she can run the economy!

To her credit, Clinton is politically disciplined and focused. Her handlers give her a meme, define a set of narratives, and she laser-focuses on them. Trump is the polar opposite. He seems incapable of disciple or focus, free-associating in front of audiences and failing to attack Clinton effectively. He goes so far off-topic that he muddles his message and created self-inflicted wounds.

We have two BAD choices. The question continues to be which is worse?