A pretty well reasoned and quite rational response to the absolute lunacy going on in the country.

Both candidates are detestable in their own lovely ways, and personally, I think the best case scenario would have been for a small bomb to go off on stage during the last debate and be rid of them both for us - but I guess we missed that boat. I kid, I kid, mostly...

As you say, it's been an election very much the result and cause of wild rhetoric going out of control. On one side is the most Machiavellian, vile woman who I am about 70% sure actually will rig the election (though that's not to say she wouldn't win anyways). And on the other is the most cartoonishly absurd egoist, who's policies include violating the charter of human rights and freedoms - I'm sure in reaction to people being fed up with regressive nonsense.

For the record though, I don't think Trump has ever actually sexually harassed these women he's talking about. As much as the media likes to portray trump as a big goblin, it never seems to have occurred to anyone that some women might actually see a famous presidential canidate with billions of dollars as somehow desirable. In some strange scenarios, some "hu-mans" might actually derive pleasure from being touched in androgynous zones. The freaks.

I don't feel that Russia is a real threat to anyone, in any way- and it's more the perception of Russia that people have that is the problem. Is Putin anti-homosexual? Sure, but people forget what kind of hell-hole Russia was in the 90s before him. He and many others seriously cleaned that country up. Did he invade Crimea? The way I understand it, the population voted to rejoin Russia, twice. So they did.

Of course, it was in Russia's self-interest, but the US is hardly guilt-free of that sort of thing itself. For some reason it's cool to hate Russia, but A-OK to buddy up with Saudi Arabia.

What I do have to say is what a huge disappointment this election, maybe even greater than the Democrats turning inside out to eviscerate the only decency it still had within it, was how the independents just completely dropped the ball. Jill Stein, Gary Johnson? What the heck happened you guys? You had a chance to show people that there's other voices than these two lunatics that could be running the country in the next few months.

A very disappointing and troubling election to be sure. 

Okay seriously, who do people seem so determined to hate Hillary so much? Every single thing I have seen with one or two exceptions show me she is a pretty reasonable person. I don't expect her to be a saint, but heck, if she was elected president last time instead of Obama she would probably have done at least as good of a job as he has done (and yeah maybe that's not the best). She is not going to rig the election. If she had or could, she would have done it last time.

Yes, the DNC did sort of conspire to keep Sanders out, but that was because Sanders just didn't really fit the ticket the leadership of the DNC wanted to push. That's kinda how political parties work. That is not 'rigging'. That is working out a strategy to convince people to keep someone you don't agree from having the support of the party. And as for third party candidates? Third party candidates never win. The whole system in the USA is set up for two and only two parties. The only reason Sanders got as far is because he was a Democrat. The only reason Trump got that far is because he was a Republican. The difference is that the DNC was more sneaky about what to do with Sanders and the RNC were too incompetent to stop Trump.

And on the subject of Russia, Putin doesn't particularly seem like anyone's friend. He was implicated in a huge corruption scandal as one of the kingpins of the some of what the Panama Papers was talking about if I recall currently. I also don't doubt at all that he is behind a lot of the hacking that gave Wikileaks it's material. Even if I am sure he probably did everyone in the USA a favor in the long run by exposing how the DNC did their best to keep Sanders out and maybe some of Hillary's comments, the national ties Wikileaks has developed with Russia has only hurt it's credibility. Already the implication that some documents are forged or embellished is being thrown around. And this isn't the only time Russia has tried to manipulate elections. Russia is clearly and decisively trying to manipulate world politics in it's favor. Do they have grievances with the USA? Yeah probably. But Putin has seen fit to approach them in a really alarming way, and now both sides seem ready to start the cold war again. You could call it buying into the propaganda if you want, but on balance Putin seems to be making the effort to at least seem threatening and pushing what power he does have as far as he can.

But okay look. Maybe Hillary is dishonest and troublesome and maybe Putin is more reasonable then I am making him out to be. I still don't think Hillary is going to destroy the world, and I still feel unconformable about what Putin may be up to. I still think Hillary getting elected is over all a good thing, even if I much rather it be Sanders. And if Hillary messes this up, well, I am pretty sure she isn't going to be president long, one way or the other.

No, I don't think anyone is going to destroy the world...

I'm a bit tired of the World War III talk already, even though I know people haven't gotten as hysterical about it yet, as they inevitably will. Despite being more of a mob-boss than a president, Putin is very much like Trump and Hillary. A terrible person, drowning in corruption, scandal, and some definitively unethical practice, but none of them are super villains with an itchy finger on nuclear launch button. I don't doubt Russia is doing things to better it's interests - but again, so does the US. Again, why is our "pro-LGBT" election candidate taking campaign money from Saudi Arabia? It's always self-interest, and it's always deplorable.

Speaking of which! Since you asked, I personally, dislike Hillary for being indecisive and pandering, Machiavellian and flagrantly corrupt, ruthless and aggressive, full to the brim of empty promises, potentially ill, and (lest we forget) anti-video game. Who the heck says "my kind of leader" to that bundle of joy? She neither deserves to, nor I personally feel, would excel in governing one of the most influential countries in the world, and I do not trust her decision making skills would be to the benefit of those outside her stakeholders. She is called the corporate candidate for a very literal reason.

And of course, does anything actually need to be said about Trump these days.

As an outsider I just shake my head - but then again, according to Trudeau I'm a misogynist biggot, who probably needs to burn or something - so what do I know.

Hillary has had conservatives going after her since the 90s when she brought up healthcare as the first lady. They have gone after her so long, that it´s become cultural.

Now, I hear a lot of this "they are both equally bad" talk. People say it more as a way to keep friends or look cool and above it all, but no, they are not equally bad. Despite what party you´re in, Trump is a disgrace to the United States. He will weaken not only us, but also our allies. His economic policies alone will launch us into the biggest bubble imaginable and his ego will write checks that our military won´t be able to cash. He lies constantly, more than any politician I´ve ever seen. He´s such a bad candidate, he makes Hillary win by default. There is a reason why no one ex-presidents are supporting him. Republicans had an opening to winning this election, but they´ve failed miserably when they chose him, and deep down inside, they know that.

I don't think anyone is really out to 'destroy the world' either. I seriously don't. Only place I seriously think would possibly start launching nukes unless we stop them is North Korea, because crazy dictators who basically demand they are treated as god and outlaw sarcasm are not the sort of people you want with nukes. Putin I don't think is that stupid. But I also think Putin is determined to be as much of a huge troll about everything.

I am not sure if I am really more scared of Putin launching nukes or something, or if I am more scared of him blatantly bending or breaking every single rule he can until he manages to piss someone off enough that they start launching nukes or something. Yes, Putin is more of a mob boss. A mob boss with nukes. And mob bosses don't tend to respect any kind of law or restraint. But with Putin it's not going to be just all suddenly "Bam! Nukes everywhere!" right away or anything. It's going to be a question of escalation. Question is, do you expect him to back down if it comes to that? I don't, and that scares me.

As for Hillary, it sounds basically like you don't like her because she is a politician. Uh, duh! Like I said, I think Hillary is so warn down at this point, so beat by the system and the people that run it, that of course she thinks the only way to get ahead is to play Machiavellian games of power and hiding everything under a stiff political mask. That's kinda how politicians work you know. Hillary certainly isn't the strongest candidate we could have had, but I honestly thing she is relatively harmless.

Now let me be clear. I don't agree with nearly everything that comes out of her mouth, nor do I exactly 'trust' her. But she is a smart and capable politician with a drive to do what it takes for her agenda, and I think her agenda is at least generally progressive. And anti-videogame? Okay I get she was swept up in the awful ideas of people like Jack Tompson, but that debate is pretty much over. Games are protected speech now, it hasn't been a real hot button issue over here in years, and I am pretty sure she doesn't care any more. All and all, I would have rather had Sanders, but she is definitely no Trump or Putin.

I'm not super into American politics, what with being not-American and all. But yeah, I also thought it was weird to not see the 'third parties' stepping up when the half the world is literally saying things like ~'these are the worst two human beings alive'; If you can't turncoat a staunch republican/democrat now then when are you hoping to?

Hillary is pretty bad. She did well during the first debate as she displayed her maturity as a politician, if a little condescending (which played well into Trump's us vs. them rhetoric) but the second? She was a joke; Calling Trump out on dodging questions when she was doing it herself (from the very first question even), frequently interrupting him with snide remarks (again, after saying she wouldn't and chastising Trump for it), and that little two-minute masturbatory session she engaged in after being asked to say something good about Trump; I've never seen someone fail to take the high ground so spectacularly (which is only made worse by her, more or less, claiming to do so - that's your high road Mrs. Clinton?). She was so terrible that she actually made Trump look good.

Obviously Trump's a fool (clean coal? lol) and selecting pretty much anyone at random would lead to a less dangerous president; this includes Hillary Clinton. From what I've seen though, I can understand people considering her as a bad candidate as more than ~'a fad'. I haven't seen the third debate yet so hopefully she can at least keep the mask on this time; I expect at least that much from a politician.

I'd like to be able to say something a little more about policy but they don't seem super invested in selling that; Hillary is doing so a little at least, but mostly empty stuff. Two minutes is a short time to expect fine detail, but they frequently go over and she could spend that time colouring in her middle class utopian doodle rather than defaming a man who seems intent on doing so himself.

I think it reflects pretty poorly on America when I can list out all these irredeemable qualities of one of your presidential candidates and the oft cynical response of, "Yeah, she's a politician".

Small heads up America, just like the rest of the world doesn't seem to have problems with gun violence, a good portion the rest of the world leaders aren't pieces of corrupt garbage. Maybe you missed the memo. Trudeau and Harper before him, Merkel, and Cameron are all very flawed individuals, but none of them are what I might consider a "terrible human being".

Just as you should "be the change you want to see" you should vote for the change you want to see. Hillary (and hopefully Trump), should not be that for anyone.

And like I said, third parties in America are basically a joke due to the way the system in set up. In America your party either wins or it doesn't and there is no proportional representation, and you vote for whoever the party decides should run and that's that. Third party candidates who don't pool very well get shafted in the debate, and they usually don't poll well because people automatically assume a third party will never win, which in turn makes it so they never do. Sanders and Trump both managed to start grassroots movements within the parties. Sanders lost the nomination, but he has done his best to hold on to the movement and push Hillary to be more progressive. Trump won the nomination, but he is basically causing his party to fall apart.

If Hillary wins and does a good job, well great. If she wins and does a bad job, more and more people within the party are going to turn on her and her allies. If she loses to Trump his party will start to unify around the reactionary mindset that got him this far, and that's no good for any sane person. If she looses to a third party candidate... well that's pretty much impossible. Maybe next election things will be better.

But come on. Are you really saying that America is alone in this? I mean, I totally am with you that the system has to be changed over here and that most of the people in power are pretty crappy. But I don't see much different in many places in the world, and a significant percentage are much much worse. Sure, maybe I probably would rather live in Canada (or depending on what happens within the next few months maybe Iceland), and I won't deny that the USA has huge huge problems, but there are terrible people in charge of terrible governments everywhere and all things considered the USA is still I think one of the better places to live.

And Hillary is still I think one of the more competent people to take charge of the presidency. That's what it comes down to. No, I don't necessarily trust her, but frankly I wouldn't trust even Sanders completely. Nor should I. Politics works best when you don't trust those in charge. I feel a lot more comfortable knowing how much scrutiny she is under, even if 90% of it is bullshit. Would I rather someone else? Of course! But Hillary isn't the devil.

Heck, Trump and Putin (probably) aren't the devil either. Trump is just a childish jerk who probably has an actual mental disorder, and Putin probably is just getting more and more fed up with being told to play nice by a self appointed mother to the whole world. There are very few actual monsters in the world. Heck I am even willing to admit that ISIS probably isn't completely filled with irredeemable monsters, just mostly people angry and lashing out at the world not going their way (bit like Trump's followers really ). Hillary isn't anywhere near that level, and even if she was she is still a person with her own ambitions and moral code, not a evil mastermind bent on destroying everything you hold dear because of eeeevvvviiiillll. *wiggles fingers*

Also @Darq: The third debate I think was a victory for Hillary, but Trump actually didn't do that badly. Trump started out surprisingly strong but shot himself in the foot by saying something really dumb like he always does. He said he might not step aside peacefully if he lost, and while I am sure he was mostly thinking about the 2000 election where there was a huge deal over Florida being too close to call, it did cause many people on both sides to freak out.
 

Over half of the things written about Hillary in the last 25 years is either false or people trying too hard to take her down. She´s not perfect, but she´s also not as bad as her opponents make her out to be.

Though honestly it's hard not to doubt her sometimes. I just think the worst thing that will happen with Hillary in charge is that nothing changes and the in the next election the options may be better. Trump is probably going to really be a nightmare though, intentionally or not.

I am not an American either (French Canadian), but I can safely say that no matter which democratic country you live in at the moment, things look bleak and depressing. It's pretty much a worldwide problem that we've allowed corruption to run rampant and people are starting to move more towards the extreme opinions, and rally behind people like Trump.

I also have to disagree with Chaosian about Hillary Clinton. Speaking from my own knowledge of the twisted, corrupt and flawed world of Quebec politics, I know that it's extremely easy for those who choose to enter the race to lead a piece of land, no matter how large, to fall into the traps. How difficult it often seems to be to refuse these brown envelopes. As for the public, it's fairly obvious that this whole circus has tired them and brought unprecedented levels of cynicism.

Hillary represents a lot of things. Yeah, she's trying to pander to everyone. Yeah, she more than likely has a few secrets. Yeah, she's married to a Democrat ex-president who was caught in a sex scandal. Yeah, since she's a Democrat, if she wins we might see an Obama-like Age again where all the good ideas she brings forward get shot down by the Republicans, leaving the "most powerful person in America" ironically with little power in a lot of important spheres of American society. I also wouldn't be surprised if a lot of Americans go away from her simply because she's a woman. Does she lie? Yes. (Not nearly as much as Trump, though, you must at least admit this.) Does she have projects in her platform that won't go the way many Americans want to go? Yes, very likely. The disadvantage of having only two major parties is that you must choose between only two different "teams", each which has plans you like and others you don't. No matter which side you choose, there will be things you disagree with. I find it unfair to tie Bill Clinton's, ahem, more peculiar controversies to her current campaign.

Now let's look at her adversary. Donald Trump, a billionnaire with a large history of schemes and failures. A man who has belittled the reporters he disliked, in particular those who were women or disabled. A man who has very radical and dangerous views on how to lead America, mostly by applying laws and tactics that target the people who are the least desired by the racist, xenophobic part of the population. Many of his ideas have been directly compared to Hitler's, although even if that comparison was impossible, the ideas he brings forward are rather extreme. The allegations of sexual harassment are still only that, allegations, so unless a deeper investigation is made, we won't know for sure - but these potentially true cases of harassment, coupled with his little "locker room talk" of "grabbing women by the p***y", show him as a man with pretty despicable views on women. And almost everyone else who isn't a white, straight American adult man. Oh, by the way, have you seen all of his meltdowns on Twitter? And of course, his last ideas were to have his followers discreetly spy on voting centers to "make sure things aren't rigged" (basically encouraging bullying towards those who vote Democrat). He has planted that impression that things are rigged into the heads of his followers, so that when Hillary loses, Trump voters will scream out and call things rigged. Monday, I watch a stream and the guy explained that he voted ahead of time, a practice that has been in place for a long time to accomodate those who can't vote on the actual day of the Elections (he also put the "I Voted" sticker on himself), and a nearly stereotypical Trump follower walked up to him and yelled that things were rigged because the streamer voted ahead of time. Whether you like it or not, Donald Trump's latest tactic has further broken the trust a lot of Americans had in the voting system (that's not to say it wasn't already in kind of a bad shape), which means that whatever tensions existed before November 8th will just grow worse if Hillary is elected. No matter which way you look at it, Trump's mere presence on the political scene in the United States has horribly tainted said scene.

I guess it's pretty obvious now who I would vote for, but I need to say that it's really a case of the lesser of two evils. I'd vote Democrat mostly because the little pile of things I disagree with in the Democratic platform is a molehill compared to the mountain of things I disagree with in the Republican platform. Adding to this, whatever you wish to believe, Hillary would likely be a much more professional president, as she already has ties with a lot of people in America and overseas, as well as plenty of past experience, while Trump is by all accounts a newcomer to the political gig and is about as diplomatic as a redneck.

Even if Trump loses, he has won on many fields. He has discredited his opponent so much, and has put such poisonous ideas in the brains of the people who believe him, that no matter the end result on November 8, America will end up with even bigger trust issues than we've ever seen in the Obama years. And of course, we are talking about Trump's followers, who might just blindly believe the biggest BS as long as it goes against Democrats, which includes "documentaries" like this one. The campaign has also tainted the Republican party, which will need a long time before it can begin to recover. Finally, it has given him plenty of spotlight for whatever next projects he decides to work on - with an army of passionate Americans behind him, and this, even if he leaves politics.

The next four years will be bleak. It really is almost like that horror movie tagline. Whoever wins, [America] lose. It's pretty much down to whether you want a mediocre four years, or an absolutely terrible four years.

I don't think it's nearly as bleak and depressing as you may think. There have been a lot of fundamental social changes within the last few decades that the world's governments and many of the world's corporations have to catch up with, and they are filled with stubborn and slow people who are holding on to a power structure that I think the world is growing out of. I honestly suspect that a fairly sizable number of people really won't notice or care. Provided Russia doesn't nuke us all anyway.
 
For better or worse more and more power is falling into the hands of a sort of global decentralized technocracy and traditional ideas of government are being looked at with distrust. There are a lot of technical experts working hard behind the scenes to build alternative systems that work independently of government oversight and lots of hackers who build better and better tools to subvert or disrupt governments or institutions.

I suspect very strongly that the complicated bureaucracy needed for large governments and most corporations is becoming completely unbearable and more people are turning to using something more like adhocracy to solve more and more problems outside traditional power structures. It may be that the lessons of open source style development is taking root in society at a much deeper level then ever before.

Though, like I sort of was saying before, the question of if a sort of 'technocratic democracy' will be a viable replacement for other forms of government is one I think Iceland may be on the verge of answering already, since many of the members of the Pirate Party are technology experts and programmers and are possibly working to leverage advantages like cold weather and abundant geothermal power to create/attract a powerful data canter industry. Will be interesting to see the results of that little experiment and if it results in a new sort of open government, one controlled too much by corporate interests, or just falls apart all together.

In the meantime I suspect that depending on what the USA decides to do there could be many outcomes. If the USA pushes Russia too much there is a possibility of nuclear war. Because fact is that it's nuclear arsenal is one of the few real assets Russia has left to get it's way and reverse what it sees as a steady decline in power and resources, and you can bet Putin would be the type to at least seriously conciser using them if he feels he is backed into a corner with no way out. I don't think either side really wants to have it come to that, and there is still negotiation to do though. North Korea is another problem entirely though, and I am not sure what can be done there.

I think there may come a point, if we have not gone way past it already, where the best thing to do is disengage. The USA really needs to stop trying to be the world's mom or police. Problem is, I am not sure how to do that without leaving a lot of people high and dry. I suspect that sooner or later things are going to change for the better though. There is going to be a lot of pressure to avoid war I think, and anything short of that is probably going to be more annoying then dangerous to most people.

Maybe this is naive of me to say, but I do think there is going to be some big changes in the world, and I think most of them will end up being for the better. The current way of doing things is hardly benefiting anyone anymore. People in power can't get away with things as much anymore. Hillary is going to have to work really hard to untangle this mess and all eyes are going to be on her, and there is no way she can do it by being dumb about it. And she isn't dumb no matter what her faults. But we will see.