Clinton because she has proven to be the more stable of the two. Its really not a hard choice. It is logically unsound to give the type of impulsive human being that Donald projects himself to be the responsibilities of executive office.... with an army.

What's funny, though, is Clinton has been the more Warhawky of the two. We'll soon have a debate where the Republican was against the Iraq war, is an isolationist, and is against free trade, while the Democrat is in favor of free trade, was married to the architect of some of the most important free trade agreements, and voted for both the Afghan and Iraq wars.

I have such a morbid curiosity about how these debates will go... hell, Gary Johnson has a great chance of hitting 15% and participating as well.

I can't remember who it was that suggested Trump should select Monica Lewinsky as his running mate. But that would be brilliant.

If it's gonna be a shit show we might as well go all out!

That is terribly disgusting that I laughed in shock lol

Why? She's a very ordinary politician.

and Trump is a whole differnt issue. He's a manchild. He doesn't think the Judge in the "Trump University" case can be impartial because he's "mexican" (which, to be clear...he isn't. He was born in Indiana.), He throws tantrums on Twitter when people say mean things about him.

He also doesn't even seem to care about lieing. I'm not even 100% he knows you're not supposed to do that...This is the guy that claimed that Ted Cruz's father was with Lee Harvey Oswald before he was shot.

This is also the same guy who said...this:

"I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down," the Republican presidential candidate said at a Nov. 21 rally in Birmingham, Ala. "And I watched in Jersey City, N.J., where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering."

He doesn't seem to give a shit if what he's saying is true. That is an insane trait in someone running for President.

Clinton clinched the nomination??
Ummm....do you have a source for this? Because according to the law, she doesn't clinch it until the superdelegates vote

nominating a candidate with an FBI investigation and a pending indictment, while having the head of the FBI a lifelong republican...

brilliant move as always Democrats... o.0

Oh I won't argue that Trump is positively bizarre and gives no thought to how true something is before he says it. He's truly remarkable in that I'm not sure he's even consciously aware that he's lying at this point, as the veracity of his statements never actually cross his mind. By lying so regularly people have just stopped giving a crap as one just accepts that their five year old sibling is prone to exaggeration and such. The man has lied both in ways that help and hurt him, and he just denies it when people object. I've never seen anything like it.

That said, Clinton seems positively devoid of even an ounce of integrity. I didn't mean to say she's somehow "worse" than trump, but rather that if you're voting to avoid a "bad person" as you put it, I suspect you'll have to look outside of these two for your candidate lol

She hasn't definitively clinched anything yet, let's be fair here. The supers most likely won't flip unless the FBI recommends indictment, obviously, but that's there's a clear distinction between Supers and pledged delegates. And as Clinton should know from 2008, the Supers aren't loyal until they're 100% forced to lock in.

We've still got a month to go before we are completely positive of the match-up we're getting, and for the first time in years, literally anything could happen between now and July with this crazy cycle. I'm fairly certain CNN is only reporting on this to try and hush down California's primary on Tuesday and wash Sanders away quietly.