US Elections: the choice between the greatest and the second greatest evil

hillary-clinton-a-10241-530x398One month into the primaries, the number of candidates from which the next President of the United States will be chosen has narrowed down to four. On the Democrat side, Hillary Clinton enjoys a comfortable lead over left-winger Bernie Sanders, while the race for the Republican ticket appears to be a tad narrower, with Donald Trump nevertheless clearly ahead of Ted Cruz.

Donald vs. Hillary is thus the likely set-up, and this should fill us all with grave concern. Neither of the two is even remotely desirable as a leader for the world’s single remaining super-power.

Hillary Clinton has been craving to be President ever since her husband Bill left the White House. What makes her particularly undesirable as a US President is not only her proven lack of responsibility (e.g. with regard to her e-mail scandal) and her greed for personal enrichment (vide the Whitewater affair), but also her radical anti-life and anti-family agenda: she is the preferred candidate of the abortion and nowadays, if only as a result of her political opportunism, presents herself also as a radical supporter of the homo-agenda. In a recent interview she was neither able nor willing to name any circumstance under which it might be appropriate to protect the unborn child against being wilfully murdered; her praise of the Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges Decision also suggests that she adheres to the view that the Court should be a lawmaking rather than a judiciary body, which leaves us expecting the worst when appointing future judges.

Bernie Sanders’s character may be less deficient than Hillary’s, but his social agenda is hardly better than hers. Anyway, he is now so far behind, and enjoys so much less support within the Democratic Party’s establishment, that we clearly need not expect him to be the Democrat candidate.

With this sombre picture on the Democratic side, should we hope that the Republicans win the Presidency?

Perhaps not, if the Republican candidate really is going to be Donald Trump.

It is not at all clear what Donald’s political agenda really is going to look like, besides going around and insulting people. And while his agenda doesn’t come out clearly, his personal character is all too well known: this is a man with absolutely no moral principles, loud-mouthed and aggressive, a man with no political experience but a rather questionable reputation as a business tycoon. And while his political ideas are so unclear, his rhetoric reminds us of Adolf Hitler’s early years. Not that we want to insinuate that he is planning to build death camps and gas chambers, but his way of talking is really frightening.

Even many Republican politicians such as (perhaps rather counter-productively) Mitt Romney warn against Donald Trump, and so do (maybe less counterproductively) leading Christian intellectuals such as Robert George and George Weigel. Let us just hope that their voices will be heard while it is still time.

This leaves us with Ted Cruz. The media describe him as “radical”, “ultra-conservative”, and “fundamentalist” – but if such defamatory language comes from liberal journalists it should probably rather be taken as an attestation of quality. And whatever else can be said about him, Cruz at least has the advantage of being the only candidate still in the race who is neither Donald Trump nor a Democrat.

So let us all hope that in the end the Republican electorate still can be prevented from nominating Donald Trump as presidential candidate.

As the world’s single super-power, the United States still look unlikely to be overcome by an outside enemy. But with candidates such as Hillary and Donald, the real danger comes from the inside.