[quote=@Techspert]
[@DarkwolfX37]

I don't disagree that neither is entirely optimal. But Donald Trump actually has a serious passion for America and repairing the problems in the country. Yes, he's had failed businesses, but of all of them, only six have filed for bankruptcy. Out of how many? 516. Only six out of five hundred sixteen is a .01162790697 failure record, which is marvelous. We can see eye to eye on Hillary, so that's less of an issue, but Donald Trump's greatest characteristic is the fact that he's anti-establishment. This is the reason the GOP has turned against him, and if he pulls the presidency, Clinton and several "Republicans" are going down with the ship as he ushers in an extremely smaller government. A supposed FBI source has claimed that nearly half of the federal government is so entangled in the Clinton Foundation's crimes that indicting her for the emails alone would be political (and perhaps physical) suicide. Because it would dig up old graves and expose all these corrupt politicians, there were two scenarios. One, risk total government collapse by pulling the entire system down, or two, the case would result in a Not Guilty because they're "too big to take down." This same source also says the FBI is trying to release this gradually, pulling each piece out one at a time like a Jenga game so they can be replaced as they're removed. But if the FBI takes down the Foundation with this most recent investigation, it could be strong enough to destroy all of them but prevent the destruction of the government. Trump is for this goal and wants the corruption removed. I won't even deny that he's probably lied (though the media twists his words into untruths more often than not), but any lies haven't obscured the truth of his campaign. America needs a non-politician (and even Franklin (I believe it was) said the government should be cleansed of all members every twenty years) to guide it, and with its current financial state, a businessman would suit it quite well.
[/quote]

I agree with that founding father, and it wouldn't surprise me if it were Franklin because he was the best founder. The problem is, he IS a politician. He's the best politician out of every candidate who ran republican. Being a politician just means gaining support. In fact, the worst politician who ran for 2016 was Sanders because he was actually honest and gave his real policies from the start. And a businessman who has 510 or so failed businesses (bankruptcy isn't the only sign of failure, it's just the most severe. A businesses is either stagnant, successful, or a failure. Very few of his businesses were successful and just as few were stagnant.) isn't the kind we need to fix the financial situation. Especially since his successful businesses are also mostly just things he's sold his name to, even. He's definitely not worse than Hillary, but he's not better than her, when it comes to who would make a good president. Not to mention that his first pick for his cabinet is his own daughter. AND that he's "anti-establishment" yet has spent the past X years buying politicians which is what keeps the establishment in place. He didn't even fund his own campaign like he claims to have, he just gave himself a loan which means he could pay himself back with money raised from donations. 

The best thing that could possibly happen is that they are both killed during the first debate. It would have to be then, because if they wait until one is elected then we get either a mystery box from Hillary or a retard from Donald, and if one dies and one survives, even if they're so damaged that they can't be president, it would be a clusterfuck from the survivor. But no terrorist is going to do it because they know the US will be more damaged by either of them winning than any terrorist acts.