The "anything goes" mentality

[whichphilosophy]

You may well get members of the Republican party who are racist. However that does not mean the may rank and file are racist and the Republican Party is inhrently racist. About 60 years ago there was racism because of segregation and discrimination.

There is always the possibility of ultra right wing groups with small membership who would try to infiltrate the party.
Certainly the Latin and Afro American members of the Republican party are not likely to be racist against those of their own ethnic background.

Gee whiz WP, your apologetics are getting even weaker. Who ya planning to vote for?

It's self evident in politics. In the same vein the communist party of America supports Hilary but it doesn't mean she is communist.
It's a matter of the least worst. However, I'm not American. I wouldn't vote for either of them. The mud slinging campaigns are just weapons of mass distraction to divert the voters from the real issues, such as spiralling debts (not yet a real problem), and the economy.

 

[Elixir]

Gee whiz WP, your apologetics are getting even weaker. Who ya planning to vote for?

It's self evident in politics. In the same vein the communist party of America supports Hilary but it doesn't mean she is communist.
It's a matter of the least worst. However, I'm not American. I wouldn't vote for either of them. The mud slinging campaigns are just weapons of mass distraction to divert the voters from the real issues, such as spiralling debts (not yet a real problem), and the economy.

Well, it is precisely the economy that forces me to hold my nose and vote for Clinton. She will be pressured to nominate justices who will argue against letting ever more money into our political system, even though it goes against her self-interest. Somewhere down the line I'd expect that to result in more representation for the middle class and a less dramatically uneven distribution of wealth. Trump would keep rigging the economy to his own benefit, as he has done all his life through manipulations and his "contributions".

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's self evident in politics. In the same vein the communist party of America supports Hilary but it doesn't mean she is communist.
It's a matter of the least worst. However, I'm not American. I wouldn't vote for either of them. The mud slinging campaigns are just weapons of mass distraction to divert the voters from the real issues, such as spiralling debts (not yet a real problem), and the economy.

Well, it is precisely the economy that forces me to hold my nose and vote for Clinton. She will be pressured to nominate justices who will argue against letting ever more money into our political system, even though it goes against her self-interest. Somewhere down the line I'd expect that to result in more representation for the middle class and a less dramatically uneven distribution of wealth. Trump would keep rigging the economy to his own benefit, as he has done all his life through manipulations and his "contributions".

I am not sure that she would accept such pressures given she is pretty obstinate. Both I am sure will seek to play the system.

In the UK judges used to be appointed by the House of Lords but now recommendations are made by the independent Judicial Appointments Commission on merit. However the Lord Chancellor has a right to reject names but must do so in writing. The Prime Minister nor the Queen have this power. You do not hear about Conservative or Labour judges; just judges.

This may be on method to look at but I am sure there would be flaws in whatever method is used. However the UK public doesn't complain about its judges and prefers its Superior Court system over the Eu's court. It's an invitation to a conflict of interest if the President appoints judges so this system should be changed.