First of all, I respect your opinions on this and don't fully disagree Hive account@dantheman.

It is interesting to me that there is an underlying assumption that I support Clinton. Yes, two devils. I don't believe we had a good choice, but I do think that of Clinton v. Trump, Clinton was a better choice because she is level-headed in her approach. She has also done work to repair her relationship with women and the community of color within America which is very important. As she is less internally divisive for the United States, she is a more logical choice than a man whose entire campaign has been avidly supported by the KKK, a white terrorist group I have personal experience being targeted by. So yes, I do have "cognitive biases" even though I do understand some reasons why a human could support Trump. For example, the perceived threat to white culture through technological advancement and outsourcing of jobs. That's a big deal. I get it. I'd love to support action toward creating a niche for these individuals but NOT at the expense of everyone who is not white, and that is precisely what Trump has been doing.

Trump has been intentionally polarizing from day one. I didn't call his voters idiots so that was not my conclusion. It was more of "you made this mess, fuck you." The term idiocracy was a reference to being ruled by an idiot. I did question intelligence when I said "how stupid are you." Why? I think a lot of ignorance had to go into this election for this to be the outcome. I mean, people voted for him without seeing his tax returns. And how many times have I heard it said that because he has no experience, he's a better choice since he won't be able to get anything done? Come on! He has a VP with plenty of experience and he has a mouth that insults every creature not yielding to his immediate expectations. He will be taking that with him when he talks with leaders of other countries with whom America's ties require diplomacy and finesse to be maintained. That in itself is a nightmare.

It would have been better if we had pulled the system down and put up a real candidate, but we didn't. Perhaps Trump will inspire that action. I don't know. What I do know is that Trump's antics pose a direct threat to the physical safety of me and my family. And those who voted for him may have real reasons other than xenophobia and sexism, but they still chose to support someone who is openly hateful and encourages American citizens to harm each other. Who hasn't even tried to temper it. There is no empathy in that action. In fact, there is a distinct lack. When it is an option, make a choice that does not support assaulting women and minorities or any of the many other groups he has so inarticulately disparaged.

As to Hillary supporting her husband, I wish I had the energy to get into a discussion on sexism and power right now. There is plenty wrong there, but the main take away is that his actions were also crimes against her and as a woman, she stands to lose more than he does by stepping away from him. That doesn't even touch on potential abuse/victim/survivor scenarios that may be at play. If she hadn't shifted her language around survivors of sexual violence, I would still be as vocally anti-HC as I am anti-Trump. But she did which shows a very important characteristic: she listens and takes action based on the feedback she receives. The Trump equivalent has been deleting abusive tweets.

But more importantly than empathy is logic: America elected a man who, again, has incited violence WITHIN OUR BORDERS openly and with delight. That IS unintelligent. The president is supposed lead our country and protect its citizenry, but we've chosen a man who has done the opposite from day one.