I remember telling people on this board that Obama was a warmonger and he has since become the President that has delivered the most death and destruction of any of his predecessors. Killary thinks he is too soft and is always urging a tougher stance. Voting for her is a guarantee that you are voting for perpetual war. Of course if you live in Canada you have the luxury of knowing that the odds of us getting bombed by the US are really low but that is the case whether Trump or Clinton get elected.
I remember when I'd just started paying attention to this election (around the end of March, back when Bernie was still a mathematical possiblity to be Dem nominee), and I had a similar thought. The only danger to Canadian residents is if Hillary starts a war with Russia and we get bombed by Russia, which overall is probably not too likely. But many other places in the world have great reason to fear a Clinton presidency. This is quite easy to see when comparing Clinton and Bernie. It's quite painful when comparing Clinton and Trump.
This has evolved into a peculiar perception that most Hillary supporters would probably prefer the outcome of a Trump presidency, and most Trump suppoters would prefer the outcome of a Hillary presidency.
After all, why do all the supposedly hateful racist Islamophobes (Trump suppoters) claim to have an issue with Hillary's crimes against Middle Eastern countries? You'd think if they really hated Muslims that much, they'd support the candidate with a proven track record of destroying even the decent (Libya) Middle Eastern countries resulting in millions of Muslim deaths.
And why do all of Hillary's supporters, supposedly the poor, the downtrodden, the oppressed, the working class...why do they support the establishment candidate who is the pro-TPP and is basically owned by big business? You'd think they would support the anti-establishment candidate who is against the TPP and wants to promote American jobs.
It seems totally backwards to me.