Is there a conservative case for voting for Hillary?

I don’t think so. What conservative would vote for a corrupt, dishonest, vindictive left-liberal with a long record of disregarding the law?

If anyone can make a persuasive case for doing so, it probably would be the estimable David Frum. He undertakes the task here.

In my view, Frum makes a decent conservative case for not backing Donald Trump, but comes up well short of a case for backing Clinton.

The essence of Frum’s case for a Clinton vote consists of a list of modest virtue he thinks Clinton possesses but Trump does not:

[Clinton] is a patriot. She will uphold the sovereignty and independence of the United States. She will defend allies. She will execute the laws with reasonable impartiality. . . .She will not outright defy legality altogether. Above all, she can govern herself; the first indispensable qualification for governing others.

Frum offers no support for any of these propositions. I dispute all but the first and the last of them.

Clinton is a transnationalist who, almost certainly will mimic President Obama’s tendency of ceding authority (i.e., sovereignty) to international bodies. (Trump, I’m pretty sure, will not.)

To say that Hillary will execute the laws with reasonable impartiality mystifies me. The Clintons are masters of playing favorites. Hillary’s recent discussion of what she’s looking for in Supreme Court Justices, in which she didn’t even mention the Constitution, undercuts Frum’s claim.

As for “defying legality,” Hillary has repeatedly demonstrated that she thinks the rules that govern others don’t apply to her. She supports President Obama’s lawless rule by executive order.

I suppose the key word for Frum is “altogether.” I doubt that either she or Trump would defy law “altogether.” But neither candidate gives me confidence that he/she will be constrained much by law. If that’s the test, it favors voting for neither candidate, not voting for Hillary.

Hillary is, I assume, patriotic. But given her subordination of U.S. interests to those of donors to her Foundation, some of whom are not friends of America, she’s patriotic only in a weak sense.

Other things being equal, she may put American interests first. But things aren’t equal when her personal interests are at stake.

Can Hillary govern herself? Yes, but again only in a weak sense. She has often let her lust for power and money rule her judgment. The intermingling of Clinton Foundation interests with State Department business is only the latest example.

Hillary destroys much of what she touches. Of her two closest Rose Law Firm friends, one ended up in prison and the other committed suicide under the strain of trying to defend her and live with himself. Respected public servants like Ken Starr and now James Comey have had their reputations stained if not ruined for examining Clinton scandals, even though neither one prosecuted a Clinton or recommended doing so.

I don’t say that Hillary would destroy America (nor would Trump). However, she would give us a very rough ride.

Conservatives who believe that Trump is as bad as Frum says — and he may be almost that bad — will be loath to vote for the tycoon, even though his stated views align much more closely with conservatism than Clinton’s. But not voting for Hillary should be an easy call.

NOTE: I have modified the final paragraph slightly since I originally posted it.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.