I couldn't agree more, other than to fault you for not being sufficiently strong with your terms. I would kindly suggest that "revolting," "horrible people," "chronic liars," "sycophants," and "pariahs" to be more descriptive of just about every one of them on both sides of the isle. I keep hoping even one candidate reveals a fundamentally good character, but I'm disappointed every step of the way. I've had the opportunity to be around mega millionaires in my life and in fairness, some of them were decent people (a couple even authentically great). But once you get to that level, self-interest isn't your primary goal - its parity, even dominance over those in your high-net-worth bracket. What drives those 1%ers is a combination of fame, redemption, power to influence, the ability to leave a lasting legacy and congeal the high opinion they have of themselves as they climbed the ladder to their reining pole positions.