None of that follows. If "being religious is not a disqualifying factor" then proselytization cannot be a disqualifying factor. "I want to exterminate redheads" is already problematic; "I want to exterminate redheads in the name of Yog-Sothoth" is no more problematic.

Arguing that at some point you will have to choose God over country doesn't make much sense in a country that added "Under God" to their pledge of allegiance over 50 years ago. There's a conflict you presume to exist that is in no way implied or demonstrated.

It's interesting to me that you're totally cool with "yeah, my parents have voted Republican forever, that's just who they are, they believe in the old Republicanism and the new Republicanism has them doubting" while simultaneously being "ohhhhhhhh shit Democrat said the G-word get out the smelling salts." Emoluments are compensation - that's about where your money is coming from, not about influence. NINETY FIVE PERCENT of Republicans running for national office in 2012 signed Grover Norquist's tax pledge. Grover Norquist has stated publicly that his goal is the destruction of the federal government.

Democrats elect shady fucks from time to time. A man whose career has been orating and spiritual advice should not, in my opinion, be disqualified.