This article by Clancy Martin in The New Republic is wonderfully informing about an important philosophical issue: distinguishing lying versus bullshitting, a distinction first introduced by Harry Frankfurt, and why this distinction may reveal who in the current president race is the bullshitter and who is the liar.
Hillary, the Noble Liar, Donald the Bullshitter, Ted the Trickster, and Bernie, The Blue Eyed Liar
In contrast to current political odds-making, Martin uses Frankfurt's ideas to argue that Hillary, the Perfect Liar, may be the candidate who finally is the most trusted, and supported and why.
Bernie, the Blue-Eyed Liar knows that his proposals are simply not politically feasible and this doesn't stop him. The Bullshitter, according to Frankfurt, has a “lack of connection to a concern with truth,” and an “indifference to how things really are.” It is for this reason we should fear the bullshitter more than other sort of liars.
Trump is the perfect bullshitter; he says whatever comes to mind without almost any concern about the truth or factual foundation. Trump simply doesn't care whether what he is saying is truthful; what he says is useful for his supporters to hear because they want to hear it.
Hillary is the truthful liar because she knows that what we need most, a reformed health care system or a reformed foreign policy, will be very hard to achieve in the near term.
Trump doesn't care a whit that his ideas are not only wildly unrealistic; what he cares about is what wildly unrealistic. Forbidding Muslims from entering the U.S. is not only morally wrong; it is unrealistic and impossible as a concrete goal.
Senator Bernie Sanders is the Blue-edyed Liar because he knows that his platform is simply beyond the scope of present-day American politics.
I used Frankfurt's ideas in my first book, The Health of the Republic: Medicine, Morals, and Epidemics as Challenges for Democracy.