Attention, Trump Supporters

[Revoltingest]

Clinton was so often an excuse for supporting Trump, even when it didn't make sense.​

To vote for Trump when Hillary is the alternative requires no excuse.
People with different values & prognostications of each candidate's
consequences will make different "sense" of their choices. But I
notice that anti-Trumpers typically don't understand the other side.
But if one tries....

My advice....
See both sides.
Pick the likely least evil.
Prepare for the worst.
Hope for the best.

 

[Stevicus]

So, no you can't.

​

Perhaps you need to learn the difference between the words "can't" and "won't." I'm certainly not going to put much effort into placating you and your ridiculous demands.​

​

Addressing your comments and responding to them isn't shifting anything.

Address the comments, not the poster. When you start making assumptions about what a person might know or might not know, then you're doing it wrong. When you say that someone is "clueless" or that they're sticking their head in the sand, that's also an indication that you're doing it wrong. Just a tip.

Your posts clearly show that you are a Trump supporter. You disregard all criticism of him. You play down factual criticisms as exaggerated and overblown.

You're wrong, but either way, it's irrelevant to the discussion. When you start introducing irrelevancies, you're doing it wrong.

 

[Father Heathen]

Forget about any reason you may have had for not wanting Hillary Clinton in office. That's in the past. Trump won the election and now serves as our President. My question to you is,

Why do you continue to support Trump?.​

Some people simply don't care how dishonest, corrupt, and/or incompetent you are as long as you continue to say the things they want to hear. They would rather chain themselves to the mast of a sinking ship than accept that their favored narrative doesn't reflect reality.

 

[idav]

Some people simply don't care how dishonest, corrupt, and/or incompetent you are as long as you continue to say the things they want to hear. They would rather chain themselves to the mast of a sinking ship than accept that their favored narrative doesn't reflect reality.

Debating a trumpeter is like trying to convince the anti science people that evolution is true.

 

[e.r.m.]

To vote for Trump when Hillary is the alternative requires no excuse.
People with different values & prognostications of each candidate's
consequences will make different "sense" of their choices. But I
notice that anti-Trumpers typically don't understand the other side.
But if one tries....

My advice....
See both sides.
Pick the likely least evil.
Prepare for the worst.
Hope for the best.

My point was that Hillary, at that point, was not the alternative. The alternatives were 16 other Republicans. Picking the likely least evil at that point would have been easier than when Hillary joined the fray. Instead of choosing a candidate who approved of multiple race crimes unfolding before him, pick another Republican.

 

[ecco]

Perhaps you need to learn the difference between the words "can't" and "won't." I'm certainly not going to put much effort into placating you and your ridiculous demands.​

​

Oh, I do understand the difference between "can't" and "won't." That's why I used "can't".

I had posted

Perhaps you can show me wrong. Perhaps you can show one of your comments to me where you disagree with something Trump has said or done. Perhaps you can show one of your comments to me where you agree with criticisms made against Trump.​

You ducked. That's when I wrote

So, no you can't.​

It's not that you didn't want to show one of your comments to me where you disagree with something Trump has said or done. It's that you couldn't, because there were none.

​

Address the comments, not the poster. When you start making assumptions about what a person might know or might not know, then you're doing it wrong. When you say that someone is "clueless" or that they're sticking their head in the sand, that's also an indication that you're doing it wrong. Just a tip.

You're wrong, but either way, it's irrelevant to the discussion. When you start introducing irrelevancies, you're doing it wrong.

Thank you for the lesson in the proper way to conduct oneself in a forum discussion.

I thought this part was especially helpful.

Address the comments, not the poster.​

You wrote that just before you wrote...

then you're doing it wrong
You're wrong,
you're doing it wrong
you're doing it wrong.
​

 

[ecco]

Debating a trumpeter is like trying to convince the anti science people that evolution is true.

Yep...

You remind me of the Creos who say "God said it, I believe it".

 

[Stevicus]

​

Oh, I do understand the difference between "can't" and "won't." That's why I used "can't".

I had posted

Perhaps you can show me wrong. Perhaps you can show one of your comments to me where you disagree with something Trump has said or done. Perhaps you can show one of your comments to me where you agree with criticisms made against Trump.​

You ducked. That's when I wrote

So, no you can't.​

It's not that you didn't want to show one of your comments to me where you disagree with something Trump has said or done. It's that you couldn't, because there were none.

​

Thank you for the lesson in the proper way to conduct oneself in a forum discussion.

I thought this part was especially helpful.

Address the comments, not the poster.​

You wrote that just before you wrote...

then you're doing it wrong
You're wrong,
you're doing it wrong
you're doing it wrong.
​

I was just trying to be helpful.

I'm not ducking anything. I'm participating in numerous discussions with various people, and I have a limited amount of time. There are some who are worth the time and effort, while there are others who are not worth it. Guess what group you fall into.

 

[ecco]

I was just trying to be helpful.

I'm not ducking anything. I'm participating in numerous discussions with various people, and I have a limited amount of time. There are some who are worth the time and effort, while there are others who are not worth it. Guess what group you fall into.

By "worth the time and effort", do you mean people who agree with you?
By "worth the time and effort", do you mean people who don't challenge you?

OK.

 

[Stevicus]

By "worth the time and effort", do you mean people who agree with you?
By "worth the time and effort", do you mean people who don't challenge you?

OK.

This bickering is pointless. I have no obligation to justify or defend anything to you.

If you're really that interested in me, my posting history is available and open for your perusal.

 

[Revoltingest]

My point was that Hillary, at that point, was not the alternative. The alternatives were 16 other Republicans. Picking the likely least evil at that point would have been easier than when Hillary joined the fray. Instead of choosing a candidate who approved of multiple race crimes unfolding before him, pick another Republican.

I agree that there were better choices in the primary.
(This was true for both parties.)

 

[e.r.m.]

I agree that there were better choices in the primary.
(This was true for both parties.)

Agreed.

 

[LuisDantas]

To vote for Trump when Hillary is the alternative requires no excuse.

Not an excuse. A huge apology and lots of deep sould-searching. For starters.

 

[metis]

Not an excuse. A huge apology and lots of deep sould-searching. For starters.

I was no Hillary supporter by any stretch of the imagination, but for some to say that she was worse than Trump falls into the "Fantasy Island" category.

It's a nonsensical excuse to try and justify their vote. Even if this was their supposedly honest reason, they should by now have abandoned Trump because of all that he has said and done since he took office that is so blatantly unethical by almost any religious or humanistic standards.

So, imo, theirs is basically a near complete lack of empathy for others that we're picking up, because had Trump did it to their family, including their children, I'm pretty sure their reaction would be very different.

 

[Underhill]

Thank you for proving my point.

He isn't wrong though. Trump has made mistake after mistake. He's proven himself to be a man of little or no character, who seems to revel in relationships with tirants while angering our long time allies. He has weakened human rights, undermined both the fbi and the media. And this is all in the last week.

To say that your only reason for following him is because you dislike those apposed to him, shows a distinct lack of character. It's also nonsense as I know people who dislike Trump from all sides of the political spectrum.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not an excuse. A huge apology and lots of deep sould-searching. For starters.

Did it ever occur to you that your political views are not shared by all?
Astounding as it would be to discover it, a great many thought Hillary
was worse.

 

[ecco]

This bickering is pointless. I have no obligation to justify or defend anything to you.

If you're really that interested in me, my posting history is available and open for your perusal.

I'm not.

 

[ecco]

I agree that there were better choices in the primary.

The Republican Primary voters did not think so.

 

[Revoltingest]

The Republican Primary voters did not think so.

Oh, well....Pub & Dem voters often disagree with me.

 

[LuisDantas]

Did it ever occur to you that your political views are not shared by all?

You must be on a streak of asking questions that were never needed and with utterly obvious questions.

Astounding as it would be to discover it, a great many thought Hillary was worse.

Apparently. But I fully expect those of them with a modicum of mental health to have learned better since.