Of those two options, the latter would be easier.I honestly don't know how to respond here. I realize there is nothing I can say. You see absolutes, I don't. You see one candidate as defensible and the other as tearing the nation apart, I don't care for either candidate. This is an asymmetrical conversation. Maybe you should be having this conversation with a left wing partisan ideologue who will respond with their own attacks and absolutes.I see the difference within the context of your point, I just don't agree.Do you see the difference between targeting players and targeting the population?
.
How so?
.
You are aware of why I believe one candidate is tearing this nation apart.
You could explain why you disagree with my analysis on that, OR what about Trump there is that balances out that negative of Hillary's.
First, I agree with much of what the USA Today article listed: He is erratic, he is ill-equipped to be Commander in Chief, he isn't leveling with the American people, he speaks recklessly, he has coarsened the American dialogue, and while I wouldn't necessarily say that he is a serial liar, I would definitely say that I have never seen anyone who communicates almost exclusively in blatant hyperbole like this man - which leaves me in the same position as dealing with a serial liar in that nothing he says can be taken seriously.
Further, he simply can't let things go when someone gets under his skin, his childish early morning tweets about that Machado lady being just the latest ridiculous example. It's pretty obvious that such a character flaw can be dangerous in such a dangerous, hair-trigger world. I am also not at all convinced that he possesses the intellectual agility or capacity required of someone who holds that office. Yes, he has enjoyed a measure of success in business, but overwhelming people through the sheer force of your personality is not going to work in this position.
And I haven't even gotten into the issues. Why bother? No one can predict with any certainty what he would actually do, because (a) no one really knows his core beliefs and (b) he's likely to turn on a dime on any of them.
And finally, I don't really know if I need to even list these flaws. I'm pretty sure his fans see them, at least on a subconscious level, but they're willing to brush them away like flies at a picnic because (a) they have completely bought into his bizarre act and (b) they have allowed themselves to be convinced that Hillary Clinton is literally some kind of Attila the Hun/Chairman Mao hybrid.
Again, I don't like Hillary Clinton. She's an awful, awful candidate. But Trump should not be President, and I feel obliged (especially in a swing state) to vote accordingly. And even though I do lean a little left, had the GOP run a sane ticket like Kasich/Rubio, I probably would have voted for them.
.
1. IF he has been open about his use of hyperbole, for decades, which he has, then such hyperbole is not LYING, in the sense that he is trying to actually fool someone.
1b Coarsened the American dialogue? It has been moving in that direction for quite some time. This is the Right's response to the last 50 years of being vilified. And still we are behind the curve compared to the Left, with their CONSTANT use of the Race Card, and now the Godwin Card.
2. We do NOT live in a hair trigger world, anymore thanks to our victory in the Cold War. The ONE conflict that could really spiral out of control quickly is the one that he is on the right side of, ie STOP fucking with Russia.
3. He has been constant on Trade and Immigration and Russia. That softening of his on immigration was "hyperbole" by the media.
4. This country is at a tipping point. Did you ever expect to see the Party elites of both parties openly conspiring to ignore the primaries? Hillary won vs the Will of the Democratic voters. We need to change direction in a lot of ways. Trump might fail at that. HIllary won't even try. She will actively support US continuing down the wrong path.