Obvious logical fallacy. You've explained why the other candidates are bad, but you've failed to explain why you believe Donald Trump will keep his promises.
You should not try to use the "Logical Fallacy" argument. YOu don't understand it.
You don't get to set the bar for me.
I am satisfied that Trump is more likely to support policies I want, than those who openly advocate policies I oppose or those that claim to support policies I support but have a record of betraying me on them.
IMO, that is the best choice I can do with the information I have available.
So, can you address that without pretending to misunderstand it, or without moving the goal posts, or without trying to set a higher standard of proof than I think I need, or without dodging and returning to your overall strategy of Proof by Assertion?