"You are still crying wolf"

[mjr]

This is complete nonsense. "Give a reason" is not, and it is unreasonable to treat it as if it were, the same as "give a reason, and it has to be one sufficient to convince me you're right." Any reason that really is one, sufficient or not, progresses the conversation. Nor was there any suggestion, either overt or implied, that it must cover everyone. You made both of those requirements up out of nothing. Which you can do if you like, of course, just don't pretend that's not what you're doing.

Because past experience tells me there's a game being played. And I know the rules and mechanics of the game. And the answer I believe Gravekeeper wants is an answer sufficient to meet unspoken conditions. In other words, no matter what anyone says, none of the reasons would be sufficient to him. I've run into this situation before on various forums. It's a little thing called "moving the goalposts".

But I think Yeti did a good job of explaining. Some others might include:

1. He's not Hillary Clinton.
2. He's Republican.
3. Some voters think he's more trustworthy.
4. Some voters want an "outsider".

The list could go on. None of those are what Gravekeeper wants, though.

Again, I didn't vote for him, but 60+ million people did. I'm sure they all have their reasons. Just like people who voted for Hillary had their reasons. But could I ask the same question about Hillary? Why WOULD people vote for her?

[Gravekeeper]

However if your point was, "I still want to be able to call these people idiots for not knowing x,y, and z" that's valid. It's just no political science text will tell you a majority or even more than 5% of voters are actually that knowledgable.

My point was that paying the barest amount of attention to the election cycle would have demonstrated Trump's numerous, flagrant character flaws and complete lack of plan to carry through any bullshit he was promising. Heap that on the fact that looking into the matter for even a few minutes would reveal that he's practically the incarnation of everything these people are talking about. Its not like it was remotely difficult to catch him lying his face off 24/7. Sometimes even within hours if not the same interview.

You don't have to be knowledgeable to spot a terrible human being or actually ask the question "How is he going to do this?". I mean, this is a man for whom half his rhetoric was absolutely nothing more than "I'll magically fix everything. Trust me!" while doing his best Charlie Sheen impression.

So yes, I have a problem when people essentially vote to burn it to the ground and choose a unconscionable demagogue as their firestarter. Especially when it can have such a potentially devastating effect not just on themselves and their country, but my country and the world at large.

Because past experience tells me there's a game being played. And I know the rules and mechanics of the game.

Don't complain about a game you started.

[mjr]

Don't complain about a game you started.

A game I started? That's rich. I read you like a book. I merely pointed out that there was more to your question than it seemed. If that's not the case, tell me how I'm wrong.

Can you honestly sit there and tell me that ANY answer that ANYONE gave you as to why they voted for Trump would be good enough for you? And if so, what would that answer be?

Yeah. That's what I thought.

[KabeRinnaul]

There were really only two reasons to vote for Trump that weren't immediately disqualified on grounds of "that's unconstitutional", "that's actively against your own best interests", or "that's literally impossible":

1. You're a bigot, and would like more mainstream support for your beliefs.
2. You're a strict social conservative and want to see a Supreme Court as stacked against progress as possible.

Well, okay, or you're in the 1% and want to ensure the most wealth-friendly party has as much power as possible.

[HYHYBT]

It's not "moving the goalposts" to respond to answers with what's wrong with them, or with further questions. (It's also not "filibustering" to point out that different words mean different things.)

Keeping that in mind, what NON-FICTIONAL reasons are there for "He's not Hillary Clinton," in and of itself and NECESSARILY including "he IS Donald Trump" on the other side, exist that makes that a reason to have voted for Trump? (Again, not moving goalposts. I'm asking you to fill in gaps in the answer as you chose to give it.) How can anyone who's paid even five minutes' attention to the rlection believe him to be trustworthy at all, never mind more so than she?

Again, this is not "playing a game" or "moving goalposts." It's just progresing a conversation.

[Gravekeeper]

A game I started? That's rich. I read you like a book.

I'm not sure how to tell you this, but you may be illiterate. -.-

Yeah. That's what I thought.

That right there is why you're treated this way in discussions. You started this "conversation" with the line "Tell me I'm wrong.". You set the bar and the tone from the get go. So you don't get to complain about it afterwards when I respond in kind.

You then responded with:

That's irrelevant. It's irrelevant because you'd disagree with whatever was said. No reason, to you, would be valid enough. Tell me I'm wrong.

Demonstrating you had absolutely zero interest in any discussion on the topic at all and were, as usual, just stirring things up. You declared a bar you claimed could not be met, then complained about not being able to meet the bar you yourself set. Then, ironically, accused me of moving goalposts.

Its your prerogative to act like a troll but don't expect anyone to engage you in a legitimate discussion as a result.

As for everything else, Kabe and HYHYBT have already covered it quite well.

[mjr]

There were really only two reasons to vote for Trump that weren't immediately disqualified on grounds of "that's unconstitutional", "that's actively against your own best interests", or "that's literally impossible":

1. You're a bigot, and would like more mainstream support for your beliefs.
2. You're a strict social conservative and want to see a Supreme Court as stacked against progress as possible.

Well, okay, or you're in the 1% and want to ensure the most wealth-friendly party has as much power as possible.

This post right here proves my point 100%.

[mjr]

I'm not sure how to tell you this, but you may be illiterate. -.-

I can read just fine, thanks.

That right there is why you're treated this way in discussions. You started this "conversation" with the line "Tell me I'm wrong.". You set the bar and the tone from the get go. So you don't get to complain about it afterwards when I respond in kind.

Respond in kind? Ha. Hardly. Go back and re-read what you actually originally asked.

You originally said:

Its your right to vote like a fucking moron, but don't try to say anyone else made you do it.

That, to me, could easily translate to what I said, which was:

"You're an idiot because you didn't vote for the guy I think you should vote for. Because Reasons."

Then I said, "Tell me I'm wrong."

And you couldn't, because that's exactly how you feel.

Then you responded:

Tell me why voting for Trump isn't a foolish and irresponsible thing to do.

Which tells me that you have your mind made up already, and that no answer would be sufficient to you.

Then I reiterated my position here:

It's irrelevant because you'd disagree with whatever was said. No reason, to you, would be valid enough. Tell me I'm wrong.

And I've yet to be shown how I'm wrong there.

Its your prerogative to act like a troll but don't expect anyone to engage you in a legitimate discussion as a result.

And yet you continue to respond...

You also wrote:

You declared a bar you claimed could not be met, then complained about not being able to meet the bar you yourself set.

Which is complete, utter BS. And you know it. The "bar" I set is based upon your past comments regarding Trump. Again, I didn't vote for him, but I don't know that any answer anyone would have given would be sufficient to you.

Kabe's post pretty much sums up, to me, how you feel about the 60+ million people who voted for him.

In your mind they can say whatever reason, but to you, it's always That they're a racist or bigot.

Now, tell me I'm wrong.

But I'll ask you a VERY simple yes/no question:

According to your statement:

Tell me why voting for Trump isn't a foolish and irresponsible thing to do.

You feel that anyone who voted for Trump was foolish and/or irresponsible in doing so. So the question is thus: Is/Was there, in your mind, an "acceptable" reason to vote for Trump? I think I know what your answer will be (and it will likely prove my point), but I'll wait to see what you have to say...

[mjr]

Keeping that in mind, what NON-FICTIONAL reasons are there for "He's not Hillary Clinton," in and of itself and NECESSARILY including "he IS Donald Trump" on the other side, exist that makes that a reason to have voted for Trump?

Because "He's not Hillary" might be the answer. Why not find somone who voted for Trump, and ask them? Are you afraid they're not going to give an honest answer?

(Again, not moving goalposts. I'm asking you to fill in gaps in the answer as you chose to give it.) How can anyone who's paid even five minutes' attention to the rlection believe him to be trustworthy at all, never mind more so than she?

Again, this is not "playing a game" or "moving goalposts." It's just progresing a conversation.

How would I know? Ask someone who voted for Trump. My entire point, all along, is that people have their own reasons, and not all of those reasons are because the person is a bigoted, sexist, hateful dumbass. Because that's how they're all being painted.

Heck, even Jon Stewart (who I disagree with on most things) had a pretty good commentary about not putting an entire voting bloc into one box.

[Gravekeeper]

Respond in kind? Ha. Hardly. Go back and re-read what you actually originally asked.

I didn't ask anything. Do you see a question mark? That was a statement. One directed at a figurative you. Not at you personally. If you are going to bring an attitude towards me I will respond in kind.

As for how I feel, that is irrelevant. Because, again, all of the flaws of Heir Trump are a matter of fact, not feeling or opinion. I am not looking for something to "satisfy" me despite your insistence. Nor did you even try to justify a counter position you went straight to declaring that there is no answer to a question I did not posit.

I fully understand there are reasons people voted for Trump. That is not the issue nor the debate. My point was that I see no reason sufficient enough to justify supporting Trump in the face of everything he has said and done. Especially when the common reasons given are in direct opposition to Trump's personality, behaviour and history.

Every reason I have seen given for supporting Trump ( aside from the racist/bigot type ones ) falls apart the second you ask a single question that anyone with any common sense should be asking. If you can ask Clinton about her emails 500 times over you can ask 1 question of Trump such as "How would you actually build a wall?" "How are you going to magically make jobs and industries that don't exist anymore reappear?" "What does WINNING SO HARD even mean?" "Why won't you release your taxes anyway?"

When you put that in the face of Trump now going around doing virtually everything everyone said he would as he shits on the Constitution while turning the government into a literal kleptocracy then yes. Yes, I get upset with you.

Because you didn't just fuck yourselves, you fucked us all, and we will all pay for your obvious mistakes.

[mjr]

If you want to talk about Attitude, perhaps we all should consider how we word things. Just saying.

I fully understand there are reasons people voted for Trump. My point was that I see no reason sufficient enough to justify supporting Trump in the face of everything he has said and done.

Those two sentences are mutually exclusive. Unless you're referring to yourself, personally.

If you can ask Clinton about her emails 500 times over you can ask 1 question of Trump such as "How would you actually build a wall?" "How are you going to magically make jobs and industries that don't exist anymore reappear?" "What does WINNING SO HARD even mean?" "Why won't you release your taxes anyway?"

Absolutely. I'd say that's fair. But don't expect any sort of real answer. Just like we don't get "real" answers out of most politicians.

But again, most Trump supporters (like with most Hillary supporters) don't care about the "how" (for the most part). As I've said before, elections like this one were emotion before fact.

Because you didn't just fuck yourselves, you fucked us all, and we will all pay for your obvious mistakes.

And if that's the case, there will be a different President in 2020. There probably will be, anyway.

Bottom line is, whether we like it or not, we're stuck with him for four years. I'm hoping Congress can reign him in. Though I have heard rumors that Congress is going to try to impeach him for some reason or another, and just have Pence take over. Yes, this is a rumor that's floating around.

So, ponder on that one.

[Talon]

Those two sentences are mutually exclusive.

No they aren't.

And if that's the case, there will be a different President in 2020. There probably will be, anyway.

You're far more optimistic than I.
For launching the ill-conceived Iraq War, I was convinced the American body politic would not reelect the reckless incompetent fool George W Bush. Look how that turned out.

I expect Trump will drag America into another pointless war right around the time he comes up for reelection. So he can paint himself as a war hero, and voting against him amounts to undermining the war effort. I hope I'm wrong, but it's not much of a hope.

Though I have heard rumors that Congress is going to try to impeach him ...

A Republican congress turning on a Republican President? Unless Trump channels his inner Dead Zone, I highly doubt that. Can't say I expect much from a theoretical Democratic congress either.

[Kheldarson]

A Republican congress turning on a Republican President? Unless Trump channels his inner Dead Zone, I highly doubt that. Can't say I expect much from a theoretical Democratic congress either.

It can happen. He'd have to get record lows in terms of popularity though. Which is conceivable given that he can't remotely deliver on his promises and won't shut up about drama.

[Gravekeeper]

It can happen. He'd have to get record lows in terms of popularity though. Which is conceivable given that he can't remotely deliver on his promises and won't shut up about drama.

He's already record low going in. The GOP only hitched themselves to his orange hate wagon for the votes. They would definitely prefer President Pence. Once Trump's mouth breathers finish turning on him for not building a wall or hanging Hillary he won't be of much use to the GOP anymore.

So I can see a Republican congress turning on him. The GOP are shameless bandwagon hoppers. They'll jump on anything they can to drum up support then jump ship on it once it looks like the wind is blowing a different direction. Especially if Trump continues to insist he can do whatever he wants in terms of his businesses. Thus putting him in violation of the Constitution on day 1 of his presidency.

As is, Trump is ceding everything to Pence because he doesn't give a rat's ass about doing the job of the President. Only the ego stroking of being called the President. So he'll likely end up half diplomatic disaster / crazy asshole and half figurehead as Pence pulls the strings from behind ala Cheney.