- Joined
- Jun 22, 2013
- Messages
- 20,271
- Reaction score
- 28,077
- Location
- Mid-West USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
I find myself personally disgusted by the anti-Trump positions I've seen posted in this Forum and in the general forum of public opinion.
This disgust does not come from a belief that people can't have a rational, well-reasoned position upon which they base their opposition. As I've stated in all honesty before, he would not be my first choice for a candidate either.
No, it comes from the vitriolic personal attacks on the candidate based on misrepresentation, labeling, and unbridled hatred.
Even worse is how this translates into attacks on his supporters of whatever stripe, as if Anti-Trump advocates think we are in a school-yard engaged in name-calling and bullying in order to divide the "cool kids" from the socially unacceptable scapegoats.
So, while I may not be the best qualified advocate since my support for Trump is somewhat conditional, I am willing to pretend that I am acting as his defense attorney so as to try to address real concerns about his candidacy. :fyi:
The rules are simple:
1. Stick to the facts that show a problem with his becoming President.
2. Statements of "gut feeling," labeling, or clear vitriol will be dismissed or ignored.
3. I will admit when any point presented is valid, and will state so in any reply where this is the case.
The gauntlet is thrown. I will do my best to provide rational and responsible replies to all points raised in the same vein.
This disgust does not come from a belief that people can't have a rational, well-reasoned position upon which they base their opposition. As I've stated in all honesty before, he would not be my first choice for a candidate either.
No, it comes from the vitriolic personal attacks on the candidate based on misrepresentation, labeling, and unbridled hatred.
Even worse is how this translates into attacks on his supporters of whatever stripe, as if Anti-Trump advocates think we are in a school-yard engaged in name-calling and bullying in order to divide the "cool kids" from the socially unacceptable scapegoats.
So, while I may not be the best qualified advocate since my support for Trump is somewhat conditional, I am willing to pretend that I am acting as his defense attorney so as to try to address real concerns about his candidacy. :fyi:
The rules are simple:
1. Stick to the facts that show a problem with his becoming President.
- Don't use labels; rather point to a direct citation I can investigate which supports your position.
- Address actual policy issues you have concerns with, again citing the factual basis for this concern.
2. Statements of "gut feeling," labeling, or clear vitriol will be dismissed or ignored.
3. I will admit when any point presented is valid, and will state so in any reply where this is the case.
The gauntlet is thrown. I will do my best to provide rational and responsible replies to all points raised in the same vein.
Last edited: