Gas Attack In Syria

[Dill]

(04-13-2018, 07:36 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: This is over the top man.  No one here is emotionally identified with Trump.  Every conservative here knows there is good and bad and weird with the guy.  The key is to ride the good, scold the bad, and try to avoid the weird.  

I voted for trump because of his immigration and regulatory positions,  I also knew we would get good justices.  Most of his policies are too liberal for me but I try and give him the benefit of the doubt.  Like on these tariffs for instance.

I think one is.

I notice that the flip flopping that Fred references does not bother Trump supporters or defenders much.

Bfine does not identify as a Trump voter/supporter, but nevertheless feels a strong impulse to defend him against charges of factual and logical inconsistency.  He would not be doing that if he did not have some deep investment in what Trump stands for--or against.

When he supposes that it is simply "Trump hate" which drives Trump critique, he is separating himself from any kind of grounded, accountable, evidence-based analysis, substituting for that a field of emotional polarities operating regardless of empirical correction.  Hence the scorn in the previous posts for logical consistency and accountability.

Any one who voted for or currently defends Trump is doing more than just favoring one set of policies/interests over another. It is Trump's authoritarian style which his supporters support, his lack of empathy, his thumb-in-the-eye to U.S. tradition and morality, his flaunting of accountability, the permission he gives to scapegoating.  Defending him drags down standards of accountability across journalism, our legal system, and government. The standards HAVE to go down to maintain support for him and to create smoke around his behavior.

So you accept "the bad and the weird," and we have an emotionally unstable Commander-in-Chief more worried about his illegal payments to porn stars and Playmates than an impending military crisis. Ok, though, if you get a "good justice" via extra-legal maneuvering in Congress.

You are giving the guy far more than "benefit of the doubt." You are saying the degrading of public discourse and politics really doesn't matter if you get the few things you want.