Helsinki--the Tipping Point?

[*bfine32*]

(07-18-2018, 12:12 AM)Dill Wrote: Shouldn't that depend on the incident?  I know a soldier who was leaning Trump until the comment about McCain as a POW. Was that irrational?

And why isn't repeated denial that bad behavior is disqualifying in a POTUS "emotional"? 

I would say a rational person should vote for competence.  People voting for Trump were not looking for that. But at this point, after MANY incidents, they ought to be prepared to send their party a message--rein this guy in or get rid of him. Passive "outrage" is hardly the only option.

No one says misogynistic comments made in private conversation by private citizens are the same as those made by a POTUS, but what about all the ugly tweets about women and people in general since Jan. 20, 2017?  How is Trump different now? Is he ( ) more presidential? Lots of gravitas while reading the snake poem or chanting "locker her up"? What president has EVER behaved this way in public since Andrew Johnson?  And that was in the 1860s.

Well you did ask should this one incident change the vote of a rational person. Then go on to point to different incidences and repeated behavior. So did you you mean this one incident or did you mean other incidences and/or repeated incidences or are you just making this up as you go along?