Helsinki--the Tipping Point?

[Dill]

(07-18-2018, 12:39 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 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?  

This is not an either/or. It is easy to imagine more than one scenario built around ONE INCIDENT. Don't you do that automatically with questions like this?

1. Imagine Trump has not done badly for two years, then suddenly, it is discovered that he arranged to scuttle a B-2 on a runway in Russia so they could get the technology, in return for a Trump tower in Moscow. Even Devon Nunes is not likely to say "Well, that's just one incident."  So clearly if ONE incident reached the level of high crimes and misdemeanors, it could change the vote of a rational person.

2. Then there is the straw that broke the camel's back: imagine Trump has another summit, this time with Xi, and screws up again. People who forgave him for Singapore and Helsinki might now find this incident one too many, and change their vote. That would not be irrational. Though it probably was to stick by Trump this long because a voter doesn't want to be swayed by "one incident."

Either way, these possibilities call into question your notion that a rational person does not change his vote over one incident.

In Helsinki we have the perfect example of an incident which could make rational voters change their mind.