The big problem is not Trump. It is "Trumpism"

[Dill]

(05-06-2019, 04:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Let me quote the posts you identified as defending Trump:

Anyone can plainly see there was 0 attempt at "defending Trump". There's a reason both you and hollo failing when trying to do so. And you know why that was? Because there was no defending of Trump. But you did identify the true problem You chose to point the finger at me while displaying the true problem and that is "if you're not with us in our mission of hate, you're against us"

I do like how you moved the goalpost from defending Trump to defending Trump supporters. You want to know why you did that? Because that is the actual point of the thread and is exactly what I said in the first post you referred to.

Just look at some of the rhetoric thrown around in this post and the attempts to outwardly hate one candidate:

"Tossing out Checks and Balances" "Prize moral Character".. Let me just leave you with a little of the good boo:

You hypocrite! First, remove the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye.

LOL  "moved the goalpost."   Anyone can "plainly see" that you jumped into a Trumpism thread to talk about Hillary. Somehow saying that those who voted for the bankruptcy champ and "king of debt" and world-class philanderer are "no worse" in judgment than those who voted for an accomplished statesperson is no attempt to defend Trump supporters, and so no attempt to defend Trump? You thought maybe your Fox list could at least establish moral equivalency.  In the meantime, no other mission has been articulated.  

Again, where others can discern repeated efforts to reground discussion in a factual record with a logical, analytic comparison, you see only a "rhetoric" of "attempts to hate."   As you have so often done in the past, you substitute some vague "hate" as the REAL motivation for Trump critique, and not Trump's public behavior. 

HOW IS THAT SUBSTITUTION NOT A DEFENSE OF TRUMP?

Outside the bubble, you cannot create any table of Hillary offenses which would make her Trump's unethical equal. So to defend Trump, you have to dismiss the factual record, now even enlisting Bible verses to assert false equivalences.  You didn't jump into this thread with your defense of Trump supporters and critique of Fox-Hillary because you'd "removed the beam" from your own eye.  You want to avoid beams and specks altogether, if they can be documented and compared