Why does he refuse to condemn them?

[hollodero]

(09-30-2020, 09:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: et tu brute

Quit adding words to try and support your point. Where have I said Strong Condemnation? This place has jumped the shark. We can no longer discuss issues in earnest. 

Dude. You heavily implied that Trump's answer was "fore some reason" not good enough "for many"... how typical of them, right? When you take this stance with the attitude you took, you don't get to be offended when being "accused" of talking about a perfectly fine, hence strong condemnation.

If it were not a strong condemnation, there'd be no reason for you to wonder why it's not good enough for many. Because in that case it would have been weak, and many might reasonably feel that weak is not good enough. So nope, I respectfully reject your attempt at shaming me. Your whole point bites itself in the behind.

Also, Caesar: If you do not see a strong condemnation (the part you took issue with), why don't you just say so. It might even help you understand where other people are actually coming from. Why respond like you did? Earnestly, Gaius Julius, I have no issue with disagreement, but some issue with this particular kind of response.