Quote:
Originally Posted by zeek
Did any of those networks run the Tibbits case as their lead story as the writer says Fox News did? The author is taking a stab at understanding why people who used to call themselves "The Moral Majority" and who once claimed to have "Family Values" have forsaken their supposed moral high ground to support a philandering, traitorous flim-flam man who with his attorney Michael Cohen is now apparently an unindicted co-conspirator to defraud the American people in the 2016 election. Got a better hypothesis?
|
So then why not actually listen to what these supporters have said, like Ohio.
1. They are not supporting his philandering, instead they are willing to say that not voting or giving your vote to Clinton because this candidate is a philanderer is foolish.
2. Many of those who have pushed family values have made it clear that they are not ignorant of who he is, nor do they approve, but the reality is there are two choices and the one they made was based on policies, not other requirements.
3. The term "traitorous" is unfair on two levels. First, there was no indication of any of the inferred collusion when they voted. So your reference to "support" should not be understood as "voted for". Second, as real, undeniable evidence of crimes (not traitorous, but impeachable crimes) has come out many of the strong supporters have pulled that support. Therefore the support you are talking about is simply supporting a guy who is being attacked.
4. Flim flam man. That is my impression, but lets be realistic, the economy is as good as anyone could have hoped. Also, he has followed through on his promises unlike virtually all other politicians including Obama. Finally, those who voted for him were the victims of the previous administrations of film flam men who have shipped their jobs overseas.
Yes, I have a much better hypothesis. During the Nov election the Democrats will win and then the impeachment process will begin. Why will they win in Nov because they finally can see the outcome of Mueller's investigation and have undeniable evidence of something they will not tolerate. This is not based simply on Cohen's confession, but rather the CFO of Trump's organization has been given immunity. Why would he ask for or need immunity if he didn't have evidence of crimes that he helped Trump commit.
This guys theory in the Atlantic is as hateful, insulting and divisive as anything I have ever seen. Perhaps there are 10% of Trump supporters who are "hard core" and this does apply to, but since that represents 5% of the voters and that in turn represents about 2.5% of the eligible voters in the US I find it completely unhelpful.