Simply supporting anything doesn't make you an idiot. Your reasoning might, so you'd have to elaborate. Somebody can support hepatitis and it would come down to their rationale.
This is reasonable, but it isn't in line with a lot of what is being said on here.
I mean, if someone started a thread like this about Obama during his term they would have been called racist.
And unreasonable criticism of any President is always going to be there. George Washington refused to go out in public during his second term because the criticism was unbearable.
And it is funny that the same arguments get shot down by a party when they are in power, then used by the party when they are not.
I mean, Clinton seriously obstructed justice by robbing a woman of her day in court, and the libs made America believe it was a little lie about him getting a BJ.
Now, the party of Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton is all up in arms about Trump or Kavenaugh's treatment of women, or Trump saying he could shoot someone on the street. Come on, Kennedy LITERALLY killed someone and got away with it.
And it is ironic that Hilary is accused of being in bed with the Russians with Uranium One and then they turn around and claim Trumo is too...spend all this money, and cannot find a smoking gun.
Now, the latest "transcripts" are pretty foolish. Maybe he could have handled it better. But I negotiate things all day long and I see what he was doing. And if something happens in a foreign country, and there are multiple stories coming out about it, yeah, you should go to the leader and say, "Let's figure this out." That is kind of the point. Leaders SHOULD be talking to each other. At least, that is what Obama said when he wants to talk to Ahmedenajad.
Don't get me wrong, Trump is a d1ck and I wouldn't invite him to dinner. But I could say that about most politicians, and the ones I would invite are the ones I am most afraid of - they are the best at hiding their lies.
Ted Bundy got people to trust him too.
But I would vote for Trump before a woman who thinks it is "part of her family history" to say she is an Indian in order to receive beneficial standing, when the real truth is that her family stole land from the Indians, and her grandfather even killed one.
The real issues are that we need term limits. They are all politicians. Liberal and conservative should be two separate ideals that compete. But we don't have people representing each ideal anymore. We have career politicians who get job security, money and power by growing the government and getting as much reliance on the government by the people as they can (read, impoverishing society).
At least Democrats somewhat should believe in this ideal. Conservatives though...not so much. But they risk their job if they go against it and as such, there are no true conservatives out there. So the best we have is, unfortunately, is Trump.
As far as Clinton's "It's the economy" - I am in a position to make more money next year (one year) than I did in all 8 years of Obama combined - in the same job. There were some tough years in there.
But Trump DID have term limits on his agenda when I voted for him and I have heard nothing of that, which is a big let down.
Anyway, this isn't pointed at you Aleksandar because your response is reasonable. But it isn't like there are so many great options out there and the dems are putting up squeaky clean competitors either.
boingboing.net
