@Crimson67 Isn't it kind of the same as when you insult people's religion? Why should they care as long as they feel strongly those beliefs. My beliefs don't affect them. That is the way it appears to me.

@Crimson67 Exactly!

I find it an insult to the Nation and wish that it could stop on both sides. It makes us look foolish but I must admit I cannot find words to describe my fear and anxiety with this trumpie guy and his appointees that are ruining the country.! I personally take this admistration as an insult.

Not exactly though I see why it comes off this way. My issue is that criticism needs to a) be backed by evidence and b) offered and answered by its own merit. What I mean is, if there's an issue it should be addressed as presented and responded to without needing to refer/deflect instead of answering.

For instance, if I criticize Trump, the Trump supporter should be able to answer with a claim, and evidence, that shows that I'm wrong. Deflecting to hillary, as I often experience, doesn't answer the question. Even if what they say is valid, it doesn't answer the question. That's what I find offensive. It's also something you see with all politicians, who when asked a direct question just move on to a different topic or spit out some canned generic answer. All I want is intellectual honesty, and the lack of it frustrates me.

I guess a way of saying it is that if im offering criticism, answer that criticism, then present a counterpoint and I will respond to that.

I think a good analogy would be if I was talking to someone about why a Mitsubishi is not a good car due to prices, engine specs, and so on. I would be expecting a counter argument explaining why thats wrong and they're good cars. But if instead of answering my criticism they say "well kias suck!!" The truth or not about kias is irrelevant because we weren't talking about kias, we were talking about Mitsubishi!

The issue I have with Trump supporters is that the need to instantly deflect is practically trained into them due to the nature of their candidate. It's what Trump does and so they pick up on it. For instance, people are criticizing trumps lack of response to Russia's nuclear threat so he attacks an actor on Twitter.

But no, insults to Trump are usually facts just because there is evidence to support it. I'm willing to accept insults to get or Obama if a)they're supported by evidence and b) presented as their own matter and not merely as a deflection.

Holy crap that was an essay lol sorry. Hope it cleared up where I stand because it's not as simple as they're wrong I'm right, as much as my ego would like that

Edit: just thought of a good analogy. You objected to what I said and that's cool, it starts discussion. But if instead of trying to defend and explain or clarify my position, I just said "well [other poster on the board] said something worse!" That wouldnt answer your question, not even close. Even if that poster had said something worse, it doesn't matter at that point.