1. "he makes biased decisions sometimes..."
Of course he makes biased decisions; as a Republican he is expected to make decisions which are biased in favor of his constituency who voted for him.
No one can give equal support to antithetical policies.
It is his job to be biased in favor of certain types of policies.
If you don't like him, or don't like his policies, that's fine.
But saying he's biased is a bit like buying blue jeans and then being upset because they're blue.
We elect ALL politicians to be biased in favor of certain policies or agendas.
2. "his followers encourage or cover for him blindly."
A. I can't deny that this happens, at times, with ALL politicians.
I think that happens with ALL politicians, and ALL public figures, even Kim Kardashian.
There will always be SOME people who follow blindly.
B. However, I do think you made a really wide blanket statement that is neither accurate nor fair.
Any president's constituency is a made up of MILLIONS of individuals, who each act according to their own paradigms and values, and we all know they aren't all identical... constituents aren't robots.
I can't say "all Clinton supporters" do this or that, or "all Obama supporters" do this or that.
It isn't tenable to paint everyone with such a broad brush.
It isn't accurate or fair; it isn't logical or rational; and it certainly isn't provable, because it's an irrational proposition.
C. This statement about his followers "covering for him blindly" also PRESUMES GUILT on his part, for which his followers need to cover.
When you say his followers have to cover for him, you are presuming there is something they NEED to cover... you are PRESUMING GUILT.
I think this presumption of guilt, every time the media says ANYTHING NEGATIVE, really needs to be re-examined.
Each individual issue needs to be assessed independently, and thoroughly, and IF there is guilt, then there is guilt.
But to presume guilt every time the media says anything negative, is really silly.
I could just as easily accuse his detractors of "covering for their side blindly."
Please consider one more thing: to defend or support someone is not the same as "covering blindly" if the ACCUSATION AGAINST THEM IS FALSE.
- Many accusations, in the PAST, have been leveled against Trump, which were later proven false.
- Therefore, it would be unwise to assume that every accusation in the FUTURE will necessarily be true.
* The left accuses the right of blindly assuming everything Trump does is GOOD... all the while the left is blindly assuming everything Trump does is bad!
* I would prefer we relax a bit, and wait for data and evidence to roll in.
3. "He Is overlooking the Intelligence Information given about Russia Interfering Into our election..."
Have you read the full report that was just released?
I did.
A. I didn't see a single point that wasn't full of holes.
B. I didn't see a single bit of provable data regarding anything actually significant.
C. I saw a lot of bluster about unimportant things everyone already knows, and a lot of accusations and assertions without including any proof or evidence.
D. I didn't see anything significant that would hold up in court, or even in a debate, for more than 5 seconds.
There just wasn't any evidence to support any of their statements.
It was pages and pages of accusations and assertions, with no actual proof.
And a document with NO PROOF OR EVIDENCE is what we're going to stand on in order to smear the President Elect?
Seriously?
4. "...Instead of having confidence In our Intelligence,and reacting appropriately,"
Lets not forget that 16 intelligence agencies signed a report claiming there were WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION in Iraq... and it was later PROVEN TO BE FALSE, and it was proven that everyone KNEW it was false.
There's really nothing else to say.
Anyone who is not at least "moderately skeptical" of our intelligence agencies, is a complete and utter moron.
5. "I think Putin Is wondering how to use Donald against the United States."
I think, that what you think, about what Putin thinks... is a bit beyond your purview.
A. You have no way to know what Putin is really thinking about anything.
Unless you're psychic.
Maybe you're psychic.
B. ALL world leaders, ALL of them, including our allies, have their own agendas, and are ultimately looking out for their own countries, and not ours.
This isn't news.
This is what ALL countries do, even our allies.
All world leaders are looking out for their own countries, and whatever is best for THEM.
Everyone knows this, including Trump.
This isn't news.
C. Although we know Putin is ultimately looking out for his own best interests (like all world leaders, even our allies) we can't assume this means everything which is "in his best interest" is somehow going to harm us.
- Putin's own best interests might be to hep the U.S. fight terrorism.
- Putin's own best interests might be to become an ally of the U.S. to thwart some of the overreach of the U.N.
- Putin's own best interests might be to develop better trade relations with the U.S. so both countries can become more prosperous.
- Putin's own best interests might be to "give in" on some international issues, just to stay out of war, and gain a trading partner.
I'm sure he'll act in his own best interests... but his own best interests undoubtedly cover a very wide range.
It would be silly to think you can read his mind, or that all of his own best interests are necessarily antithetical to ours.
D. Trump, as a businessman, will WANT to negotiate with people who have strong self interests... that's actually necessary in order to get anything done.
- If you don't understand this point, I'm not going to explain it here.
- It's a basic factor in negotiations... very rudimentary psychology.
Conclusion:
I'm all for going after ANYONE, when there is actual evidence.
Accusations don't equal evidence.
good to know.
