| SpokenTruth said: This is your candidate. Watch it. Don't shrug it off, don't spin it, just watch it and then ask yourself how you can excuse all of that. https://thescene.com/watch/gq/176-reasons-donald-trump-shouldn-t-be-president |
It's not really 176 reasons, it's 2 reasons, "he is insulting" and "he is lying", with 176 "evidences". So the title is quite a bit stretched.
It's not put in perspective, while we know that Trump supporters vote a lot against Clinton. Can you really think about that, don't shrug it off, don't spin it :
- what ever lie and bold statement Trump had, he had it just as a public personality, and he knew he would get media attention worth million dollars from any bold statement. It's fair to say he would not be even there without that, and that part is a tactical use of sensationalist journalism. It's fair enough also to say he has a big ego and present himself as prescient.
- what ever lie and bold statement Clinton had, she had it as a public servant, she is accountable for it, especially because a lot of her lies (or supposedly lies) are here to cover her dishonnesty (corruption) as a public servant.
In these "evidences", we can see different patterns we have to break down.
- Trump is falsely presented as the problem when he is not the major concern
Trump can call to hack Clinton's server, but it's just words. He does not have an army of obedient hackers waiting his order, right ? Hackers will hack anyway. So that's not big deal, it's just tactical. The real problem here is Clinton, she lied about her private server, she put national security at risk with her private server, and she did not comply to congress requests. That's so much worst, it's not even comparable.
Trump can lie about his position regarding Irak, and that's something I don't like, but it's not the same as actually voting for the war in Irak. As a business man, he did not have access to reports, does not have specifically thought about the question.
- Bold statements are presented as something horrible
That can be too much, but again that's part a communication style, part about getting attention, and part an hyperbole. I mean telling illegal mexican immigrants are bringing drug and crime, he does not mean every single of them, the point here is that there is that there is a security issue with illegal immigration, a complete failure regarding immigration law reinforcement, and that he's positionning himslef as someone that acknoweldge the problem, and as someone that is willing to fix it. Also it has to compared to Clinton that does not even think about it as a problem. There is a major drug and crime problem inside Mexico, that's plain fact, how the hell would uncontrolled, illegal immigration does not bring drugs and crimes ?
- His lies to make up thing or make himself look smart
That's a fact and I don't think it's a good thing, but it's not as much damaging as lying unde oath in front of the congress regarding security. Also it does not make him less smart or able, he is successful, his economic plan makes sense to me, and he is not tied by foreign and wall street money. The ability to do is the point, and it does not minor it so much. Clinton on the other hand is the very reason why nothing changes : corruption.
