Replies

I... see. Well, let's explore that:

Nope. You are absolutely incorrect about what I was going for.

I stand corrected.

Mostly I am annoyed that you think you can read the minds of Trump

Not a bit of it. There's a technique known as "listening to" (or, in this case, "reading") what people say, and evaluating them based on sound reasoning. If the reasons, for example, that are given for voting for Trump are "He'll make America great again", "he'll build a wall", "he's conservative", "he's a solid Christian" (though most Christians will eventually admit that the latter has no basis in Trump's comments or actions, and they regress back to one of the other reasons... usually with a qualifier of "we're not electing a pastor-in-chief! If you wait for a perfect candidate, you'll never get one!", blah, blah, blah.), and nothing of substance, then it's reasonable to conclude that the choice is mainly irrational and emotion-driven.

supporters and more annoyed that you automatically assume we are stupid.

There's a distinction that needs to be made, here. There's a difference between a stupid ACTION (or choice) and a stupid PERSON. I don't presume to make judgments on the latter; but I feel quite free to make judgments on the former (as any sane, thinking person is not only free, but obliged, to do). It's quite possible for otherwise smart (or even brilliant) people to make stupid choices; I (though not brilliant, so the example weakens, somewhat) have done so, more times than I can count... and it's not unreasonable for someone else to point it out if the situation warrants it. (In this case, we're on a debate forum, where criticism and debate of ideas is the very point of the forum's existence.)

And look. Your earlier post proves me right!

I hope I've shown that that isn't the case. No disrespect to your skill with snark intended.