Look, I quoted, or misquoted as the case may be, Trump on this incident not to show the man was callous but to show the loyalty of his base. That he enjoys such strong loyalty from his base is relevant to a discussion of his approval rating and how that might be affected by infelicitous tweets.
The base will not much object if he missteps but the base is not the whole world. It was 43% on election day and it is down in the 30s now. The rest of the world very likely does care. Senators and congressmen certainly care. And Trump above all cares very much, that cannot be denied.
It becomes tedious to be forced constantly to respond to false allegations that I am a Trump hater. Nothing could be further from the truth. The difference between you and me is that I judge a politician on his policies, you base the policies on whether you like the politician. I think you have it backwards.
Therefore, when Trump is right as he is, for example, about immigration (except Daca) I support him but when he is wrong as he is for example about Rino care and about reneging on his promise to pursue Hillary Clinton for her crimes, I oppose him. It is not a question of liking or disliking Trump.
It is policy not personal.
‘It becomes tedious to be forced constantly to respond to false allegations that I am a Trump hater. Nothing could be further from the truth.’
I’ll revise my assessment accordingly. You don’t hate trump; you just post the way a person who hates Trump would. I.e.: you put the worst spin on his comments. You treat discredited polling as objective truth, and if it’s negative for Trump, you reference it CONSTANTLY. Your posts reek of anti-Trump gloom, doom and pessimism.
But if you’re sure you don’t hate him, then I’ll just give you credit for doing a first class imitation.
It becomes tedious to be forced constantly to respond to false allegations that I am a Trump-hater. Nothing could be further from the truth. If that's true, then you should consider the possibility that such accusations are leveled based on an impression which you create. You did, during the election cycle, repeatedly state your belief that Donald Trump was a fraud, charlatan, and con man, and other words to that effect.
Have those beliefs changed at all? Have you ever expressed regret for those smears, or even acknowledged that they might not have been entirely accurate? It would be easy enough to dispel such impressions with a positive statement to the contrary.
You never fail to express the most negative interpretation possible regarding anything Donald Trump does. If you didn't despise the man, then on occasion you'd give him the benefit of the doubt. But whenever there's any opportunity to criticize, you seem to indulge it to the greatest degree possible. At least that's the way it seems to this layman. Oh, it's all presented with a veneer of objectivity, but the lack of goodwill invariably shines through.
You cite "truth" as your motivation, as if you are the only arbiter thereof. But other people are equally (or perhaps even more) capable of discovering and revealing "truth"—albeit with less eloquence, of course.
You should consider the possibility that you're serving the cause of the Enemy by constantly engaging in commentary which tends to undermine morale. In times of war, it's generally better to err on the side of caution when dealing with such questions. You seem to entirely discount that factor.
IMHO, you've really do have an anti-Trump bias. Whether it's bona fide hatred is an academic debate, I suppose, but it's certainly de facto animosity.
It's not as if we don't have an energetic Enemy intent upon undermining the President at every opportunity—an Enemy that really doesn't need any assistance in proclaiming the "truth" about all things Trump.
I'm not trying to engage in a personal attack—accusing you of being off your meds or eschewing therapy, for instance, as you have done to me (while simultaneously decrying personal attacks)—I'm merely expressing my heartfelt assessment that you're bias is against Donald Trump—a bias which was well-documented during the campaign cycle, and which I've seen no evidence of having been changed.
If you're guilty of nothing else, you're certainly guilty of grossly underestimating Donald Trump, including the man's character.
I'll admit to assuming the role of "cheerleader"; that has occurred as a result of everything I've seen and heard from Donald J. Trump during this incredible period of American history.
Any comments which are made with the intent to undermine this Presidency are out of line, IMHO, and I've concluded—rightly or wrongly—that you, if only subconsciously, often speak from that motivation.
There's a right way and a wrong way to do such things in time of war. People like Jim Robinson, for instance, are able to express disagreement with the President without going on the attack. Others seem less able, or inclined, to do so...