Why Trump Supporters Believe He is Innocent With 91 Felony Counts.
I am no psychologist or psychiatrist, but I have had enough therapy in my 84 years to be able to teach classes on Cognitive Base Therapy (CBT) and Dialectic Based Therapy. (DBT).
CBT is very simple to grasp. It is based on reframing your negative thoughts that are bothering you. Either the glass is half full or it is half empty, depending on your frame of mind. So all one has to do is become aware of those feeling that make you feel negatively about something and document how you feel about that situation.
Next, you look for something that is positive about that situation. There can always be something one can find to make them feel positive about it. Then all you do is document how that makes you feel. In other words, you have re-framed your thoughts into something positive. If you see a picture with a black frame around it will invoke negatives thoughts. A picture with a bright, cherry frame around it will invoke positive thoughts.
Here is an article by a neuroscientist who explains why MAGA Supporters refuse to accept Trump's criminal charges. It is based on CBT and the Dunning Kruger Effect.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/ … &ei=44Do these theories include an explanation of the happiness and joy in thinking that an indictment or charge indicates guilt, without the evil necessity of having a trial? That might explain a lot for those that perpetually declare guilt without need for the actions we in this country consider necessary for the declaration, things such as a trial, a jury of peers, guilt beyond any reasonable doubt, etc.
Wilderness: Nobody said there is not going to be a trial. Hopefully, there will be four of them. A trial is not an "evil necessity." If Trump if found innocent, his supporters will rejoice. If Trump and his co-conspirators are found guilty, the anti-Trumpers will rejoice because justice has been truly served.
Right now the glass is half full for Trumpers because he is campaigning and he and they can focus on that. While the glass for anti-Trumpers is half empty. If Trump and company is found guilty of all four indictments, then the content of the glass gets reversed because justice has bee truly served.
In your reference to your second paragraph, I can say the same thing about Biden haters. Right now the house is forming a committee to impeach Biden. Aren't they assuming he is guilty until proven innocent without a trial?If the glass is half empty, why the glee and celebrations? That is not the mark of people with a half empty glass; it is the mark of a full glass. It is the mark of people that have already decided guilt without the need for a trial, and thus think their glass is full. (They seem to have quickly forgotten the results of two previous "trials" in Congress over Trump's guilt or innocence.)
Which is why I asked if the theories address this kind of thinking - it does seem very similar to what you were discussing.Wilderness: It is relative if the glass is half full or half empty. It depends on the frame of mind that the person is in. You can also look at it as if the glass is completely full or completely empty. It is still relative to a frame of mind When Trumpers see the glass full, anti-Trumpers see that glass empty, if that makes you feel better. I'm not going to get into a contest with you about the glass metaphor.
You're right; the glass is only a metaphor for actions and mindset. But the question remains. Given the years long persecution, never finding a conviction, why are the anti-Trumpers so gleeful about some more indictments?
The answer lies in hope: this time! This time he's going to jail for sure! We got him at last! Without ever considering that all it takes is a single juror to ruin that hope, but that's because, just like the other times, it is obvious beyond belief that he's guilty. If they could I really believe that the anti-Trumpers would simply jail him - to trial necessary."If they could I really believe that the anti-Trumpers would simply jail him - to trial necessary."
Yes, I think that Trump sucks, I always have. But that does not mean that he will not be given the benefit of the legal system and a fair trial as prescribed in the Bill of Rights. I just couldn't stomach the MAGAs turning him into some sort of martyr over a perceived lynch mob.
But what he won't get is "preferential treatment".Then you should probably start with a presumption of innocence, not with a declaration of guilt.
I do think that he is guilty on all counts, there are too many coincidences, concerning activities in this entire sordid affair such that there has to be a source or cause.
But what do my thoughts matter? I am not the one who will make the decision.
But, I think and also SAID that Trump is entitled to his day in court and we will let the justice system substantiate my presumption or not. So, what does my presumption have to do with it?I must ask... what evidence have you seen that would stand up to point to Trump's guilt, in any of the indictments? When the fire is put out it a lot of second and third-hand accusations. But is there any proof in the form of physical evidence that he has broken laws? They have the famous phone call --- but the jury will be made to finally listen to it in full. Its context is outwardly very clear. One only needs to listen.
I have actually not seen any true physical evidence when not boils down to it. Have you?Sharlee, I am not qualified as an prosecutor with expertise in the finer points of the law.
In my opinion, the "big picture" points to Trump's involvement. These indictments were taken against Trump by professionals who certainly would not have done it based on unsubstantiated or hear-say evidence. I think that laws were broken, when he gets his day in court he will have the opportunity to prove otherwise. Let's just see to where the bread crumbs actually lead.
I insist that there be a trial, where Trump will have the opportunity to absolve himself of the charges. If he is innocent, then Ok. He should have nothing to fear.
Trump has spent a great deal of time and effort attempting to make the charges against him appear to be political vendetta from Biden and the Democrats. With all the lies and exaggeration coming from between his lips in the last 4 years, I don't buy it.
I am sorry that you cannot understand what such an attitude means to the country and its people.
It means nothing, everyone has their opinion and their right to it, just as you clearly express regarding Joe Biden.
So, what the problem? Let the judge and jury decide his fate, my point of view is only an opinion.I know it is only an opinion...an opinion that you have expressed as a fact several hundred times. That's how the hanging mob starts - from one person expressing an opinion as a fact.
My opinion is just that, my opinion. Is that as much a fact as saying that Biden is stupid?
I am not responsible for hanging mobs, that is on your side of the isle with the human refuse that attacked the Capitol on J6.
If I had the evidence in Trumps case as a juror, I could evaluate it fairly and not go on unprofessional vendettas as conservatives are just that more apt to do...
You're being obtuse, again, Wilderness....And the mobs all over the country were from your side.
But you don't need evidence to go on an "unprofessional vendettas" - you have been on one against Trump, declaring he is guilty of this, that and the other thing for years. Good grief - the drool nearly comes over the internet every time someone says they have found something Trump did wrong!
No, I just refuse to claim someone is guilty before a trial, and refuse to join the "Hang 'em!" group. This results in constant attacks from those complaining I'm defending Trump (or others) because I support the justice system as better than the hanging mob.
But I do admit to calling Biden "stupid" - some of his actions can only come from pure stupidity.So, you can have your endless opinions of castigating Biden and the Democrats, but I am not allowed to express mine?
You KNOW that I will not even entertain such a double standard.
Trump is a JERK, he has always been one for as far back as can remember, in my opinion.
In the face of that, if this pig of a man has 4 indictments and countless criminal charges, it is not likely that he is innocent. But, I support Trump getting a fair trial as I have said that numerous times, and that is as much as I will concede on his behalf. I certainly don't have to like him.
What else do you want?
I did not tell anyone "to burn down the house" so, do you have something against free speech particularly if it comes from a direction that you do not prefer? Because you certainly are opinionated when you want to be, so why should I be silenced? Not a chance!!
My thoughts do not translate into violent mob actions. But I remain free to express myself in pen and ink to my satisfaction.Credence, I castigate Biden for the actions he has taken. For opening the border, for spending what we don't have and can't afford, for giving what little we have to other countries, for allowing crime to grow rampant. His list of stupid actions is almost legendary...although I understand you will disagree that some of them are stupid. What I do NOT do is call him names and castigate him for his speech or mannerisms. I leave that to you.
"I certainly don't have to like him. What else do you want?"
"do you have something against free speech particularly if it comes from a direction that you do not prefer?"
Have you ever heard of "libel" or "slander"? When you declare someone (Trump) did something illegal you need to be prepared to show that in a court of law, beyond a reasonable doubt. If you can't, keep your mouth shut.
Quit announcing that he is guilty of criminal activities without having a trial first. That has been plain from the get go.Your castigation is based on your opinion of the man, not some universal truth. The Right winger is always beyond redemption.
Wilderness, this is not going to sell, not at all.
If you can call Biden stupid, I will say or call Trump whatever I like, and as I am not the New York Times, I have freedom of speech. I don't need your approval to do either.
I attack Trump for his behavior and his conduct, and there is plenty to work on that point alone.
I am going to be here when they vanquish Trump and scatter the MAGA to the 4 winds. As far as I am concerned until the man is dead, in jail or swears off politics for good, he remains fair game.
Touché?
Wilderness: It's not that they haven't found a conviction. It's called due process of law and it takes a long time.Just be patient. Trump is like a mafia boss with a lot of money and the lawyers to try and delay and move the trials to other venues, but it is not working.
He has just admitted that he is guilty of Jan. 6, but it is because the election was rigged. You see there is no end to his denial, because it makes him feel good to be in denial.
He can't handle the truth, it would blow his mind. He has always said he has done noting wrong in all four of these indictments. He can plead not guilty and so can his co-conspirators. The Constitution gives them that right. In my view, with all he pain and suffering he has caused he does not deserve to be president ever again.
https://www.inquisitr.com/trump-admits- … ion-claimsAnd during that long time it takes, he is presumed innocent. By some; others will presume guilt without a trial.
Oh c'mon! Trump has never admitted guilt of the riot Jan 6. Such claims are utter nonsense and are part of the problem we are seeing in this country. Outright lies presented as simple facts when everyone knows better.
Yes, he can plead not guilty, has done so...and millions of people declare him guilty without a trial, without evidence, without formal testimony.Wilderness: It doesn't take a trial to see what happened on Jan.6 It doesn't take a trial to hear the phone conversation with Raffensberger, Trump and Meadows and Giuliani, et al. It doesn't take a trial to see the undue stress put upon a mother and daughter team who were just trying to fulfill their Constitutional right as ballor counters. Their lives have been threatened and turned upside down because of false accusations.
You are using the excuse of a trial to minimize what Trump and company have done. Even if he is found innocent of all four indictments. The grief he caused to all those he has affected will linger on.
There is only one truth and one reality, no matter what the courts find. With enough money and influence the democratic process can get in the way of the truth and reality. Let's face it, you are hoping he is found innocent of all charges in all four indictments and I am hoping he is found guilty of all charges in all four indictments. Is the glass half full or half empty?You seem to be running in circles. There has been no evidence thus far that proves Trump is guilty as he has been charged. There are accusations. None of what as of yet has been defended in a court of law. The Raffensberger call is a good example -- if one listens to the complete call, one can see the context of all of Trump's words, not just a few that you have seemed to take into account.
Ad for the article, it was clearly view oriented, and in my own view ridiculous. The author was projecting his own leftist attitude. I can see why so many are really having a problem with comprehension these days.
It would seem he has Conservative characteristics confused with liberal traits. Conservatives are rarely seen with their hair on fire, blatantly insulting an entire group of people (as this author did). We are common sense people, not much flusters us... I am not sure how liberals can think straight if their hair is always on fire. Seems so counterproductive.
.Sharlee, your listening to the call is just your opinion, unless you can prove otherwise. How about the accusations against the mother and daughter team who were accused of rigging the ballots? Trump and company have made their lives miserable for just trying to do their civic duty.
You said the same thing about Tucker Carlson and his edited tapes of Jan.6 You down played that as well. You have been on your soapbox about how good Trump is a president and leader. I seem him as person who creates misery at their expense. In my book he does not deserve to president of anything, ever again." How about the accusations against the mother and daughter team who were accused of rigging the ballots? Trump and company have made their lives miserable for just trying to do their civic duty."
. These mother and daughter have filed lawsuits against Rudy Giuliani and the far-right news website The Gateway Pundit, alleging they intentionally spread false information about them. Notably, they have not filed a lawsuit against Trump.
It's indeed regrettable that they got entangled in the election fraud controversy; it seems quite unfair.
I certainly have a right to my opinion in regard to Trump's job performance. You have a right to say anything you please about Trump.
I have no idea what you refer to in regard to Tucker Carlson. I shared with you several times, that I am not a fan nor did I follow his show."Trump himself singled out Freeman, by name, 18 times in a now-famous call in which he pressed Georgia officials to alter the state’s results. He called the 62-year-old temp worker a “professional vote scammer,” a “hustler” and a “known political operative” who “stuffed the ballot boxes.”
How is this acceptable? Who does something like this? How can a man with this type of character be suitable to hold the highest office in the land? His character is reprehensible. Does this not matter whatsoever? These two women have been threatened and driven out of their homes due to these statements. I just completely fail to comprehend excuses for this kind of behavior. It's wrong on all levels.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/sp … s-georgia/I don't have much information about this mother and daughter, but I believe they might have grounds to pursue legal action against Trump. It's disheartening to hear about their apparent suffering.
In these troubling times, my choice for whom to vote for is clear. You've expressed your concerns about Trump's character, and similarly, I have reservations about the entire Democratic party. I'm inclined to seek change out of genuine concern for the current direction our country is heading in.
I view the Democratic party to be far worse than I view Donald Trump.
"There is only one truth and one reality, no matter what the courts find."
Thanks, but I prefer our court system, as flawed as it is, to the hanging mob that has gone after Trump with cries of "Guilty! Guilty!" for years now.
As far as what I hope or want, you haven't the faintest clue; you are making that stupid claim based on my failure to join that hanging mob, nothing else. Personally, I find that kind of thinking disgusting.It is so obvious he just can't accept anyone's view but his own. How did some in our society evolve into this hate-driven mindset?
In this case, TDS. That and an ego that says they know more than police, prosecutors and jurors all put together.
Wilderness: You neve answered my question about the house trying to impeach Biden. The Freedom Caucus is nothing more than a mob that wants to impeach Biden without a fair trial. They are assuming he is guilty until proven he is innocent. Further, they are holding McCarthy hostage if he doesn't do what they want him to. Where is the justice in that? Either he toes their line or he is toast with one vote. It is my opinion, they are doing this on Trump's behalf because he still controls the MAGA part of congress while in the shadows.
In my opinion it is being done as tit-for-tat; you did it to our man, we will do it to yours. Pelosi was "held hostage" (although not quite so obvious), now McCarthy is. Trump was impeached without any real evidence, Biden may be.
I'm failing to see the difference, which is why I have the belief that I do about the "inquiry". Heck, we even have McCarthy explaining that he doesn't need a House vote to start the inquiry...because Pelosi did it first!Pelosi ended up taking a vote though.
She called McCarthy's statement hogwash and doesn't understand why the press keeps repeating it.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna105030
What is a fact though? Is that Republicans are ignoring the rule set by Bill Barr that a house vote must be taken before an impeachment. inquiry is launched.I've gathered that while the House did indeed conduct a vote to initiate the first impeachment inquiry against Trump, it wasn't done until approximately a month into the investigation. Speaker Pelosi formally declared the impeachment inquiry on September 24, 2019, but the House didn't cast their votes on this matter until October 31.
So, to clarify, there was a vote held a month after the impeachment inquiry had commenced. In this context, it could be argued that she wasn't necessarily dishonest with Anderson Cooper but may not have presented the full timeline of events.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect of those who don't have the cognitive knowledge of a subject to know they don't have the knowledge, but think they do.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/ … &ei=56I'm unsure if Trump supporters should be categorized as a single homogeneous group. It's worth noting that there's a psychological term that cautions against such generalizations — "Groupthink," a phenomenon wherein individuals within a group tend to seek consensus, often setting aside their own individual beliefs to align with the group's opinions.
I'm not entirely convinced that it's prudent to diminish people's capacity to view life with a "half-full cup" perspective. From my standpoint, this approach reflects a certain humility, a willingness to refrain from succumbing to groupthink or passing judgment until all the facts are presented. This principle is particularly pertinent in situations like Trump's indictment, where the presumption of innocence until proven guilty seems judicious.
One can't help but consider the numerous accusations directed at Trump, only for him to be ultimately exonerated. It appears somewhat peculiar to wholeheartedly embrace a mindset that leans into groupthink. Nonetheless, it's become increasingly popular and provides shelter to those who may not possess strong individual critical thinking skills.I don't feel or it does not appear that the MAGA movement encourages critical thinking. Quite the opposite.
From my view, Trump encourages his supporters to rely on a "collective construction of rationalization" (an element of groupthink) that allows supporters to avoid critical analysis of fact in favor of easier explanations that "everyone is after Trump" Or "it's just fake news from lib sources" In the end, these rationalizations encourage the MAGA coalition to avoid considering information that conflicts their current belief system. Trump has essentially provided built-in answers for his supporter to circumvent thought and research. No critical thinking skills involved. It seems much like a cult leader that provides rationalizations and dogma to the group they lead; Trump provides dogma to his followers and clear answers for how to respond when challenged. Just my opinion, but I think Trump utilizes components of groupthink and has been able to successfully manipulate the reality of many of his followers. How often have you seen those canned responses used on these very forums?Is that not how ALL politicians talk? Never give the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Always exaggerated and, quite often, outright lies?
It is the way of the world today; never, ever, give enough information to make an informed decision. Always give ONLY that information (true or not) that supports what you want the listener to believe. And it's not limited to politicians, either.Fascinating response! It's clear that we approach this issue from distinct perspectives, as evidenced by our comments. While I respectfully hold a different viewpoint, I genuinely appreciate and respect your thoughts. Reading diverse opinions like yours is always enlightening.
I agree with Willowarbor, but I'm going to delve a little deeper into why Trumpers have been manipulated by Trump's groupthink. Hillary's "Lock her up and Benghazi" were groupthink. TDS with no scientific basis and The Deep State are also a result of groupthink
The Jan. 6 stop the steal, hang Mike Pence, Where are you Nancy are a result of groupthink, Just storming the capital was a result of groupthink. The proud boys and oath keepers were a result of groupthink.
And now The Freedom Caucus is holding Kevin McCarthy hostage while they force him to do The Right Thing or they will vote him out. Of course, the right thing is to impeach Biden, prosecute Hunter, and shutdown the government until they get what they want. This is all brought about by Trump's long reach of groupthink influence on the radical right wing of the house.
Waiting for the trial and hoping they find Trump innocent when the whole world, including Trump, knows that he tried to overturn the election on Jan.6 is also GroupThink. Trump's rallies are designed to invoke groupthink. He is polling ahead while there are four indictments pending, but he and his supporters ignore or don't know they even exists is also groupthink.
Here is the Psychology Today explanation of GroupThink.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/groupthink"I agree with Willowarbor, but I'm going to delve a little deeper into why Trumpers have been manipulated by Trump's groupthink. Hillary's "Lock her up and Benghazi" were groupthink. TDS with no scientific basis and The Deep State are also a result of groupthink" ---
Is it appropriate to assign derogatory labels to any group? For instance, I could use the term "Bidunces" for Biden supporters, but wouldn't this be an instance of participating in the labeling and demeaning of others? I coined this term as an example. Regarding Hillary and her email scandal, it's well-documented that she breached protocol, and Comey chose not to recommend prosecution for various issues he did uncover. Here's a link providing valuable insights and clear evidence of her protocol violations concerning her private server and its careless use.
"The Jan. 6 stop the steal, hang Mike Pence, Where are you Nancy are a result of groupthink, Just storming the capital was a result of groupthink. The proud boys and oath keepers were a result of groupthink." ---
It is evident that the courts have reached verdicts against multiple individuals associated with the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers. It is reasonable to assert that this particular subset of Trump supporters had intentions to cause disruption at the Capitol. However, it is important to note that on that day, there were reportedly up to 30,000 people present for Trump's speech, and the vast majority of them peacefully dispersed afterward.
I want to emphasize the importance of not generalizing or lumping all Trump supporters together. Doing so demonstrates a form of groupthink that oversimplifies a diverse group of individuals. Trump supporters, like any political group, encompass a wide range of perspectives.
Conservatives are generally known for their strong convictions, aversion to violence, adherence to common sense principles, and their pride in being independent thinkers. They tend not to be easily swayed by trends or fads; for instance, it would be improbable to find a staunch Republican purchasing a "pet rock."
It is crucial to acknowledge that there are indeed right-wing extremist groups, but they do not represent the majority of Trump supporters, and they do not neatly align with any political party.
"And now The Freedom Caucus is holding Kevin McCarthy hostage while they force him to do The Right Thing or they will vote him out. Of course, the right thing is to impeach Biden, prosecute Hunter, and shutdown the government until they get what they want. This is all brought about by Trump's long reach of groupthink influence on the radical right wing of the house." ---
I ask how many are in the actual "Freedom Caucus"? They are clearly a group that supports Trump, but you should realize the remaining Republicans in the House are individuals, and all have their own opinion on whether Biden should be impeached. The Hunter Biden investigation is being conducted under the current DOJ. As well as the House Judicial Committee. So, not sure anyone can stop that in-motion wrecking ball. I have shared my view in regard to the need to investigate Hunter Biden and ascertain if Joe Biden played any part in his businesses. It's very much too glaring to note that all the transactions Hunter made were conducted with Nations that Joe Biden was appointed to oversee Foreign policy. Again, I am not claiming Joe Biden is guilty, only that the information that has been rolling in be looked at carefully.
"Waiting for the trial and hoping they find Trump innocent when the whole world, including Trump, knows that he tried to overturn the election on Jan.6 is also GroupThink. Trump's rallies are designed to invoke groupthink. He is polling ahead while there are four indictments pending, but he and his supporters ignore or don't know they even exist is also groupthink." ---
I'm curious about the size of the "Freedom Caucus." They appear to be a small group strongly aligned with Trump, but it's essential to recognize they are few. The remaining Republicans in the House are individuals, each with their own opinions regarding the potential impeachment of Biden. It's worth noting that the Hunter Biden investigation is currently underway within the Department of Justice and the House Judicial Committee. Therefore, they have no power to stop either investigation.
I've previously expressed my viewpoint on the necessity of investigating Hunter Biden to determine if there was any involvement by Joe Biden in his business dealings. It's hard to ignore the fact that these transactions took place with nations that Joe Biden was tasked with overseeing in terms of foreign policy. Please understand that I'm not making any accusations against Joe Biden but simply emphasizing the importance of scrutinizing the information that has come to light.
Regarding the anticipation of Trump's trial and the hope for his acquittal, it's important not to assume what others are thinking about his guilt or innocence. When it comes to his favorable polling numbers, it's essential to consider the issues being polled. This can provide insights into why Trump is leading in the polls.
I often find it puzzling when people question why Trump maintains popularity. To understand this, one should examine the concerns being raised in the polls. Many individuals seem disheartened by the direction in which the country is heading. They express concerns about the economy, immigration, education, differing ideologies, crime rates, the influx of drugs, and the associated deaths, a very expensive war, as well as his foreign policies.
Additionally, some are disheartened by what they perceive as a government promoting division through race-related issues, and an overreach into parental rights.
Lastly, there is frustration with an administration that appears to control and restrict what a president can say or should not say. Some believe that the president has aged and may be experiencing cognitive decline, which they feel hinders his ability to perform his duties effectively.
So, I would guess Trump is garnering support due to many feeling he did a better job at many of the above issues I have offered. hard to say why he leads in the polls --- you see not all people think alike. Especially conservatives.
Source for Comey findings https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases … ail-system
I have left a lengthy comment, in hopes of sharing my views, on all of your sentiments. It should work to help you understand my sentiments."Is it appropriate to assign derogatory labels to any group? For instance, I could use the term "Bidunces" for Biden supporters, but wouldn't this be an instance of participating in the labeling and demeaning of others?"
Didn't you just assign groupthink to anti-Trumpers, isn't that demeaning, isn't TDS demeaning, libtard, commie socialist. They are all demeaning.?
I see conservatives in these forums as self-aggrandizing and self-righteous without realizing they are being hypocritical.
"It is evident that the courts have reached verdicts against multiple individuals associated with the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers. It is reasonable to assert that this particular subset of Trump supporters had intentions to cause disruption at the Capitol. However, it is important to note that on that day, there were reportedly up to 30,000 people present for Trump's speech, and the vast majority of them peacefully dispersed afterward."
Who cares? My point is the proud boys and oath keepers were all influenced by Trump and were practicing groupthink..
"Regarding the anticipation of Trump's trial and the hope for his acquittal, it's important not to assume what others are thinking about his guilt or innocence. When it comes to his favorable polling numbers, it's essential to consider the issues being polled. This can provide insights into why Trump is leading in the polls."
That's important for you, but not for those of us who are not in denial of the facts we have witnessed.
I get the feeling you think groupthink involves a lot of people. It really doesn't have to in order to have leverage in political terms.
.The neocons were a small group of individuals, including Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle and Paul Bremer. While not identifying as neoconservatives, senior officials Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld listened closely to neoconservative advisers regarding foreign policy, especially the defense of Israel and the promotion of American influence in the Middle East.
They were able to convince the UN that we should go to war because Saddam Hussein had WMDs. They showed artist renderings of what they looked like. They were not even photographs. But it was enough to get us into a 20 year war.
The Freedom Caucus is a relatively small group, but they have a lot of power when they can decide who becomes the speaker of the house.
But anyway, I understand your sentiments and thanks for talking down to me. That is exactly the tone of voice I get from your comments to me."Is it appropriate to assign derogatory labels to any group? For instance, I could use the term "Bidunces" for Biden supporters, but wouldn't this be an instance of participating in the labeling and demeaning of others?"
PP statement - Didn't you just assign groupthink to anti-Trumpers, isn't that demeaning, isn't TDS demeaning, libtard, commie socialist. They are all demeaning.?
My context shares that sentiment. I clearly was offering an example of labeling and demeaning others. I have never used the words libtard, commie socialist, or TDS on any chat forum.
"I see conservatives in these forums as self-aggrandizing and self-righteous without realizing they are being hypocritical."
As I have shared, conservatives, in my view, tend to have characteristics that could be seen as self-righteous, and prideful due to using common sense. I see them as more apt to be independent in their thought process. Hey, that is just my view...
"Who cares? My point is the proud boys and oath keepers were all influenced by Trump and were practicing groupthink.."
And my point is that both are groups that share ideologies. However, these groups should not be lumped in with all conservatives or Republicans. Again, we are individuals with varying ideologies.
"That's important for you, but not for those of us who are not in denial of the facts we have witnessed."
I have asked ECO as well as others here --- please offer me one piece of evidence that could be used in a court of law. So, far no takers. Yes, there have been many allegations, and views shared, but no real plausible evidence that might stand up before a judge.
'
I totally understand your displeasure with all that we have needed to witness in regard to Trump's various indictments. And yes, it is all disturbing allegations. I do feel these trials will give him a final chance to defend himself and end this ongoing turmoil once and for all.
I have shared that I hoped we as a nation would be given two new candidates. I think this alone could help us all move on or at least make efforts to move on. All of this political turmoil is taking us in the wrong direction.
To anyone who wants to have a go at this excerpt from the link/article
"When delving into the perplexing world of politics and the enigmatic figure of Donald Trump, we often encounter a peculiar phenomenon amongst his supporters: a staunch refusal to accept any criminal allegation or felony charge against him, no matter how compelling the evidence."
What concrete proof exists that could withstand legal scrutiny to establish Trump's guilt? Let's be mindful that hearsay and secondhand information don't hold up in a courtroom. So, where is this compelling evidence?
Up until now, I haven't come across any substantial evidence. Nevertheless, the author of this article insists that I should "accept criminal allegations" and asserts the presence of compelling proof. However, amidst all the rhetoric, the author fails to present any of this compelling evidence. So, who is genuinely grappling with what he labels a phenomenon?Sharlee: I'm going to keep this simple. When it comes to Trump, your glass is half full and mine is half empty. You see him from your positive aspects of him. I see him from his negative aspects of him. Just like you see Biden from his negative aspects. I see Biden from his positive aspect of him. The difference is that you justify your negative aspect of him by claiming that you have studied him for years. Where is your evidence that you have done that?
What the author is saying is that Trumpers, including himself are in denial of any wrong doings because it would make them feel bad if they accepted him for what he is. Therefore, it is easier for them to be in denial and feel good about him."Sharlee: I'm going to keep this simple. When it comes to Trump, your glass is half full and mine is half empty. "
This is 100% true...
" The difference is that you justify your negative aspect of him by claiming that you have studied him for years. Where is your evidence that you have done that?"
I actually put together an extensive Hubpage to document my research before the 2020 election, titled "Say It Ain't So Joe" (updated in 2022). Whenever I share my thoughts on President Biden, I ensure that I've done my due diligence by clearly distinguishing between facts and opinions, often providing supporting sources.
Having closely observed his 50-year history in Washington, it's remarkably straightforward to research the track record of politicians we've elected to represent us.
I make it a personal commitment to thoroughly research candidates in every election where I exercise my voting privilege.
I believe the article was poorly executed and seemed to contain a lot of unsubstantiated claims. In my view, the author talks about evidence but fails to provide any. I frown upon anyone who lumps people together, similar to Hillary Clinton's "basket of deplorables" remark.
For me, it's not about denial; it's about exercising clear, common sense and refraining from passing judgment on anyone until sufficient evidence of wrongdoing is presented. I'm proud to say that I will never prematurely label someone as guilty without a fair examination of the evidence.
It's not a case of me being in denial; it's not a perspective I hold to see the glass as half-empty. That, I must admit, seems to be your viewpoint.
Related Discussions
- 75
Majority Say Biden Seeking to Jail Trump to Stop His Reelection
by Readmikenow 9 days ago
In our new national poll 56% of all voters think Biden really wants to stop Trump from winning by putting him in jail.Democratic constituencies also have a negative view of Biden's actions with African Americans at 41%, Hispanics at 53%, and women at 53% agreeing.Here are more findings of our poll...
- 142
Are Trump Supporters Blind? Sheep? Misinformed? Misleading?
by Allen Donald 4 years ago
Three things have happened in recent days that should have any logical person convinced that President Trump is a liar and guilty of the thing he's being impeached for:1. His lawyers have asserted that the reason for withholding aid to Ukraine had to due with the fact they were responsible for...
- 65
Keeping Up With The Presidential Race Polls Trump Verses Biden
by Sharlee 7 months ago
Disapproval ratings. Aug 16, 2023Trump holds a rating of 55.9https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/po … ald-trump/Biden holds a rating of 54.4 https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/bi … al-rating/Today (August 16th) I ask --- Do you think Trump's indictments will...
- 304
Trump's Criminal Trials
by J Conn 45 hours ago
The country will get at least one verdict before the November election. The New York Hush Money/Election Interference case is set to kick off on March 25. Trump attorneys attempts to get charges dropped and the case delayed were struck...
- 50
The next 13 days - What will Trump do next?
by PrettyPanther 3 years ago
Personally, I think yesterday's events were entirely predictable and the logical progression of a lying con man telling his supporters, day in and day out, over the course of several years, that everyone who is not for him is an enemy of the United States. The angry mob is directly the result...
- 29
When are Trump Supporters Going to Realize They've Been Conned?
by Allen Donald 3 years ago
It's no fun when somebody takes advantage of you. It's exceedingly hard to admit when somebody has sold you something that turns out not to work. It's also hard to admit when somebody tells you something, insisting it's true, and it turns out to be totally false.There are literally millions of...