JuggaloJ said

Typical cowardly pivot, switched subjects up REAL quick didn’t you? 

Cause you can’t address the substance of what I said.

I’m not worried. Don’t believe it’s over. Only is funnier to me when it finally sinks in to you all.   

I didn't pivot. I merely posted info I had just found unrelated to what you had said while not reading the thread. I just went back and read what you said.. I have found that it is not worth responding much to people who say Trump is racist. If you can point out where he has done racist things (things directed against a particular race) while in office I will listen. I have heard many things pointed out where what he has done while in office is called racist but when reviewed, it seems he did not say or do what they claimed. 

Find what he has done while in office that is racist. Not against a nation but actually against a race. While you are looking for that, look up what he has done positively for many Americans who racist people like to call "Black", "Brown" or whatever.  If this is about moral character, then please point out, like so many others, that he put people in cages and I will respond as I have done several times on here and will also provide the link to the executive order where he ordered the Obama policy of family separation and putting kids in cages be ended soon after he learned that it was still occurring. 

I'll check back tomorrow when I get back online.

JuggaloJ said
So when Trump said it was IMPOSSIBLE for a Mexican judge to be impartial, that wasn’t bigotry? 

Or do YOU think everyone is capable of being an individual and they don’t just make decisions based on their nationality? 🤔  

First, he did not say it was impossible for a Mexican judge to be impartial. He said the he did not think that judge could be impartial specifically. He also said many Mexican judges could be impartial but this judge held his heritage above impartiality.

When he disrespected the mother of a soldier who died for this nation, insinuating that she may be “forbidden from speaking” because she was Muslim, that wasn’t bigotry? 

Or do YOU think people are individuals, and Muslims practice their religion in all different various ways?  (she was NOT forbidden from speaking, she was grief stricken over her son too much to speak) 🤔

I do think people are individuals and I do thing people practice their religion in many ways. I do know (from living in an area with a high Muslim population and having over half of my non-work friends practicing Muslims) that some are fundamentalist and do restrict wives from communicating openly. It is a possibility and like he said, "maybe she wasn't allowed to have anything to say." Yes, afterwards, she said it was because she was grief stricken. I believe her. I also think Trump's speculations were not completely unfounded. I would not have handled it the way he did. I also would not have done what the Khan family did by attacking Trump (all this was before he was even president) during public appearances before Trump ever said one word about them and not expect an attack back. 

When he said we don’t need any more people from shithole countries was that not clear bigotry?

Or do YOU think that regardless how shitty and rundown a country  due to its governance, it does not reflect in any shape or form on the people who live within that country? 🤔

So you believe the many news sites that said he said "people from shithole countries"? They all relate to the initial claim by the Washington Post who said their source were aides who were briefed directly following the meeting. They were not in actual attendance. Those in attendance have never claimed he said those words, some who were in attendance have not denied he use profanity but did say they do no remember him talking about "people from shithole countries". When the only sources are people who did not attend the meeting, I have to question it. Could he have said it. Of course. Did he actually say it when people who were actually in attendance have said he didn't, maybe. But to take the word of aides of democrat politicians who were not in attendance over those who were is not good journalism.

I’ve got PLENTY more, but I think I proved my point lol.

Go ahead, try to twist yourself into a pretzel defending your moral principles 😂  

Did I do well enough?  If not, can't say I didn't try :P

But, I do believe people are individuals and there were many different reasons people voted for Trump. From my twitter presence, I have found there are many who voted for Trump, not because they like his morals (some find them repulsive) but they believe that if they voted based on morals, it would cause more harm to the country. Some looked at it as the lesser of two evils. Some look at the direction that they see a Biden admin taking the U.S. would be far worse in the long run than anything Trump could do. 

Everyone has their reasons for who they voted for. One of my co-workers voted Libertarian. Not because he believed the party had any chance of winning but because he felt that her platform touted ideas that were the farthest from government control of any other candidate.