Of course not. Donald stick to his lies even on things he has been proven beyond doubt to be lying about. He has virtually no positions of his own... hillary has several things worth questioning but in the end nothing nearly as bad as trump.
I'm not a fan of political correctness myself, to be honest. I don't see the ruckus over saying Merry Christmas and hate the fact that Happy Holidays is used instead.
That's not really what political correctness is intended for. Conservatives just like to bring it up to further their narrative about Christianity being under attack or whatever keeps old grannies awake at night. But yeah, telling someone Merry Christmas isn't offending or disadvantaging anyone really.
Pandering isn't offensive? Avoiding stating something that's really rings false is somehow taking a side? I understand your concern, but I hope you notice the failures in logic here?
...so what exactly does that have to do with trust or his stances? Weren't there all sorts of conspiracy theories about Obama years before Trump voiced himself on that? And that's certainly not the first or only conspiracy theory he involved himself with. And didn't that conspiracy theory end quite good? Obama giving proof, which is enough to please most of the people who doubted him. Only interesting is why it took him some years to do much about it but oh well.
Judging from the rest of your response, your actual answer isn't "of course not" as that would be saying she is less untrustworthy than Trump, but instead "yes", although admittedly my question was confusingly put.
Examples please? And you can literally say the very same thing for Hillary.
Really? What did he do that's so much worse than what she did? Remember we're talking about trustworthiness. Personally I find it a lot more alerting that someone like Hillary who was involved in politics most of her life is so unstable as she is. She's a different person depending on the number of the year.
Well, here is an example. With humor!
Wait, so you'd be fine with an attention-whoring public figure pushing some crackpot conspiracy theory only for him to be utterly wrong? Your opinion of him wouldn't change at all? He wouldn't be discredited in any way? The "good" ending for him and birthers is if they were right, not them being proven wrong. I think it's rather obvious why the movement had as much steam as it did, and it had very little to do with him living in Indonesia as a kid. Trump might not have started it, but he was the loudest and most public voice regarding it for some time.
As much as I dislike Clinton, she was right when she said Trump traffics in prejudice and paranoia. His involvement in the Birther movement is the only proof you need to see that.
Then what is it intended for?
Only if you're not a Trump supporter, otherwise I think the only way Trump could lose support is if he says Muslims shouldn't be banned at all or says walls are unnecessary.
So what you're saying is: "She is better at deceiving me, hence she's more trustworthy!"? Sound logic m8.
No, I really fail to see your point. At best you seem like a big fan of Obama which is why this conspiracy theory of 3 years ago is "making all your points" as you say.
I'm not "fine" with it,
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
So you're saying it's more likely the neighbors were lying? Why?
--- Double Post Merged, ---
Actually, I'd go so far as to assume that most of his supporters would still stay with him after that, since he'd find something else to keep the people entertained, and he's still the "anti-government guy" and all.
Well, he'd never say that either. Something like that is too controversial, and subjective anyway. He's a Christian, after all.
Stating facts about someone means you're a big fan of them? I'm not a big fan of Obama, nor any politician, but that has nothing to do with the topic either way. Trump still hasn't gone back on it either when asked about it, so it being from 3 years ago is kinda irrelevant.
You don't see how much of an attention-seeker this guy is? Were you even aware of him before he ran for president? The guy is media-savvy, even if it's something he thought was true, what's the point of continually speaking on it if he had no intention of influencing the public over it? Why give so much credence to the movement without hard evidence?
I don't see why you would want to give him credit for perpetuating it in order to prove himself wrong. That makes no sense. That's obviously not what Birthers were trying to do either. A good result for a Birther is his election being rendered illegal and him being kicked out of office. Also, define "never cared"? He denied it whenever he was asked as far as I can recall. His campaign produced a short version of his certificated and later on when he was in office he asked Hawaii to wave their policy on not producing long-form printed versions of it and released that as well.
I brought up other conspiracy theories as an example, not making any sort of value or moral judgment on believing them or not. Just merely saying that buying into these theories have an effect on the perception of a person's judgment in a general sense. I would think that much is pretty obvious.
Why would you "never forgive him"? How does the wall being built or not have any effect on your life? That's an aspect of the US's domestic policy that has nothing to do with Europe really. Why exactly is that your breaking point?
I did say "even if she does" which merely implies there is the possibility of her lying and giving her the benefit of doubt. Trump is a proven pathological liar who sticks to tales which are easily falsified... It's ridiculous.So what you're saying is: "She is better at deceiving me, hence she's more trustworthy!"? Sound logic m8.And do you get most of your info from comedy youtube videos? Just curious.
It's an example! I don't care if he says a religion is a religion of peace, as long as he doesn't demonize anyone or anything that doesn't deserve it or takes side. A president shouldn't take sides, like the candidates and etc are with Israel vs. Palestine. All someone like Trump and Cruz is doing is creating hatred and scapegoat, whether they blame Muslims and suggest blocking them or monitoring them or when they say white shooters are people with mental issues.
I think he was joking. but then again, it's not like Trump supporters have a brain anyway.
We're going around in circles. I think I made my point regarding political correctness enough times already.
Well, why wouldn't it be blamed on mental issues? Not that it can't be a gun control issue as well. The problem is it's too inconvenient to actually do anything about it from a politician's POV.