But there's the key mistake. You don't know ANY politicians motives. This is a truism. You might as well argue no one knows anyone's motives. We'll get to that in a second.
You just presume you do based on the media image and whatever you can remember about things they've said in the past. I've already said this more than once -- my father knew him (my father was a real estate lender, smart enough to never give the guy a dime); I know people who know him (nearly a dozen) because I work in his industry; I've read some of his books. The presumption is yours. Unless you happen to personally know a President then you've got no way of actually knowing. You are contradicting yourself. See your truism. By your own definition you do not believe this. Just because I personally know someone I cannot know that person's motives, according to you.
This is the difference. I don't claim to know Trumps character or "real agenda". Neither do I. Read my post. I say this very thing. I simply don't trust him, because I can prove he lies, regularly. I don't claim to know anything unknowable. Everything that he says is taken in good faith and judged on its merits or failures without prejudice. Mate, you don't even treat some people on this chatboard with "good faith", but that aside, this is a ridiculous statement based on his history, which makes you either naive, a total patsy, lacking in common sense, unknowledgable or -- my guess -- just posturing.
You self admittedly START with the idea that whatever he's doing is "bad". I did no such thing. I said I can prove he lies, and has lied, for years, and as such I do not trust him. It's not my fault so much is a matter of public record, that he provides the evidence, that I know people who know him, that I understand some of his businesses and how he has acted consistently for years. That's in no way a rational or decent position to take. LOL. I beg to differ. That's an incredibly partisan mindset for a start, and secondly, you will constantly find exactly what you're looking for because people always do. I voted for Romney in 2012, and Reagan, and the first Bush, as well as Clinton twice, Gore, Kerry and Obama the first time -- so my "partisanship" is yet another erroneous presumption on your part. And I'd love to see Steve Bullock take on Nikki Haley so I had a choice between two people I think would make good leaders. And all you had to do was ask. If you want to find evidence that Obama is a Kenyan Muslim ISIS member then you will. What the literal fuck are you talking about? I mean, seriously? This is like a Naked Gun movie.
That's the basis of scientific thought for about 1000 years or so. Gosh, that's not very condescending. It's why you start in the middle and not already declare to one side.
