Why believe something false when it's so easy to verify it.
Something I will never understand is people’s complete and utter willingness to accept fictions portrayed as fact without so much as a question. There are people in this country who believe that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are comparably bad options for president. The reality is Trump is factually worse. Some people willingly ignore Trump’s bad points and believe the flagrant and bogus lies told about Clinton. Now I’m going to start this by saying something that some of you reading those first two sentences are going to immediately doubt, I don’t endorse Hillary for president, but since my only other option is Trump it’s literally a no brainer choice. Hilary is better for the country.
Trumps multiple bankruptcies, failed business ventures and the misuse of charitable donations to the Trump Foundation prove he’s irresponsible with people’s money and pretty terrible at negotiated profitable business deals. He claimed his temperament was his best asset when he goes on twitter rants at 3 A.M.. Even with all these clear displays of his lack of ability to be president people still believe Clinton is not only equal but in some cases worse.
Why is that what could Clinton have done that make people look so down on her, well turns out most of it is either, not nearly as bad as it looks or completely, or mostly false. So most the not nearly as bad as they look I will post a link to the segment in last week tonight where John Oliver perfectly sums up the difference between the two’s public scandals.
The parts of the Clinton hate I want to focus on here is the fiction or mostly fictitious parts that people seem to believe with at best circumstantial evidence. Sometimes completely fictitious evidence.
So let’s start with one people seem to believe with no evidence, The man who leaked Hillary’s secret medical history found dead. Which if you head over to Snopes, a site that posts sources not baseless comments without evidence, you’d see that’s false, I’ll just post the link here so you don’t have to search it yourself. Yes, I will post a Snopes link for everything they have on Clinton that people believe which is totally false.
http://www.snopes.com/person-who-leaked-hillary-clintons-medical-records-found-dead/
So let’s move on to another one, this one actually came up in a discussion with a Trump supporter I had over the previous week, that Clinton had Seth Rich murdered because he was going to testify against Clinton. I, of course, told him that was fiction, which it is, he conceded that there wasn’t proof she murdered him, but that he was going to testify against her and he is dead, and then I pointed out, that no, the testifying against her part was fiction. In case you were wondering yes, you can google this and find the Snopes article where they post the facts about the incident. But you don’t have to I’ve got you covered with the link.
http://www.snopes.com/seth-conrad-rich/
The hacker known as ‘Guccifer’ was found missing from his cell when the FBI went to question him about the Clinton E-mail scandal. This is complete fiction as The hacker known as Guccifer is still in prison and is not missing.
http://www.snopes.com/guccifer-missing-from-jail-cell/
Then, of course, the death of a U.N. official that is somehow Clinton’s fault, because, as some would believe, he was going to testify against her, but of course that’s not true.
So if you’ve read these Snopes posts you’ve learned that they all seem to stem from a website called whatdoesitmean.com whose author is described by rationalwiki as "Sorcha Faal is the alleged author of an ongoing series of "reports" published at WhatDoesItMean.com, whose work is of such quality that even other conspiracy nutters don't think much of it. .” not exactly a trusted news source. But people still believe them. Another source of bizarre Clinton theories is Alex Jones and his site and youtube channel, infowars. Alex Jones is described by rational wiki as " a radio entertainer and comedian who specializes in making up conspiracy theories to entertain his audience. " Taken from the description of his website, "The only time something with any relative truth appears on Infowars is when they post articles from the mainstream media that is supposedly in on the whole conspiracy Alex pushes, so much that any episode of Infowars is not complete without a take-down of the 'lamestream media'." Donal Trump had said “Your reputation is amazing.” to Alex Jones. That's right, Donald Trump touted the reputation of a man whose website is so full of conspiracy theories that his advertisement links are to more conspiracy theories. A man who on his show called Barak Obama the literal Devil.
The Clinton freed a child rapist claim, people believe this, I saw a Trump supporter post a youtube video the other day about it, presenting the “facts” about it. But, of course, it was not the facts it was fictitious evidence. As you can see from the Snopes article, where I must once again point out the fact that Snopes posts sources and doesn’t just make up wild claims, is not really the truth of the matter.
http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/
All people have to do is make a simple google search a simple look into the internet, where people require their staff to post facts supported by sources. That’s all it takes to look into the face of fiction, to see that many of the claims trump supporters claim are fiction. Snopes isn’t the only source of this information, I mean they had to get it from somewhere, but it was an easy and efficient source. Something easy to be understood, and simple to find without too much effort. A perfect example of how easy it is to find out the truth of a matter.
This election is not republican versus democrat, This isn’t a whoever you pick is fine election. Trump is less fit to be president than Hillary, that is a simple fact. They’re not even close on the level of scandals and yet people still see Clinton as less trustworthy. People still see her as being worse for silly or fictitious reasons.
It's gotten so bad that if you show facts that a Clinton scandal isn't as bad as they assume, they immediately think that the website or TV personality, like John Oliver, is paid by Clinton to say these things. A woman claimed to have had multiple people killed without evidence in her rise to power but somehow is simultaneously so incompetent as to not eliminate any of Bill Sexual assault victims. Two things that cannot logically be true at the same time.
People are so polarized this election, not because of party lines, but because of people who adhere to party lines when their candidate is not only worse than their opponent, and it’s not a matter of opinion, Trump being worse for the country than Clinton is a fact.
It’s fine if you don’t instantly believe me, I don’t mind any of that, what I mind is if you continue to adhere to that position in the face of facts that you could easily look up yourself, or a refusal to back down from a position that is rather clearly based on nothing substantial.