Division and Unity Pt.3

Between when I wrote the previous part and now when I am writing this part, the George Floyd murder, following protests, and later ensuing riots happened. The first post I made when returning to writing was the one I wrote in response to a youtube video which in itself was a response to the President's actions against peaceful protesters outside the white house, in his need to get a photo op with an upside-down bible in front of a church. Up until this point the people who have been reading this as I write it have told me that maybe I am a bit too harsh in regard to Trump. Then he gave a speech claiming he will send military personnel to put down the protests and riots going on in the cities across America making no distinction between rioters and peaceful protesters. 

When I wrote that piece I included an oft paraphrased quote from Lincoln. One often used incorrectly. The quote is often used to warn of threats within our own people, but in reality the quote is about the threat of ourselves. Of our ability to force division where none need be. I say often used incorrectly because the people who tend to paraphrase it use it to divide. To make you suspect of those you might otherwise trust. Which is ultimately exactly what the speech was meant to warn you from. 

I also mentioned something about my friends who believed they needed to hold onto their guns against a tyrannical government and about how they can’t vote for a democrat because they would take their guns away. Thing is, I actually trust them to be able to hold onto said guns should a democrat get elected who claims they would try to take their guns away. I do not trust them to hold onto their guns when a candidate they are willing to vote for cries “Fake news,” or threatens protesters. That is a far subtler, insidious, and effective way to disarm a population. People divided will give up their freedoms in exchange for their safety. Sometimes far too many, too quickly for them to realize they have given away the ones they cared about most. 

There is a call for unity being herald across the nation as I write this and it is going unanswered. There is a call for leadership out there, but it too goes unanswered. A country divided is a country wounded. A divided populace is weak and easy to control. The more you hunker down into your position and the more you fight against the idea that anyone has the right to disagree with you the more weak we all become. It doesn’t matter if you support Trump, it doesn’t matter if you support the protesters. What matters is that you support the protesters’ right to peaceful protest, in whatever fashion that takes.

It is also very important to keep the protesters, and the rioters and looters, separate in your head. It is important to understand what reasons may have caused people to believe that violence is the only way for them to get a response from their leadership. Remember, Martin Luther King more than once said, “Riots are the voice of the unheard.” It is important to understand that riots do not always happen because violent people want to be violent but because helpless people want to be heard. Violence answering violence will only lead to more violence. Only when we stop and listen can we heal the wound. Only when we decry violence in all its forms and call for peace and understanding can we move forward. 

The first amendment of the American constitution guarantees the right to free speech, religion, press and protest. Those are the methods of which we can demand the government be answerable to us rather than the other way around. Anyone decrying any of those rights, from trying to shut down protests, to “Fake news,” to calling for someone to be banned from speaking publicly must be opposed on all fronts until they relinquish that stance. 

That last one might be a bit of a stickler for some people but I’ll try to help you understand my reasoning. You see if you ban someone from speaking publicly for saying something, even if you find that thing reprehensible won’t stop them from saying that thing, it will only stop you from hearing it. That doesn’t solve the problem and can even make it worse since they likely can still reach the people that agree with them. They will now likely double down and start building resentment towards people who disagree with them. Stories of people with these viewpoints being banned will spread and their community will flourish somewhere else. Mislabels will get thrown around and someone will get banned for not sharing the reprehensible opinion but sounding too close to it by the wrong person, this leads to them being pushed into the community that is flourishing but now has been ignored by many as the believe banning it from public view solved the problem. 

This doesn’t solve the problem as it just hides it from the public. This also presents a second problem, which is now the denial of the problem at all. There also is the third problem which is that speech evolves, and if you aren’t monitoring it it can change its form without you knowing. This can cause someone who is unaware, see problem two, to repeat words they don’t realize the meaning of to flag themselves to others as an ally to a community they may not agree with. Then they get banned double down and well we repeat the process. 

This doesn’t mean you don’t have a right to be offended or a right to turn away or block that person from your life. You don’t have a responsibility to get that person to listen, but I would still ask you to be willing to talk if they asked you with sincerity and humility. 

Recently on social media Kenny Deforest shared a story about Dave Chapelle and him dealing with a heckler, it was beautifully handled and you should go read it yourself. I'd rather not ruin it by paraphrasing it here. After dealing with the heckler on stage, backstage the girl(heckler) came to see him and told him how sorry she was, etc., and Chapelle responded, “you’re ok. That’s all we can ask. Know better, do better. I want to thank YOU for hearing me and listening. That’s your role. And now you know. Now you’re part of that critical mass we talked about and next time you hear a friend say some ignorant shit like you said, it’s your job to correct them and share with them what you learned tonight. THEN, you’re no longer part of the problem, you’re part of the solution.”

Behind the reprehensible speech is a person, one who doesn’t have any more of an idea what’s going on in this world than you do, and only by finding some common ground can you ever reach your hand to pull them out. Because maybe, just maybe they need a place to belong and one community offered them a helping hand and the other told them they were wrong. Even if that helping hand is only there as a tool to manipulate, control, and exploit it can feel like salvation to someone who doesn’t see any other choice. Or maybe they just don’t know any better and just need someone with compassion to educate them.

At a time in my life I might have turned that corner, I’m an Atheist and there was a time where I could have looked for any hand that would help me from where I stood. But luckily for me were the welcoming hands of Douglas Adams novels, Monty Python sketches, and Richard Dawkins lectures. Most importantly would probably be the collected miscellaneous works of Douglas Adams included in Salmon of Doubt. On some level, I thought I had processed Douglas Adams's death, well before I picked up that book, but when tears flowed down my face as I reached those final pages I came to the realization that I had not. 

I would be remiss if I did not also mention the Youtube and gaming personality that was the late John “Totalbiscuit” Bain. He had a level of integrity and honesty that was so refreshing in the youtube and gaming media scene. 

I realized at some point that that is what I want from anyone and will gravitate away from people who are not either, but toward people who are both. Even if it is only later on that they become so. That ultimately is probably my main point with all this and all its parts, I want people to have more integrity and be more honest. For people to be willing to be wrong so that we can all grow. No more, “well I want to but they won’t go for it.” That’s an excuse and we all know it. We need to be better, all of us or we risk destroying ourselves. 

At the end of the day this is all just my opinion based on how I see things, and like everyone else any part of that can change at any moment. Let’s just hope and try to change for the better whenever possible. That’s the most we can ever ask for.

Division and Unity Pt. 1

When I wrote the Mental Health and Writing post I noted that there was a lot that I wanted to go into that detract too much from the main post or didn’t have the time to go into. This is one of those things, as will likely be many of the other posts I make within the next few weeks. Sadly, this one will involve one of my least favorite subjects, politics, but hopefully not more than necessary, since I don’t believe politics are the only way this subject can be interpreted. 

One thing I want to say outright at the start is to address the point many people very much misunderstood about me during the 2016 presidential election. I am not a Democrat, though it seems that anyone who is against Trump is labeled one anyway. Therein lies probably my most important distinction, I am against Trump as a person, not policy or political alignment. There are many ideas that conservative voters or politicians have that I could easily see myself agreeing with if I was raised in a different way or experienced a different life, so there would be, to me, a way to have a conversation and for us to disagree. Disagreement is important to form and refine your point of view, and direction of actions.

Donald Trump does not have room in his life for anyone who disagrees with him, and that at the first go is too much for him to get my vote. I can not vote for someone so against the idea of counter opinion. People disagree all the time, and to immediately dismiss someone’s idea on the grounds that they disagree with you is such a childish idea that it immediately tells me you lack the maturity for that kind of political position. Sure, there are many other things about Trump I disagree with, but many of them stem from his immaturity.

The most important thing I can tell you about disagreements, if there are no circumstances at which you could ever find yourself agreeing with someone you disagree with, you likely do not understand their position or your disagreement. Reality is very complex and everyone has a different life and different experiences, you can find common ground to relate to one another, but similar experiences can cause different reactions in different people. Someone can suffer a trauma that causes them PTSD but then someone else can experience something similar and just move past it. Some people can forgive abusers and some cannot understand how anyone could. 

This is the world we live in and we need to keep in mind how people have deeper layers than are immediately apparent. 

Now hopefully, I haven’t stopped everyone who likes Trump from reading this far, because I am going to make a few points here that sound like I’m going to bat for them, and in a way I am. My disagreements with Trump don’t mean that I can’t empathize and try to raise up and support people who voted for him. 

There are real reasons why people feel oppressed, and ways you can sympathize or empathize with that oppression. Now, it’s true that there seem to be ways that people feel oppression but shouldn’t really, under circumstances as you understand them. So people respond with anger and offence to someone feeling oppressed, who either society or studies determine shouldn’t feel oppressed. The problem is people fall through the cracks, people are unique and simply because someone doesn't have a reason to feel oppressed, from a societal or study based understanding of things doesn’t mean someone can’t feel oppressed.

A great example of this that so many people turn a blind eye to, is Celebrity depression, and mental illness. Almost universally people question, “What does <enter any celebrity’s name here> have to be depressed about?” Simply looking at the fact that this happens and how many times Celebrities die from depression or overdose-related deaths means that even though from appearances that someone should be above feeling like they can be oppressed, it doesn't mean they can’t feel it. And as a society, we need to accept that this happens so we can try to understand why this happens.

The only way to stop someone from being a racist isn’t to call them a racist, it’s to find out what makes them racist, and most importantly in this day and age if they even are. People have real concerns that do not always cross all lines, and, there we go back to my original point. We need to listen to people who disagree with us in order to change and grow our point of view. 

Now I know many of you out there are like, “but the other side does it more, or did it first.” The only response I have is, “It doesn’t mean you have to continue it.” The only way we move past this and move forward is to make people feel that you’re listening, not tell people that they are not worth listening to. That is how we come back to how people voted for Trump. Whether you agree with it or not, he made the people who voted for him believe he was listening to them. His detractors made this worse by making it clear they weren’t listening to his supporters or even trying to. Calling someone who supports Trump a racist doesn’t help anyone, it doesn’t extend the conversation it kills it, by telling everyone you aren’t listening to his supporters. 

There are two responses you can have to someone saying something to you that offends you. Call them some form of Bigot, or ask them what makes them feel that way. Only the latter leads to a way forward, a way to understanding and getting someone to come around. Only the latter can get a Klansmen to turn in his robes. The best thing that can happen from the former, is that they double down on their stance, the worst thing is when you drive them into becoming someone worse. 

Sympathy and empathy is the only way for us to understand one another and I know it’s hard, but showing sympathy or empathy to someone you have no reason you can find to do so is the only way to stop the narrative control someone like Donald Trump has on them. The uncomfortable part of this that I have to point out is that if you ever said anything along the lines of, “You will vote/have voted for Trump so you’re a bigot.” you’re as responsible for Trump’s win as anyone who actually voted for him.

The only way to defeat Trump is to stand together, to help people, to support each other in situations that maybe you don’t understand why they should need support. Now, this might seem like I’m suggesting you just support the idea of someone being a bigot, but that would be a complete misunderstanding of what I’ve already listed out as a form of support. I’ve made it clear that just calling someone some form of Bigot and closing them off isn’t helping them, it isn’t supporting them, it is another form of division and division is what makes someone like Trump stronger. 

Supporting someone who is a bigot or seems to be one, is finding out what makes them seem that way to you because maybe they aren’t a bigot just a frustrated person who just needs to be listened to so they can work through their own frustrations. Hell, even a Bigot could actually just be the same, and just needs someone to listen to them. As anyone can tell you, the best way for you to understand something is for you to try and explain it to someone else. The sure-fire way to get a bigot to see their bigotry is to have them explain it to you, and only after they have done so is there a way for you to sympathize and find a way to get them to sympathize with the subject of their bigotry. To get them to see where they are being unfair. It does not help in any way for you to be unfair to them.

The biggest response I could imagine from this, which of course is limited by my point of view and understanding, is, “Do they deserve that much?” and you know what? Maybe it’s being an Atheist that teaches me this, but I actually do not believe anyone is below deserving a path to being a better person. Everyone, even people we as a society would label as a monster, deserve a path to become someone better. Does that mean I believe that any victim should have to forgive the perpetrator? No. That’s a personal thing and not my place to say or dictate. 

Ultimately all this is my opinion and not hard rules, these are things anyone has any and every right to disagree with. I would love to hear them, so I can improve and understand things better, or grow my point of view. That is my view on unity, it isn’t agreeing, it’s disagreeing and compromising, it’s about growing and improving as both people and society. 

United we stand, divided we fall. It is a firm belief within me, that we only succeed working together. We only lose when we stop listening to one another when we stop sympathizing and empathizing with each other. Anyone who tries to peddle in division rather than unity will always turn me against them, but as I already said, that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t help them see what appear to be their flaws and help them overcome them if I was given the chance, or have them expand my worldview, because maybe, just maybe their flaws aren’t what I think they are, and I need to work harder to understand them as a person.

I have to stop for now but will be back with more arguments.

My thoughts on the election

    I don’t really like Hillary Clinton, but I cannot even begin to pretend why anyone would vote for Donald Trump short of denying reality. So I’m going to present a few arguments here that that Hillary isn’t more corrupt than many other politicians, presidential candidates, or even previous presidents. Most importantly I’m going to ask Trump supporters to stop using conspiracy theories and lies to defame Hillary rather than sticking to the legitimate complaints they could have. If your belief that Trump would be more fit for office than Clinton, you should be willing to get there by criticizing Trump when he uses conspiracy theories and lies instead of clinging to them and attacking people by claiming they are delusional/paid off by Clinton when they point out the falseness of Trump’s claim. Doing so invalidates your ability to debate as you are refusing to accept the other party and believe something false with ignorant fervor. It makes you intellectually dishonest, especially since Trump lies over 60% of the time. 

    So, let’s start with the big shit storm that is her deleted e-mails. 33,000 e-mails were deleted from Hillary’s private server, by an aide working for her prior to turning it over to the FBI. Hillary admitted to using the same server for classified and non-classified e-mails. There’s no evidence she was aware this had happened prior to it happening, and the investigation ended with the head of the FBI saying no reasonable person would prosecute her. But even if we assume she did know it happened and even ordered it to happen. That still doesn’t look as bad when you remember the Bush presidency deleted 22 million e-mails from a private server, that the Bush administration assures you, was not used for non-personal e-mails when the FBI went to investigate whether or not they were using the server for government use. So Hillary isn’t more corrupt than Bush and Cheney in this instance as she admitted to using a private server for governmental e-mails, when Bush and Cheney denied it and deleted all e-mails that contradicted them.

    So let’s move on to Benghazi, do I really need to go over this one? She admitted more could have been done and claimed responsibility for the failure. Let’s go back to the Bush administration, you remember Katrina? The fact that Bush was repeatedly told the levees would not hold, and did nothing. People lost their lives and livelihood. It’s almost like republican’s and Trump supporters want to pretend the Bush administration never happened. Like the corruption of that time never happened and that Hillary is somehow worse than Bush.

    So let’s move on to her wall street speech that was leaked recently, where she said you need a public and private stance on politics, which is actually something I’ve told people for over a decade, but a politician saying it is suddenly a horrible thing, my biggest problem with Hillary saying this was when asked during the debate she didn’t own it and tried to instead claim she was talking about Lincoln and how he managed to get things done, which arguably was part of the speech, but it was separate from the 'needing a public/private political stance' statements. Now do people remember Romney’s wall street speech from 2012? No? Of course not, because to do that would make Hillary’s speech feel mild and possibly meaningless.

    So let’s move right along to the Hillary intimidated Bill’s sexual assault victims. I am under no circumstance going to claim that Bill did not attack these women. That being said I find the idea that Hillary knew about it and threatened them hard to believe. "Why?" you might ask. Well, let’s just post a link to the Wikipedia page and come back to it after you’ve read that.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_sexual_misconduct_allegations

 

    So here’s my problem with the idea that Hillary knew about it and intimidated these women. You may have noticed that they only claimed to have been intimidated by Hillary this year, even though they made the claim Bill attacked them over a decade or two earlier. Meaning they had no reason to conceal the fact that Hillary intimidated them into silence since they had already broken that silence. Yet they said nothing about the involvement of Hillary until she is the presidential nominee for a major party. That makes the claim that Hillary knew about incredibly suspicious to me. Why wait over a decade to claim that Hillary knew the whole time and threatened you to keep you silent if you already broke that silence? There’s no reason to do that unless the threat was fake unless you were just trying to get back at the Clintons by attacking their credibility or grab a moment of fame now that Hillary is a big name again.

    So if you read my last blog post you know that the claims about Hillary assassinating people who stood in her way politically originate from a website that has no credibility. This didn’t stop Trump supporters from clinging to it, though it really should have. But here’s the thing, the logical fallacy I mentioned last week, if Hillary actually did kill all those people and get away with it, why didn’t she get rid of a single one of Bill’s sexual assault victims? It can’t have been suspicion because the people she’s credited with killing are people that websites claim were going to testify against her. It can’t have been fear of getting caught because being able to assassinate someone who’s going to testify against you and not getting caught means you could have done it without getting caught. There’s no way logically that those two things can be true at the same time, so if you believe that Bill honestly assaulted those women then you cannot logically believe she is responsible for those deaths without some insane mental gymnastics.

    So Trump said on a video that he doesn’t even wait, he just starts kissing them, that when you’re a star you can do whatever you want, “grab them by the pussy.” So many Trump supporters seem to have the misunderstood belief that “Grab them by the pussy” is the part many people find offensive about this comment, calling it “locker room talk.” News flash, no one gives a shit about the vulgarity of that phrase, what everyone is upset about is what precedes it, the “I don’t even wait,” The “when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything.” those two phrases make what he is saying bragging about sexual assault. Which is the rape culture feminists are up in arms about. If you wonder why feminists don’t support Trump, that’s why. He literally bragged about sexually assaulting women, and the response that was given was, "it’s just words," just “locker room talk.” That statement, and the empty apology he gave, afterward, are the very representation of rape culture in the U.S.

    I heard a youtube video where someone said what Trump claimed wasn’t that bad, that as a billionaire Trump might have women come on to him all the time. That he might not be able to tell the difference between that and women who don’t want to have sex with him, that he might unknowingly commit sexual assault. Except his statement shows he clearly did know that he was aware they were not into him, but ignoring that. They wouldn’t even imagine extending Bill the same courtesy. Bill Clinton, a man with far more charisma than Donald Trump, a man who was in a much more powerful position, a man who did have consensual sex with multiple women during his marriage to Hillary. Bill would be far more likely to, from his perspective, confuse consent, where Trump by his own statement did not. I will, again and again, state that I don’t see that as an excuse, but if you’re going to claim Trump could confuse it when he makes it clear he didn’t, and in fact brags about ignoring consent, then you logically would have to claim that maybe Bill, who doesn’t brag about it, is either unaware and doesn’t feel he did assault those women or possibly feels ashamed that the women he was with felt he did.

    Again, I don’t feel like that’s an excuse for Bill’s behavior, just like I feel using it as an excuse for Trump is lazy and offensive. Trump bragged about sexually assaulting women, that’s the long and short of it. If you believe he didn’t or that it’s just “locker room talk,” then you’re misunderstanding what people are upset about.

    Hillary is better than Trump. Sure, she’s about as corrupt as Bush, and I wouldn’t necessarily vote for another Bush. However, I’d vote Bush again in a second before I’d ever vote for Trump. So my vote will go to Hillary because there’s no one in this election who is anywhere near as qualified. Trump is a racist, homophobic, xenophobic, bigot. He inspires hate at his rallies and encourages violence against his opponents and protesters. He, in a not so veiled way, suggested that someone might want to assassinate Clinton if she gets elected. At the second debate, Trump said he would hire a special prosecutor to look into her case and have her arrested, which is exactly what tyrannical dictators do. He cannot accept the idea that he would lose unless the election was rigged against him. He’s a coward and incredibly unfit for office. Hell, he can’t even follow the simple rules of a debate or answer a question without ranting about something completely irrelevant, then throw a tantrum like a child when the moderators try to get an answer from him.

    Hillary might not be the best president, but of our choices this election, she’s by far the best choice we have.

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.

 

http://www.snopes.com/un-official-john-ashe-killed-the-day-before-he-was-to-testify-against-hillary-clinton/

 

 

    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.