Sure, but it took six or seven pages!
I have presented more evidence that I am a moderate liberal than you have that I am not. But here is what I found:
I support roe v wade (unlimited in the first trimester with fewer rights in the 2nd and 3rd trimester)
(From about when I joined https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7822664&postcount=167)
(from 2010 https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=12585127&postcount=82)
(from 2015 https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18255533&postcount=73)
I also hold the following positions. Please tell me which one you would like to see cites for because its not like I can just search for “cite that damuri ajashi supports X”.
I support gay rights
I support legalizing pot
I oppose Trump’s tax cuts
I support taking a tougher stance on trade negotiations
I do not like the one sided free trade attitudes we have followed in the past
I do not support Israel’s right to oppress palestinians
I have voted democrat in every election this millenium
I worked a phone bank for Obama
I went door to door for Obama
I voted for Hillary in 2016
I support a public option in Obamacare
I support allowing medicare to negotiate drug prices
I criticize trump
That doesn’t mean i agree with every liberal position but I am pretty clearly on the liberal side of the divide.
I support the 2nd amendment
I oppose affirmative action in education as it is being practiced today
There may be other things that I am sure others will point out.
It’s just a phenomenon that I have noticed. I’m sure others have noticed it too.
I criticize him for his dishonesty and ignorance (of the law and otherwise). I am not sure he is incompetent over finances. I think the mob boss tactics is really just your opinion. I don’t know if he is immune to other opinions, he changed his mind about stuff when his base and constituency demanded it. Strong arming foreign powers is not really something that presidents are not supposed to do if done for the right reason.
And I consider my self a conservative but apparently I am automatically a conservative because I don’t agree with every criticism of trump.
That may be because some people have one acid test: How much froth comes out of your mouth while you are criticizing trump.
It’s not easy.
You have to suspend disbelief, give trump every benefit of the doubt and ignore personal attacks by people who think that any defense of trump indicates a moral failing on the part of the defender.
I’d say that the difficulty level really depends on how you choose to defend trump. If you take a yahoo boards approach, it’s pretty easy. Just tell people to fuck off and call them names. Sorta like some of the posters here.
If you try to make a reasoned defense of trump you really do have to fall back on technicalities like hearsay and burden of proof for the Ukraine thing. Its not particularly convincing but it’s enough to provide a fig leaf for someone who doesn’t want to impeach him. If you want to defend him in other contexts you have to separate out the stuff that Trump does someone like Mitt Romney or John McCain might have done from the other stuff. You can wave away any criticism that might have been levelled at McCain and Romney by saying that any Republican president might have done the same thing and elections have consequences. If it’s something that only Trump might have done then you have to tailor your defense for the particular situation.
If you are trying to make him look good. Then I think it’s impossible. He is either a racist or someone who stokes racism in others for political benefit. I don’t know how you can make someone like that look good. He is an embarrassment and other world leader make fun of him behind his back. And it is such a consensus view that he is a boob that they feel pretty comfortable doing it at parties with other world leaders, without feeling out their opinions on the subject. We will never live this down.
its good enough for the republicans to keep their jobs.
I am trying to present a better defense of trump. Isn’t that what we are supposed to be doing here? The fact of the matter is that almost all the real damning stuff is hearsay. It’s about as reliable as hearsay gets but it’s still hearsay.
most white supremacists were not going to vote for hillary.
most evangelicals were not going to vote for hillary
there are low information voters on both sides of the aisle they were voting mostly for the R or the D
You’ve made my point for me so you leave me no choice but to agree.
Hearsay? The White House’s own account of the call? That’s ridiculous.
Trump’s illegal act caught on live TV is hearsay?
-
No, it is not.
-
If the President has exculpatory evidence, he should allow people to speak.
I just got divorced. You want a record of my comportment of it? Ask my ex-wife and daughter. I’m comfortable making that offer because I handled it well. I am so comfortable with that I am perfectly fine if the Senate wants to call them up and put us all on TV. Or, hell, just them.
You say “hearsay”. There were 12, 14 people on the call and one of them testified. The others are prevented from doing so by a man whose call apparently wasn’t as perfect as my fuckin’ divorce. :rolleyes:
I’m not sure what point you think you are making.
I’d direct this same comment at you.
(You and Waldo and the cephalopod declined to defend Glorious #45 in Lance’s thread, so just now I did it for you guys. You’re welcome.)
Again: defend him compared to whom?
As soon as the Dems put up a nominee, I plan to explain whether I expect to vote for Trump; I’m only ‘declining’ to do so now because I don’t yet know if he’ll be running against someone I figure would be worse for the country.
The Dems could run Der Trihs and I’d still tell you that you were making a bad error in judgment even considering voting for Donald.
What you have is a slam dunk technicality. All the other stuff that you may find convincing is not really convincing for someone who supports trump. Bill Clinton perjured himself when he lied about Monica Lewinsky, should he have been removed? Even the feminist organizations didn’t want to see him removed, not because they were cool with his sexually predatory behavior but because they were really liking his SCOTUS nominees.
The white house’s own account of the call was that they were bribing or soliciting a bribe from the Ukraine for trump’s personal benefit? Did I miss something?
I must have missed something. Did this happen today?
OK, you made your case. Dopers, is Damuri a moderate liberal?
You think they’re going to get voted out for not impeaching trump? That seems like wishful thinking.
Why does he need exculpatory evidence, he doesn’t think there is sufficient damning evidence to make a case. Certainly not in the senate.
So where in the call does he say “I will withhold the military aid unless and until you start investigating hunter biden because I want to hurt his father in the upcoming election”
It is not sufficient to establish that he withheld aid and on the same call asked for an investigation of hunter biden. You have to establish that he asked for the investigation for personal political gain. And that fact has not been established through direct testimony. It has all been second hand information from people who heard it from other people, and AFAICT all the witnesses heard it from the same small group of non-testifying people.
If you are a republican, you can reasonably claim that you don’t want to impeach/remove a duly elected president and overturn the democratic process based on rumors and second hand information.
I don’t understand what you are talking about.
What lance’s thread?
And why would I defend him there?
Everybody always thinks that it can’t get any worse.
That’s what we thought after Bush. And now it looks like Trump might also be itching to break Bush “most civilians needlessly killed” record for this millennium.