Well, the alternative is to view those with whom you disagree politically as literally Satan, because if you think we are trying to hurt the world and not help it, what is there left to debate?

You have to have faith that we really mean well, and it's hard for some of us on the Right to believe that folks like Obama, who did so much damage to America, meant well, but I believe he did mean well notwithstanding the horrible effects of his policies, with which so many on these political fora agree.

There is no point if you don't already agree on this.

We can't work on math problems together if you don't even think 2+2=4, no pun intended. But if you agree that we are both good people wanting good things for other folks, we can enrich and enliven the debate in a way that generates so much positive attention and clicks for this site it will make your head spin.

Requiring your opponents to preemptively assume that Trump wants tax cuts for rich people because they will make the world a better place rather than the letting them dare suspect that he wants tax cuts for rich people because they will make rich people richer is nonsensical and abdicates yourself of your burden of argument.

You must leave room for the fact that not everyone is going to agree with you on how to achieve good, proper, nice things in this world. Once you just accept that, you can buy in (like I did) that the other side is not evil, just unwise about how to get from Point A to Point B.

You don't mean well when you start with idiotic statements like Obama did so much damage to America. Your worldview is narrow and selfish.

It abdicates only you, my friend.

There is a wonderful argument to hash about how his policies, including but not limited to tax cuts, help America become great again, and a great America is a positive force in this world.

Isolating one effect ("make rich people richer") that isn't even bad in and of itself fails to engage the argument, which is all I am asking of folks here.

Because if we are literally Satan, and the only weapon you have against us conservatives is a banhammer, wouldn't you use it? Shouldn't you use it? You'd almost have to morally speaking. So I get why you want to.

There are those on the far fringes who don't want a better world, of course. The KKK members, the anarchists, etc. My principles apply to the vast 99% of us, though.

It is easier to read an opinion with which you disagree and immediately assume bad motive on the part of the holder of that opinion. The greater challenge is to avoid personal attacks and engage the argument with all the facts and resources at your disposal to show how my opinion is wrong, that America was made better by Obama's policies with which you agree, and here is example 1, example 2, and example 3 (specifically).

Zorkman, on not assuming the other side is evil:

I don't care about your arguments itt. You're a whiny baby who constructs bad arguments based on your feelings and proceeds to fill this thread up with excuses.

Trump wants to cut/eliminate US foreign aid because he doesn't see the point of it. You can try as hard as you want to pull voodoo magic tricks on the internet to make it seem like your Daddy cares about the world but it's all too easily​ contradicted by reality, sorry.

I must do no such thing. Conservatives have to do a better job of explaining how their policies are making things better. They suck at this. How is Trumpcare making things better?

I did not mean to say that Muslim = KKK.

I meant just as there is no such thing as a moderate KKK member, there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim.

There are many good and honorable aspects about every religion, including Islam. Terror should be condemned regardless of the religious beliefs of those who perpetrate it.

Zorkman posting thousands of words talking around a subject without ever addressing it directly has convinced me that he is most Sincerely Sincere about all this.

This is why you shouldn't be able to post in Politics. You make blanket statements based off of your own ignorance.

Liberals like you seem cognitively disabled. It's almost a genetic marker that the defining characteristic of a liberal is that while a conservative can ascribe positive motives to a wrongheaded liberal policy, a liberal sees a policy with which he or she disagrees and immediately assumes that because it does not, in that person's opinion, achieve the desired goal of a better world, the conservative propagating that policy must want a worse world.

I wonder to what extent liberals do this in a way that is calculated to avoid an argument or debate on the issues. It's certainly possible given their tendency to lose across the board when that is done. It's easier just to assume "You disagree with me! You must be Satan!" because what can anyone really say to that?

If that were the criterion on whether folks should be allowed to post, it would make for a very boring debate because the only folks left would be conservatives.

--Ronaldus Magnus I

LOL

You made the single most ignorant comment recently itt and you're the conservative. You don't care about anyone or anything. You don't even care about learning.

Pls keep whining about being held down though.

I'm a guest here. I try to whine within reason.

Hahahahaha. How dare you suggest conservatives don't want to help everyone, you mentally disabled ******!

Well?

Oh...

LOL

wheels are coming off for this guy

:-) Keep it coming, I love it!

There is such a thing as moderate Muslims, in fact there are hundreds of millions of them, and to say otherwise is simply an expression of bigotry.