See, this is why you make less and less sense over time. I didn't say I think she would make a good President. I said her supporters think that she will make a good President. You're so wrapped up in whatever that you're not even reading things properly.
What grandstanding or masquerading? I really want to avoid insulting your intelligence but you're making it very hard. I've always supported immigration control and even at least one thread defended exactly how I think Trump could force Mexico to build a wall.
Your other argument is laughable because it's the exact reason that I think most Trump supporters are idiots. My take on the information in as neutral as I can make it. I go and look into the Wikileaks allegations. I don't just read them from Wikileaks and assume them to be true. 99% of it is normal political maneuvering and nothing is actually illegal. That I've bothered to actually research it instead of swallowing it hook, line, and sinker seems to offend people who don't want to actually do any thinking.
This is the absurdity of the whole thing. You want to believe that everything in Wikileaks is criminal and a smoking gun because you want to believe that HRC is crooked. Your opinion on HRC is driving how you interpret the information. But you don't care that none of it is actually illegal or even unusual. When the FBI says Clinton didn't do anything criminal...the FBI is in her pocket.
Yet these people will turn around and excuse evidence of Trump doing legal things that are clearly about harming Americans and call it smart business. When Trump says his bankruptcies are evidence of smart use of the system - you don't question that (and you should because while they can be smart business, they're often the result of bad business).
You and others are applying these extremely different standards to how you're processing this information. You're so desperate for evidence that HRC is as bad as you believe to justify voting for Trump so you exaggerate everything into a massive crime.
You can miss me with that bullshit. I'm not as stupid as these people are so I'm not going to read emails describing legal political maneuvering as some kind of illegal gotcha. All it tells me is that these people have no idea how things get done. Sit on a board or negotiate something that will be reviewed by the public and you'll see email exchanges like this all of the time. I sit on a board, half of our emails relate to how we're going to handle the public part of our jobs since they will always ask questions about things they just don't understand. Things they have nt thought about from the big picture, etc. When I meet with the insurers, I have to get a great deal from them. When I meet with the lawyers, I need to get a different deal from them. When I meet with builders, I have a different goal with them. You read my emails or those of my board members, you see the same type of thing.
I don't see the emails the way you wish I did because I have more experience in this area than you do and, laughably, I'm not concerned with justifying a vote for/against anyone. I'm just gathering information and weighing it neutrally. Unlike you, whose already made up your mind and are incapable of neutral information assessment.
