To show that you consider the total merits of the person or issue before opposing it/her, make a case for the person or policy you detest. To demonstrate, I will try to praise Hillary.
But first, I must do a bit of studying. I will post my defense of Hillary Clinton in this thread but in a separate post later this morning or later today.
If anyone wishes to do Trump, here are some references.
Click on each accomplishment to read a 3rd party write up.
The point of this exercise is to make your debate stronger and more effective.
In the normal course of everyday posting, if you slam the politician or policy you hate in an ineffective way, you are wasting your time and efforts and making yourself look weak instead of focusing your criticisms on the areas where that person or policy is actually weak and vulnerable to attack.
By learning about the person or policy you oppose in a manner to defend or praise them, you are forced to learn their good points and bad points so that you can accentuate and highlight the good and explain the bad.
And by posting your case in support of the person or policy you give others a chance to critique your game so you can improve it.
And for the Trump supporters like I am, I believe that if Trump bashers actually learn enough about him to make a case FOR him, they will discover how great he actually is and if they do a credible job of prep, it will lead the bashers to expose the President’s real weaknesses and help his campaign recognize where he, it or they need more work to create a better candidate or be a better POTUS.
Hillary already made her case and lost. Know what that case was? That half of America was deplorable and irredeemable. She has no position. She swayed with the direction of the political winds because she is an opportunist who only looks out for herself. She would have sold this country out if given the chance. She’s an evil old bitch and we dodged a bullet.
So, basically you are asking to take a stance supporting something you disagree with.
For instance, if I choose to support AOC and her stance on the green deal, I need to study the reasons behind it and find reasons to support it. You are asking me to put myself in the mindset of and to think like a liberal.
I can probably do it (I had to in college and did it) but the actual facts and my support of the Constitution/BOR would make any argument I can make simply fake.
What we have currently is a complete disconnect in politics. There used to be crossing of the aisles but that is no longer the case.
What we have today is a party that wants to divert and will do so by any means necessary. They cannot be reasoned with nor can those who toe the line be reasoned with.
“Much of the history of the 21st century will be written in Asia,” Hillary declared on October 28, 2010.
It would be a lie to commend everything she does. And it would be impossible to do any justice to this exercise by even thinking of praising or defending everything she has done which has been commendable.
So, I will simply highlight the points previously made in a 12/23/2010 article featured in none other than (iinm) THE ORIGINAL mass audience popular Conservative publication founded by the legendary, William F. Buckley, National Review.
Before I do, I ask that you consider the individual nations of South East Asia.
Saying the names of each nation aloud evokes a completely separate set of conditions and people and governments. And each one of them is a potential opportunity for global turmoil and catastrophe or a golden mutually rewarding joint partnership. And every one of those relationships then must be connected to a plan to protect the interests of America and our allies and trading partners, maintain the freedom of the seas for safe passage by ALL nations and to keep the bad guys from forcing the USA to make strategic and tactical errors in policies dealing with every possible hot button topic, from climate change to human rights to nuclear non proliferation to global trade to territorial rights to economic development and more.
And in addition to those ASEAN member states, also consider the governments of Australia, New Zealand, North and South Korea, Japan, India, China and Russia.
As Secretary of State in the Obama administration from 2009 to 2013, Hillary Clinton was responsible for implementing or initiating a great number of diplomatic policies.
But, I will focus on the period of her tenure as SOS up to and including December 2010.
In one year’s time Hillary Clinton helped achieve the following things:
(1) established a new defense framework with Indonesia;
(2) announced the resumption of military exchanges with the Indonesian special forces;
(3) led multinational peacekeeping exercises in Cambodia;
(4) conducted the first joint U.S.-Vietnam military drills since the 1975 fall of Saigon;
(5) launched a high-level defense dialogue with the Vietnamese government;
(6) obtained membership in the East Asia Summit;
(7) tightened financial sanctions against North Korea;
(8) bolstered the U.S. alliance with South Korea — and sent a blunt message to Pyongyang and Beijing — through a series of large-scale war games;
(9) completed (albeit after much unnecessary haggling) a U.S.-Korea free-trade deal; (10) formalized a new strategic partnership with New Zealand;
(11) expanded defense cooperation with Australia;
(12) signed a raft of bilateral economic agreements with India while also relaxing curbs on U.S. high-tech exports to the South Asian giant;
(13) endorsed a permanent Indian seat on the United Nations Security Council; and (14) held trilateral talks with Tokyo and Seoul.
“…after a Sino-Japanese maritime incident near the Senkaku Islands (located in the East China Sea and claimed by both Beijing and Tokyo), Clinton angered the Chinese by assuring Japanese foreign minster Seiji Maehara that the Senkakus were protected under the 1960 U.S.-Japan defense treaty. She reiterated that pledge during her October 27 press conference with Maehara in Honolulu. As an Economist correspondent noted, “This drove Chinese diplomats slightly up the wall.””
On North Korea, the Obama administration has actually been “more hardline, more conditional, more neoconservative than Bush was during the last four years of his term,” former CIA analyst Bruce Klinger said recently.
“Clinton should be applauded for her diplomatic spadework, which reflects a tough-minded realism. … All the more reason to commend her achievements.”
Yes, but we are no further along in our debate by simply repeating what we all knew before this exercise.
To get any heat from the stove you have to fill it with wood and ignite the fuel.
To take a bath we must get wet.
To grow more potent as a debater we must take the steps to learn something positive about a person or policy we despise and present it as convincingly as possible.
I grant you that not everyone can do it and most wont do it well, but in making the effort, you will race past the debate opponents who cant do it or wont try.
If Hillary has been elected she would have been able to keep Obama level deportations going and we wouldn’t have these Soros funded migrant caravans flooding our country with illegals.
“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?” Clinton said. “The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it.
Just half of trump supporters, make it so much better.
But then again many leftists like yourself continue disparaging half the country to make yourself feel better.
So far, even with your explanation and my example, the readers dont seem willing or able to grasp how to play devil’s advocate or recognize how it would benefit them to attempt.
I have been beating up on Trump bashers and calling them 50% ers and half fast political observers for not being willing nor able to see the OTHER side of Donald Trump, the good side.
And as it appears here, Trump supporters are not much better informed about our opponents.
Sigh.
Kinda dispiriting to see, really.
But I love my Conservative brothers and sisters, nonetheless.
We accept our ongoing trench warfare like the WWI Doughboys accepted their limitations.
I am a better informed poster than my opponents because I know more than most of them.
I am seldom bested in debate.
Those who like losing as frequently as they do in their debate exchanges can stay as they are.
Those who enjoy their opponents being uninformed can simply stay as they are and refuse to do anything to inspire, impress or goad their opponents to become better informed.
What do you think would happen if every Democrat read this list?
What do you think would happen if every Trump hater watched this video?
The Video That Made Me Love Trump
And how do you get them to even click on the link?
By telling them that you are better informed than they are and that their opinion is one dimensional and only half full.
By demonstrating that you have bothered to learn THEIR side of the story.
