As someone who leans heavily Democrat, I disagree. There are many Trump "supporters" who just extremely dislike/disagree with Clinton. That doesn't mean they back "all he stands for" much as I don't personally back the separate email server, HRC's coziness with Wall Street, etc.

We have a two party system. Support doesn't indicate 100% alignment.

>Being a Trump supporter does mean giving support to Trump and all he stands for.

No it doesn't, since when does supporting a particular political candidate mean that you think they are the epitome of perfection? It simply means that you believe said candidate to be marginally better on the issues you care about, than the next most likely candidate to win the election.

Surprisingly, it does not mean that; it means that you prefer some of Trump's policies (whatever those might be) to Hillary's corresponding policies.

>Being a Trump supporter does mean giving support to Trump and all he stands for

It means at least you put other things at higher priority than discrimination, torture, and promotion of violence and hatred and you are willing to at least ignore those.

In my eyes, that's simply not acceptable. We aren't talking about economical policies or debate on tax laws here, we are talking about basic human decency.

But being the secretary of state of the administration that assassinates US citizens without trial (including a 16 year old US citizen) and laughing on television about a world leader being killed and sodomized with knives by a mob on television is acceptable?

We are all complicit in this madness. You should fire everyone and then fire yourself.

Clinton did not order nor promote sodomizing a "world leader" (a brutal dictator, you made it sound like he's an elected leader from a democracy or something).

The killing of the U.S. national without trial was done due to such individual's action. There was no condemnation of violence toward a large group of people due to racism or sexism.

The world is obviously not perfect, but you can't use that as the basis of argument for "everything and everyone is just as bad as each other and things cannot possibly be worse".

No, she just helped destabilize the country until he was killed and sodomized. And then laughed about it, on television. Surely this was the administrations intention all along. Of course they didn't expect him to be sodomized but as long as he died one way or another I really doubt they cared. Of course, now Libya is still embroiled in civil war.

The point is that there are legitimate reasons to support Trump over Hillary that don't involve someone being a racist, sexist, bigot. The world definitely isn't perfect and we have two (major) candidates to choose from that make a lot of reasonable people on both 'sides' existentially concerned about the future of the republic.

I agree with your concerns about Trump. I just think Hillary is even scarier, especially because a lot of the type of people who would protest and politically mobilize against the actions I think she might take support her.

How is that any different than Clinton? She's talked about 'droning' people who oppose her viewpoints.

Please show me verified proof where she publicly threatened violence or jail time or like you claimed, drone strike against her political opponents (they definitely oppose her viewpoints).

> t means at least you put other things at higher priority than discrimination, torture, and promotion of violence and hatred and you are willing to at least ignore those.

Oh please... You're not being intellectually honest.

We don't attack other users like this on Hacker News, no matter how politely you package it up.

Eric Hoffer wrote a classic book about the phenomenon. It's called The True Believer and is a short but thoroughly compelling read.

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