Not a defense of Trump supporters here, but do we know how many were edited out that intelligently spoke on issues to form the Triumph bit? Without that, you can't really make any determinations. On top of that, the sample size is likely very small.

Replace XYZ with EU, Brexit, Biden, Trump, and in the UK: Boris Johnson, and Jeremey Corbyn.

> Watch the latest Triumph bit from the Colbert show to see the mentality of Trump supporters.

It's a stretch to speak in complete absolutes here.

Colbert has built a career upon exaggerating and editorializing politics. He is an entertainer and comedian, not an analyst. He is hardly a sound source for any real political insight.

> The "issues" are whatever you can use to trigger an emotional response from someone who is easily manipulated.

I think the same can be said about both political ideologies in the US. Emotional issues are far easier to get worked up about, even if there is no easy solution to the "issue" at hand.

To claim only 51% of the country falls into this category, and to imply it's only one political ideology, is disingenuous at best. Particularly when you lead your post with something a comedian said on a late night TV show, ie. the very same emotional appeal you rail against.

Definitely. So much this, that I wonder if "both" is even the right word? So much sound and fury, and somehow Congress votes nearly unanimously to give rich people trillions in response to a pandemic, while doing nothing about health care. Somehow we're spending $750B on the military every year, more than the next fifteen nations combined, with our increase this year dwarfing Russia's total spending. Somehow in the coming election we have a confused loudmouth old man from the urban northeast who likes draft deferments, non-consensual digital penetration, and criminal-panic race baiting, running against Trump.