Originally Posted by
gugi
You didn't have to do anything, I wondered how you reconcile for example the failings of the Bill Clinton with the same failings of Donald Trump, and your response was that clearly you can not convince me the Clintons are worse than Trump, so you are giving up.
Which, honestly, you shouldn't have been trying in the first place, as I told you I don't care about convincing you who you should vote for or being convinced myself - I am just interested in the way people deal with the logical discrepancies.
The most common approach seems to be burying one's hand in the sand, focusing on only what one wants to see and pretending what one doesn't want to see is insignificant or may be doesn't even exist. I was hoping there'll be something else as well.
That's why it's not about keeping an argument going until it goes to my favor, it's about keeping it going until the logical contradictions are resolved.
Sorry about your frustrations, but I have not been hiding my interests or intentions trying to trick you, quote the opposite - you are the one who apparently decided to convince me that your candidate is better than the other candidate.
Finally, nice try, but I did not put any words in your mouth - you said that I can not be convinced the Clintons are worse than Trump, I have decided to believe what I want to believe and you are done with it. It is a fair interpretation of your words that you think I am a Clinton supporter.