Because not enough people stand up and shame them for their despicable opinions. There. I both gave you the root cause and explained why your question was bullshit in the first place.

I wish people would stop responding to him (her/whatever), and just dismiss his comments.

Miss me with that nonsense. Since Thanksgiving, all I have have heard from my black friends who actually try to do this is a duplication of my brief holiday visit to my sister-in-law’s: the elder Trumppette dominated the conversation, parroted Fox news talking points and racist nonsense, flat out cried when my niece…

I can name one 20th century president who didn’t have some policy where innocent civilians got hurt through military action, and that is Herbert Hoover, known for his inaction during the Great Depression. The difference between your statement and the original statement, is that just about every Clinton voter can give…

It is so disgusting to watch a troll defend a genuinely horrible person.

EMAILZ

Or the people who dont want to support all manner of horrid things such as racism and sexism can move forward and create a better world instead of wasting time trying to drag along a group of people who refuse to be educated ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

They are all racists. And misogynists. And vile. And blissfully unaware. Just like you. I’ll be by later to grab your daughter by the pussy and see how much understanding you have time for then. Till then, keep churning out those false equivalencies.

Completely agree. How anybody can look at Dump’s history and conclude that he will have a better, less “bloody” agenda for foreign affairs is an astounding level of moron. Clinton isn’t living in a damn treehouse with her pet monkey solving crimes like who stole the profits from the lemonade stand. She was Secretary…

What would you have an anti-bombing innocent people voter to have done? It was either traditionally hawkish Clinton or “bomb the hell out of their families” Trump.

Remember when Obama realized that 1.1 million American jobs rely on exports to Mexico, and that ending NAFTA and starting a trade war with Mexico is more complicated than simpletons think?

Not a lot of change, ‘cept pulling the economy back from the cliff that was caused by (you guessed it) a Republican administration.

You’ve brought this up twice now and I think it’s funny because it’s so obnoxiously simplistic. “Bombing innocent people” is often done in attempt to prevent further bloodshed. “If we strategically bomb city X will it prevent a massacre of Nation Y?” Yeah, they’re not fun or easy decisions but I sure as fuck want…

Again, it’s impossible to be responsible for the security of a major militry power without being responsible for some innocent deaths. No modern US president has accomplished it. No one said she was pure.

Yes a great response is to take an incredibly complicated issue and boil it down to a bumper sticker.

Has there ever been an American president whose foreign policy didn’t lead to the deaths of innocent people at one point or another? No? Ok. Did Donald Trump run on a pacifist platform? No? Ok.

Why is it always on liberals (for lack of a better term) to reach out and empathize with conservatives? Where are the right wing think pieces trying to empathize with all the people who are terrified due to the outcome of this election? There aren’t any. Because all this “try to understand! We’re not racists! We’re…

Tell you what... You want to go share an open ear with these folks, go start reading the FB comments on AL.com. Enjoy.

Obama didn’t bring much hope and change once in office

We already know Trump voters are tolerant of bombing and torturing innocents, so your false equivalence is... well false.