It's a legitimate concern that I have that needs to be solved - the fact is that a whole lot of those people who are low-lives have found validation for their perspective with the Trump election. That is a concern for me and my family; I don't feel happy about the fact that my kids will go to school with other kids bullying them and echoing racist crap because the Commander in Chief does so, or because he implies that people from my part of the world are bad. I can't just not bring these concerns up because you think that detracts from the grander scheme of fixing the Trump supporters' problems.

Seems to me like you are disregarding my concerns in the same way you're accusing me of disregarding Trump supporters' concerns.

I agree with you.

I am going beyond what I agree with. My statement is a strict super-set of your's.

Yes, Trump is a morally repugnant person. Yes, he has supporters that are as well. Yes, you should be concerned about both of those issues.

Now, while remaining concerned, let's talk; do you think lambasting 47% of voters--some of whom are (by your own admission) not intrinsically, categorically, irrecoverably, lost--is a good or bad strategy towards avoiding another Trump?

Thanks, I'm glad we agree.

I also agree that lambasting all 47% is a bad idea. I never said that it was good; I just made a statement that a portion of those 47% are horrible people who are emboldened by Trump's demagoguery and will make life difficult for minorities like me (which, as you described is a subset of your statement). I made no comment describing the rest of your statement (perhaps you misread my initial reply to you as a blanket statement when it wasn't meant as such?) and I don't disagree with you on it. I would be very happy if we could find a way to make America work for everyone, rich or poor, white or coloured.

\o/