Thank You...

[Dahlsim]

Are you saddened by my speculation about how people have been decieved? I never called anyone an extremist. And I wasn't attempting to make an exhaustive list of possible motives. 

If your whole point about asking me questions about the motives of people who believe the conspiricy theories was to coach me up, and you're not satisfied with my responses to your socratic method, then just dispense with the questioning and tell me what you think the motives are. I feel like you're doing some kind of bait and switch. I was forthright. If you want a diologue, then respond in kind.

I was actually glad to see that you at least seemed to be maybe asking a logical question about why some 74 million American citizens were deceived by as you said, by one man.  

It was the fact that you at least raised the question that prompted me to post. I'm not characterizing anything as conspiracy theories either. That in and of itself is too pejorative when we are simply discussing the general notion of dismissing evidence without examining it or investigating it at any level of detail.  You explained to me that if there enough judges that generally seem to agree on something, then you simply trust the judges. Conversely then the oddity that you raised , as to why or how this happened, must lie within the 74 million.

Many among the 74 million in fact are also judges and legal professionals but nevertheless, Ok, the judges agree.  

I'm satisfied with your answers, even if saddened by them.  That's why I said thanks. 
My intention was not, is not to defend or debate the specifics.  Quite frankly I think we have crossed a line and a divide exists in this country now where open and rational debate on some topics is no longer possible nor encouraged.  In fact if the wrong views are publicly perceived now on a range of matters it could result in real harm.  That is sad, maybe even seriously worrisome but factual. 

I'm not interested in endorsing any party here so I'm not going to speculate on motives or debate even possible evidence much of which most in the public may not have any knowledge of at all  and may not care to know anyway.  What would be the point or what good could come of it?   

My only intention 15th, with my comments on your comments, was to imply that its possible that 74 million people might not be completely baseless in their concerns any more than 81 million people would be with opposing concerns.  Perhaps give all of fellow citizens a little more benefit of the doubt and allow that all sides may have reasons that should not be easily disparaged.