>>>Right - and that is my entire point. You can't compare Trump to HRC and be of any reasonable intelligence and come to the conclusion that Trump is/was a better option for president.
>
>Well, according to that autopsy you studiously ignore, it was the educated whites that went for Trump while HRC won the deplorables- and according to figures yesterday, his support in university-educated people is rising while deplorable support is falling. Your version is described as a trite media error in the autopsy.

This means nothing - just because a person is university-educated doesn't mean they can't make a stupid decision or be victim of a scam or fall prey to Russian propaganda. Heck there are university-educated people that have been lured into religious cults.

>I'd also observe that when challenged, you often claim status as the smartest person in the room while anybody who disagrees is a dummy which PROVES you're the cleverest person in the room, et voila. My experience of years of dealing with extremely smart people, is that they never compete on qualification or claim monopoly on understanding, preferring to argue facts. Like the facts in the autopsy, for instance.

I've never claimed to be the smartest person in the room - but when only 1/3 of our citizens can even name the 3 branches of our government I'd say when it comes to politics and how our government works that statistically speaking I'd say that I know more than a lot of people (most people actually). Furthermore if you listen to the rational that Trump supporters give for either supporting him or voting for him you'll find that it does not make sense. For example - people thought it was a good idea to vote for Trump (a serial liar) because they thought that HRC lied to much. Now tell me that is not just stupid...don't like lies so they vote for the biggest liar of all time...aka stupid.

> >>I'm not going to sit here and rehash all the reasons why this is because it's so blatantly obvious that anyone who can't see this is incapable of a logical and informed discussion for whatever reason...be it ignorance, stupidity, denial, brainwashing or whatever has caused this defective thinking pattern.
>
>QED. What you call a point is a garish tapestry of fallacies: argument from authority, ad hominem fallacy, bandwagon fallacy, begging the question, false dilemma, emotional appeal, fallacy of exclusion, hasty generalization, non sequitur, red herring, straw man... where do I stop?

When you're not in denial anymore.