>>I fully expect that 2 years from now, when we have a new president (whomever he or she might be), you'll be supporting that person. Because that's what you do, you support the incumbents.

On healthcare I don't support either incumbent's attitude that you can protect pre-existing conditions without compulsory participation. Obama agreed personal mandate is necessary but failed to follow through. Current crew says you don't need mandate at all. I presume Obama thought HRC was a cert and would continue propping ACA up with huge subsidies along the road toward personal mandate/universal coverage. No idea what motivates current crowd.

>>Just like Aslasken in Ibsen's "Enemy of the People", you preach moderation and deference and temperance for whoever is in charge. Regardless of facts. Evidenced by the many UT posts in the summer of 2011 when you tried to justify a load of excreta data as "proof" of someone engaging in a false/dupe account.

LOL. first, most who have read Ibsen would laugh to see a contrarian compared to Aslasken. Aslasken would be with you and Bill because it's popular, inexpensive and far safer to praise the anti-Trump Emperor's clothes than to wear a MAGA hat in public. Of course I don't wear a MAGA hat, I merely point out fallacies in rants directed against him, but don't let that stop you.

Second, are you referring to the Grover saboteur account? If so, maybe you should ask yourself why it was so credible that you would be the culprit.