[Jcampuzano2]

This is the most uncharitable take and common of the people who try to play the middle or wave away their decision to vote for Trump.

The decision was quite literally between a known criminal and already even at the time known to be likely pedophile (and now it's basically a fact) and someone who is none of that.

[rootusrootus]

In my case it is a charitable take of someone who appreciates that painting his political opponents as evil incarnate is not going to bring about a political change. There is nuance in how people form their ideological priorities and how they end up making the final decision on who to vote for. Recognizing that is very important if we want to, you know, win any more elections. Trump would be approximately dead last for my vote if you gave me an arbitrarily long list of terrible candidates.

The dems consistently push everyone even a little bit impure from their coalition, which is why they have had difficulties winning slam-dunk elections. And instead of calling everyone who voted from Trump evil or stupid, they refuse to look in the mirror and see if there is anything they could change about their own pitch that would make it more appealing.

[Jcampuzano2]

Sorry but if you claim to be from the party of law and order and vote in a criminal, I have no issues calling those people stupid and evil.

It wasn't like Trump just had some petty past crime on his hands and had turned a new leaf.