I mean this seriously, and not as a supporter of Trump (because I am not implicitly a Trump supporter unless there is salt to be mined). But what makes him horrible? It's like people feel like they have to take a shot at him to also talk about him, like it balances it out or something.
I don't feel he's horrible, as a human being, anyway. He's a ludicrously successful businessman who came from big money and made it much bigger. He apparently is a pretty good dad (his kids all seem to be pretty decent folks, even if Barron has :autism
. He's a popular TV mainstay known for being a business mogul, and that was what he was in real life. He strikes me as someone honest to himself, and open about what he is to everyone else. I don't expect it to ever come out that he's like GWB who kept the bible on his nightstand and read multiple books every week, or anything like that. The news spent an entire election cycle trying to dig up dirt on the guy and the worst thing they ever found was the "grab em by the pussy" line, which is nothing at all. Shit, even the vaunted "nigger tapes" that supposedly existed from the apprentice never materialized. The guy is remarkably clean for such a long-lasting businessman, and if any of the popular stereotypes of people like him are true, he should have had at least 20, maybe 30 orphanages bulldozed for imminent domain projects to build new casinos. It just always seems to me that if he were a truly bad dude that something would have popped up. Some terrible moral crisis in which he took the low road and did something awful, or had such a terrible screaming fit that he said something truly reprehensible (as opposed to calling Joe Scarborough dumb or whatever).
I don't think his policies or stances make him horrible either. I didn't agree with much of anything on Obama, but I don't think he's a horrible person either just because I disagree with him politically. I don't agree with a lot of what Trump says or does either, but I don't feel that that detracts from him as a person. I could make the distinction that a person's policies were horrible without them being horrible, because I don't think that that politican sat up at night thinking of new ways to torment people like me- just that he acted according to how he believed he should act, and to his and his ideology's best benefit.
The dude likes to talk shit, and he doesn't pull any punches when he does it. I would call him silly, not horrible. Boisterous, grandstanding, bizarre, and a host of other things, but nothing that would imply that he is personally a bad person any moreso than the other people who surround him.
I think this idea that everyone and everything has to be shit in politics just leads to this pervasive nihilism that nothing is good and that taking a stance makes you silly because you have something to believe in. He doesn't have to be mother theresa or anything. You don't have to dehumanize people you disagree with, either. When you do that, you do what the current news media and tumblrverse and all those other boogeymen do. There's no reason to do it.
Sorry, I don't mean to specifically target this at you. Just that it always seems odd that before somebody says something vaguely complementary of any polarizing figure, they feel as if they need to provide some sort of negating addend to the statement so that one does not seem to be biased towards or away from the subject. That sort of behavior is why people make fun of centrists and the idea of moderation. "Well, not that I like the guy and he's a total shithead, but..."
For those reasons, I do agree that the media and political establishment in general are horrible. They make these bizarre trends propagate and magnify these problems. They cause all sorts of tribalism in the weirdest ways and divides that aren't needed. They have always existed in society and probably always will, but there is no reason to demonize some guy because he disagrees on the stratification of tax brackets.
