You’re expecting rationality where it will not be found. The do not care about effective arguments, they are vibes and emotion driven.

▲

strken 17 hours ago | parent [-]

You can make a vibes- and emotion-based argument that isn't "you are evil."

▲

toomuchtodo 17 hours ago | parent [-]

I disagree. Can you talk someone out of their religion? Their identity? Their belief system? In most cases, you cannot. Exceptions exist, certainly, but are not the norm in this regard. This could include those who are proudly racist, proudly misogynist, or take joy or satisfaction in the harm or pain of others. Are they evil? I think that distinction is a waste of time to be honest. All that matters is: “can you convince these people to vote differently?” If not, any time or effort you spend on them is wasted, and the evidence is robust a lot of these people will keep voting as they have, regardless of argument made.

	▲	strken 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This isn't true. Swing voters exist. Moderates exist. Single-issue voters exist. Occasional voters exist. These are observable facts about the world. The four groups exist in large enough numbers that they decide elections. Die-hard party loyalists exist, committed non-voters who'll never ever vote exist, but they're fixed quantities and are practically irrelevant. I agree with the statement that what really matters is whether you can convince someone to vote differently - but, yes, of course you can! Trump has run three times and only won twice. Obviously there's something that can convince people not to vote for Donald Trump, because it has already happened.