For some people, country comes before personal benefits of federal policy. For some people the future consequences of federal policy is more important than any personal short term benefits of that same federal policy.
I’m sure we won’t find any posts from you criticizing Obama’s policies even though the same economy we have now was happening under Obama.
You've saved me some words, even making my response more possible because I've run out of energy over the last three years expounding about Trump. Compuwiz1 remarked "Lotta hate in one post". This arrives at an intersection where we had discussed -- sometime in the last few years -- the "limits of tolerance", when the intolerant take advantage of the tolerant in the thoughtless assumption that tolerance is a principle which has no limits. This is similar to the notion that Freedom is a principle which has no limits, but I won't belabor it.
So one can call it what they want. In this country, we might have thought that there are insufficient reasons for the emotion of "hate" -- race being one such baseless reason. The families of criminal victims often say in court that they "don't hate the criminal" who robbed their family of a victim. As laudable as that may seem, advocacy of the death penalty is not a loving inclination. However, one might say "I despise so-and-so", but then check the dictionary and thesaurus for synonyms.
The distress Trump caused many began immediately after the election, as he chose his language through the inauguration and thereafter to inflame, disparage and exclude against making reconciliation. The fact that he merely captured the White House as distinct from winning the popular vote would've been a rational imperative for more carefully chosen language. That he daily murdered the Truth about almost everything would inflame anyone who had been taught to put a high value on the Truth. That he literally asked in public for a geopolitical adversary to hack the e-mails of an opponent adds more to the outrage.
Did he hurt me personally, in some material way? I have a family member on the verge of losing a leg to amputation, and who depends on the ACA for decent health care. The tax cuts mean nothing; the rollback of environmental protection may not mean immediate harm to any single person, but affects collective well-being. Are we supposed to base all of our political inclinations solely on food on the table, gasoline in the tank and other niceties? I think not.
Constantly disparaging Obama three years after his exit, threatening Hillary with prosecution, hurling insults at John McCain before and after his burial, belittling members of Congress and defying Constitutional Congressional oversight -- these behaviors are not civil. In fact, they are monstrously uncivil. So the notion that capturing the White House -- with or without Russian assistance -- automatically entitles the Trump electorate to legitimate respect is preposterous. Squeaker elections and Electoral College captures literally require compromise and reconciliation. But what we have is incitement to riot.
Shall I continue? Let this stand as a fair sample of what would follow. There is no compromise with Crazy.