That’s absurdly naive – it’s like saying every picture is the same because they aren’t entirely (255, 255, 255) pixels. If your goal is to do anything other than feel smug, consider the impact such non-serious positions have on how other people will perceive anything more serious you say.
Respectfully, you are wrong. Nothing I've said is untrue.
I gave you examples, where you reciprocated with a personal attack. This is one of the ways in which US internal politics has become infantile and tedious. I would appreciate it if you left it there.
You didn’t give examples, you called it “fanciful thinking” to think that there are real differences between people using vague claims about a different issue. The same logic for calling my categorization of that as a personal attack would apply evenly to your comment.
If you are concerned about politics being “infantile and tedious”, try to set an example of the rigor you’re looking for. For example, you could point to specific verifiable actions by a candidate like I did.
If you don't understand the examples, that's perfectly okay. But I think it's not my responsibility to tell you in even more exhaustive detail about things in your own country that have been extensively covered everywhere.
