so, for example:

picking trade wars that tell you and i with whom we may transact and under what terms and fees is not a vast interference with rights and commerce (and a negative sum one that always harms the imposing nation to boot?)

he did not champion the truly unpreceedented act of shutting down america and then vilify and attack the governors (like geogria and florida) who tried to re open.

i find this rationale to be really problematic:

"And sometimes we *do* have to make judgement and take some chance in choosing leaders, because the "lesser" evil *is* better than the greater and that process *will* work in the long run. Think about it."

it's playing a sort of one move lookahead that dooms you to reside at local minima of possibility frontiers forever and excludes the possibility that one day one might actually have a choice that was NOT an evil.

i would actually argue that it's precisely being trapped in that sort of "well, if your bad guy does not win, then theirs will and he's worse!" thinking that has ruined our political sphere and left us never having any good choices.

both sides are endlessly chipping away at rights and acting ever more the dictator. neither are ever really giving them back or engaging in any sort of fiscal responsibility or even honesty. it's a one way ratchet away from the principles of a republic and of a free people. "my side slides us toward dictatorship more slowly" is not really much of a rallying cry.