It would make just as much sense, considering I know who I'm replying to, and I presume the same for you.

>I didn't attempt to correct you.

"I said you would pull from Trumps playbook, not legs"

That's a cut and paste from your own post.

In response... I cut and pasted my own post, made before yours, which said the exact same thing.

It's not a debate, or an opinion. You're demonstrably wrong. Can you just accept that you were wrong? Or is that really too hard for you?

>That talking point is getting worn out.

It's worn because it's valid, and should be a really loud fire alarm to everyone- particularly now.

>Yes Trump won and
>nobody thought he would but it does not mean anything and
>everything will happen forever.

Do you think that's a stance I hold?
Because it isn't.

>Trump ran against a bad
>candidate,

Not nearly bad enough for Trump to win. Hillary being a "bad candidate" is at the bottom of the list of reasons why he won.

>after a Black President was leaving office,

>with a
>push from the media helping Trump.

This is a non-point. "the media"- particularly conservative media- would have given any republican candidate a "push". Trump's profile was different, but by and large the reasons people voted for him had little to do with Hillary, and everything to do with his name value, and him catering to the basic bigotry of republicans.

>>How is it that you're acting this incredulous, as though
>this
>>is without recent precedent?
>>
>>Talk about throwing logic and reason out the window.

>It's not reason or logic to suggest Kanye could win by taking
>votes from Trump and Biden, when Perot got 19 percent of the
>popular vote and 0 electoral votes, no matter what you think
>of Trumps win.

Note how your response completely ignored my point about recent precedent?

But then... That's a hypothetical. I'm making the case that it's possible, not probable. Surely you grasp the difference.

What's logical and reasonable, is looking at the recent and current political landscape and the current voter pool to speculate on whether or not something is "possible".

Note as well, I haven't argued probability at all.

What isn't logical or reasonable is looking to a nearly 30 year old election, in a different climate, with different voters, and decidedly different candidates and pretending that it's a relevant sample to this situation.