That’s a silly and insulting way to frame the disagreement because someone dares to have a different opinion.
See, here’s the rub: if Trump leaves office in two years and those years are roughly the same as his first two in office, and America elects a decent successor, that person can very quickly repair a rather sizable chunk of the damage. And Congress can codify new restrictions on the executive branch to close those gaps in the armor of our democracy.
Obama, as GWB’s successor, was unable to resurrect the 4k dead service members. He was unable to breathe life into the 10s and 10s of thousands of dead Iraqis. He was unable to bring home the millions of women and children made homeless by that war. He was unable to magically snap his fingers and erase the $1.4 trillion deficit he inherited that first year.
The disconnect between us is one side is offering up concrete examples of damage while you’re projecting a lot of fear and anxiety over what could happen (and no one is disagreeing that Trump has the potential to outclass GWB’s awfulness. . .we’re simply pointing out that it hasn’t happened yet). The refusal to share your anxieties doesn’t make me detached from reality.