a brief and fairly obvious point
Someone has pointed out that Frump is a bully and a thug. That person witnessed his bullying via the television, as did, presumably, millions of others. The bully, on being named, proceeded to ridicule the person making the point. The invalidity of such a response, a response which has a well-known designation, ad hominem, was shown some 2,500 years ago. It is equally invalid today of course. This invalidity applies equally to all those who say that actors, musicians etc should not be listened to on matters political, or indeed any other matter. A person’s claim must be based on its truth value, not on the person’s profession or supposed expertise.
So it’s of absolutely no relevance whatever whether Frump’s bullying and thuggery is highlighted by an under-rated actor, an over-rated actor, a journalist, an academic or a drunken person in a pub. The only relevant question is whether the claim is true. And it’s a very easy question to answer in this instance ,as the evidence is bigger than your average blue whale.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/16/opinion/bullying-in-the-age-of-trump.html
http://theconversation.com/why-the-trump-effect-could-increase-bullying-67831
https://nobullying.com/trump-bully/
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/09/bullying-researcher-explains-donald-trump.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-islam/donald-trump-baby-bully-and_b_11615520.html
http://www.diversityinc.com/news/trumps-record-of-hate-to-date/
http://www.medialaw.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=3470
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430628/donald-trump-business-record-bully
etc, etc
Leave a Reply