The problem with trying to be very specific is that you and I don't view past events the same way. I can give some standard which I don't think Trump's actions have met, but you do. So it's just going to devolve into the same old fights about what Trump has done.
No the problem is there is no "specific" that will satisfy you.
You're standing in the middle of the Pacific and you're demanding to be shown the "Wet" and you've fringe resetted back to acting like "Here's the wet, it's all around you, it's literally everywhere" is a discussion we haven't already had.
This whole obtuse act where you don't disagree with other people's opinion of why Trump is bad, no you have the utter gal to sit and act like we've never done it, as if we haven't laid out or reasons, even if you disagree with them, in full on reality denial.
There reaches a point in discourse where you are so wrong you have achieved functional rudeness. By continuing to sit there, Jabba like, demanding your opponents go through the motions of repeating their concerns over and over only to have them not even counter or dismissed but full on ignored so you can keep forcing the discussion to start back at square one is well beyond that point.
"Why Trump is bad" is a point that has been goddamn made. You get sit there and achieve the insane level of reality denial necessary to argue that's wrong, but stop sitting there pretending the point hasn't been made yet.
This why your and your tag team partner's constant faux-civil bleating pleas for "OH lordy I'm just wanting a civil debate" can take a hike.
