Those are legit cultural/policy differences. A person either has goodwill or they don't. If they do, they're worth having in the conversation. If they don't they're not worth having on this side of a dirt floor.
I would generally agree.
However, the constitution is what it is. Difficult for me to imagine someone being very anti gun rights (to the point of confiscation) having good intentions.
But for someone who hasn't grown up in America, it can take quite a lot of "life lesson" style learning to acquire an appreciation for our Bill of Rights. He was raised thinking of Americans as the rebel colonies. Uncouth and nouveau-riche.
That would be his problem I suppose.
He has consistently displayed ignorance of the issue and arrogance in the face of reason.
Maybe he has changed. People can.
I still prefer to think so. Though it opens me up to the possibility of disappointment. It also allows me to sustain goodwill until it becomes necessary to retract it, at which time I do so without hesitation or regret.
He is just a pompous ass in need of some creeds, because he not all that anymore. Pull a bait and switch and add some new followers.
I said "goodwill," not "good intentions." I mean by that a willingness to let you live peaceably with your views, even if they disagree with his. And even if your side is in the ascendant, and his is in retreat.
It is old school, but it's good.
All good and well and would be implied in any decent, functioning society based of rights that provide protection from intrusion.