>I think the greatest "wrong" is him becoming president, despite not having a popular vote.

This has happened before.   The elections were designed that way for a reason.   We are a United STATES of America.

We are not the United States of California, Texas, New York, and Florida.

I went to bed at 1:30am MST election night... at that point Trump was more than ahead in Electoral College votes...
He was also 1 million popular votes ahead.

California and Hawaii electoral college votes had been given to Hillary.    Yet the popular vote came in.

I don't live in California.   I don't particularly like the politics of California.    As far as I am concerned they do not get to dictate how I live.   So if that is the plan then we might as well disolve the Union now.

Yet that is not necessary.   That is WHY the electoral college was created, for exactly those reasons.

Furthermore, Hillary and Obama both thought she would win.   They both came out saying that the system works and that Trump better not be a sore loser if he lost.     Yet, the hypocrisy in that is pretty astounding as that is exactly what THEY did. 

>The question is this: If he was the same as he is now, but instead of rich and powerful, just a normal person, but with the same opinions, would you be his friend? A close, personal friend? Would you have beer with him? Or would you avoid him?

I'd avoid all the presidents that have been in office in my life including him.   Yet that is not a crime, it is not evidence, and it is not impeachable.  It is emotional and opinion.    Which ultimately doesn't matter in politics unless the media decides it matters.

>But his actual crimes? I've got no idea. I haven't heard of anything worthy of true scorn or fire.

Me either.   Though if it is there I'd like to know, as it could sway a lot of my opinion.    Right now I see a focused attempt to attack him since the election was lost.   My opinion on that is that for the first time in a very long time the media didn't get to elect our president.   It didn't go as planned.     This is an attempt to regain not only political power by getting him impeached, but also to make sure their propaganda machine regains its control.

That is MY opinion.    If someone has some actual evidence for something that could change my mind.   I do believe the media attack is truly unprecedented for a president, and it was also pretty heavily one sided before the election.   I believe that was actually a factor in Hillary's loss.    If it has ever been more obvious the media was trying to force feed a candidate to the populace than this election I haven't seen it.   I've known the media does this, but I suspect a lot more people noticed it.

This is also why I vote third party usually.   Most elections I don't think it really matters whether you pick the Republican or the Democrat as they both seem to be candidates that will toe the line and thus the media is fine with either of them.   Where you see the force feeding by the media during those years in in the party nomination process.   The media decides WHO can be the nominee for the parties.

This last cycle clearly was different.