Full stop.
the question of how they rationalize (anything) would presume they are rational, capable of forming a rationale, a set of thoughtful reasons for supporting their candidate and excusing her incontinent prevarication.
I think that's a mental bridge too far beyond the causeway that snakes through their Limbic Brains.
They would have to first recognize a difference between truth and falsehood, then recognize that she is a font of falsehood, then evince a reason or set thereof to embrace the falsehoods and eschew verifiable truth (or lack thereof). I think that is a level of mental activity that would trigger terminal migraines in the lot of them, with an aftermath involving rapid and expansive fragmentation.
I think that much of her support comes down to the Obama factor (help elect the first black female whatever, even if she has had the sort of black American experience growing up that Rachel Dolezal had--which is pretty close to Obama without the Madrasa in Indonesia experience), and the idea that she is 'black' and, well, female, and had neighbors who were proud of their lawns... oh, and joy--don't forget the joy...
Woo hoo.
If that seems almost as circuitous an answer as her economic talking points, well, there you have it.
