What arguments do KJV-only proponents give to support that the 1611 translation is better than say, Greek language Bibles?

I have an interlinear Bible, called the Apostolic Bible Polyglot, that presents the New Testament (along with the Old Testament, from the Septuagint) in Greek and English. Of the Complutensian Polyglot, the NT Greek source for the Apostolic Bible Polyglot, Wikipedia says, > Theodore Beza's Greek NT Text was used primarily, along with Erasmus' Greek NT Text and *with various readings from the Complutensian Greek NT Text to form the Textus Receptus* published by the Elzevir Brothers in 1633, and Erasmus' later editions were a secondary source for the King James Version of the New Testament. *The Complutensian Polyglot Bible was a tertiary source for the 1611 King James Version.* What arguments do KJV-only proponents give against the authority of Bibles like the ABP that share, and even indirectly lend, source material to the 1611 KJV? What about the authority of the Greek manuscripts that Erasmus originally used for the Textus Receptus? Do KJV-Onlyists hold at least those manuscripts in high esteem?