Comment on Trump advisor LOSES HIS MIND when confronted by foreign journalist

• Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  They’re writing understand how this can look. Doesn’t make them a sycophant.

  source

  • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    They didn’t say how it CAN look, they said:

    I don’t know what you guys are seeing, but it is quite clear that Trump’s guy won this exchange.

    What it looks like solely to Trump supporters was an addition of yours that they did not even imply.

    source
• PriorityMotif@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It’s because you’re not reading the entire thing and stopped paying attention when they used the word “won.” Go back and reread the entire paragraph.

  source

  • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Okay, here is the entire paragraph. Please point out what I am missing:

    I don’t know what you guys are seeing, but it is quite clear that Trump’s guy won this exchange. It was probably the best result he could expect. And that is before the interview became viral and millions upon millions got to hear his whole speech delivered. The journalist is well intentioned, but the result is catastrophic.

    source

    • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      The rest of the paragraph?

      It was probably the best result he could expect. And that is before the interview became viral and millions upon millions got to hear his whole speech delivered. The journalist is well intentioned, but the result is catastrophic.

      Replace the word “won” with “got what he wanted from”

      I don’t know what you guys are seeing, but it is quite clear that Trump’s guy won got what he wanted from this exchange. It was probably the best result he could expect. And that is before the interview became viral and millions upon millions got to hear his whole speech delivered. The journalist is well intentioned, but the result is catastrophic.

      source

      • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        So if I change what was literally said, it means something else. Yes, that’s usually the case.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      The rest of the paragraph makes it clear the writer is speaking from how donald’s advisor (and sycophants) see it. ie:

      the best result he could expect.

      Not ‘only valid’, not ‘we’. It is not absolute proof, but, if you consider yourself a rational arguer then it is your duty to interpret statements in the best light possible.

      source

      • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Or “the best result” being that he is the “clear” winner.

        it is your duty to interpret statements in the best light possible.

        Does that include statements like “they’re eating the dogs in Springfield” and “schools are forcing children to have gender reassignment surgery?”

        source

        • -> View More Comments