[deleted]
Comment on Trump advisor LOSES HIS MIND when confronted by foreign journalist
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 months agoIs the person I am replying to a Trump sycophant? They weren’t writing as if they are.
PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 5 months ago
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 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.
PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 5 months ago
[deleted]FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 months ago
So if I change what was literally said, it means something else. Yes, that’s usually the case.
Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win 5 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.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 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?”
Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win 5 months ago
They’re writing understand how this can look. Doesn’t make them a sycophant.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 months ago
They didn’t say how it CAN look, they said:
What it looks like solely to Trump supporters was an addition of yours that they did not even imply.