Here's what it is (and I have said this before): He doesn't really know the details of what he is talking about, but he knows the keywords regarding it, and the reaction he wants to get, so he throws together an extempore word soup that includes just the right keywords to make it sound (in his mind) like he knows what he is talking about.
That creates three groups of people:
1. The people who use the keywords to assume he said something they don't like.
2. The people who use the keywords to assume he said the same thing, and they like it.
3. The people who defend him against the first group by parsing the statement to show that he didn't really say what you think he said (and BTW, I have never seen the people in this group explain this to the people in the second group).
And when called out on it, he will either double-down, deny he said it, or change the subject.
So the important thing is not whether or not he said what you think he said, it's that he creates an environment where we debate what he said on several levels instead of dealing with the actual issue.
That is not what I want in my president, and I am displeased enough with his "accomplishments" to not give him a pass on it.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment