Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
The subject is what he said about Sweden so the rest of the statement doesn't matter.
No, the subject of the thread is "post election stress disorder." Now, unless you mean to say that Trump misspoke because of post election stress disorder, in which case that would be perfectly understandable and forgivable, unless you mean that, you changed the subject (moved the goalpost?) in order to give a jab at the President. Of course, you may believe, as the thousands "protesting" across the country do, that he is not your President. Then again, that may all be due to post election stress disorder, therefor quite understandable.
So now we have to use a President Trump Understand O Meter
1) Try to determine what President Trump actually means by decipher all the miss-statements, incorrect verbiage, bad grammar, disjointed sentences and random thoughts etc.
2) Determine if statement is an Alternative Fact or just a lie
3) Ignore what he actually said and try to understand what is in his heart.
|
A simple grammatical parsing of the President's words should have given you the clue that yes, your numbers 1) and 3) must be applied to what he said: "you look at what's happening . . . last night in Sweden,"--there is an obvious mixing of present and past tense. The time confusion creates an obvious indeterminacy. To what time does his "what's" actually refer? " What IS (what's) happening is speaking in the present progressive tense--what is happening NOW. But "last night" refers to the past. So how definite, what is the actual span, of the present in his statement? And, so, co-relative to that stretching of time, what is the time span of last "night"?
There appears to be a Trumpistic stretching of time to span the past and present together--"last night" could stretch back into a past-present "what's" and all can refer to "what has been happening." That's why I put "attack" in quotes and labeled it a (Trumpism). Simply applying your 1) and 3) solves the anomaly and makes clear, sort of, what he means, meant, or is going to mean.
And, anyway, putting nonsense aside, the subject of my reply to your post is not what the President said. The substance of my reply was a fleshing out and expansion of your "I heard of a devastating attack in Sweden." Oh, wait, Scott pointed out that Trump did not actually say attack. Oh well. Fake news. Anyway, avoiding what was said in those articles--(just a sample of many such by Swedish and European, on the ground observers of what is happening in Sweden and Europe instead of the politically correct cover up so as not to disturb the Euro-Zone edict that the asylum seekers must be accepted by all Euro-Zone countries regardless of cost, inconvenience, or danger.)--avoiding what was said in those articles and, instead, focusing on Trump's bumble mouth, brain farts, mistakes or "lies" is submitting to the greater danger in order to delegitimize who you don't like or don't agree with.
Criticize Trump for policies gone astray (and they haven't had time yet to do that), but the hysteria now occurring is uncalled for. And it could lead to the danger of not paying attention to real threats in order to score points, or get rid of, Trump.