AP: Melania Trump was an undocumented working model in '96

[*bfine32*]

(11-05-2016, 08:54 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, when I see someone saying "are you saying..." followed by something I didn't say, I don't like to expound because of the frequency with which straw man is used around here. It was answering your question, because if asked if I was saying that, and I wasn't. If you had said "in your opinion, should Clinton supporters care?" then you would have received an answer tot hat question. But that wasn't what was asked.

For the record, policy is what people should care about. Both Clinton and Trump are horrible choices with shady pasts, but one of them will be the next POTUS and people should vote based on the policies they agree with. So neither side should care about this.

Bold is exactly what I asked. Given I left out "In your opinion" but that is implied when asking "are you saying?" This is known as: asking the implication of your statement. Nothing more that avoiding the "straw man". 

I understand why you took the coy "I said what I said" route while making the distinction of who didn't care. The things work better when we are earnest in our replies. 

But allow me to light a candle instead of cursing the darkness, by providing examples:

Example 1:
Closed-minded voter: " Hillary and her crew are into demonic worship"

bfine: "Hillary voters do not care"

Independent thinker": "Are you saying Trump's should care?"

bfine: "Hell no, it is stupid and both sides should dismiss it  as silly"

Example 2:
Closed-minded voter: " Tgey are relooking Hill's emails because they showed up on Weiner's laptop"


bfine: "Hillary voters did not care the first time, so I doubt they care this time"

Independent thinker": "Are you saying Trump's should care?"

bfine: "Of course they should, it is possibly a matter of National Security"


So as you can see actually responding to an "are you saying" query can add clarity; as opposed to the profound "I said what I said"