It makes a difference to me. I’m looking for clarification and understanding of Ryan’s answer. Was Ryan’s answer based on having actually seen the tweet with the 6-pointed star OR did a reporter describe the tweet to Ryan while claiming that the 6-pointed star was a Star of David?
Assuming that Ryan had only a reporter’s description of the tweet when he answered, I wonder if Ryan’s answer would have been different if the 6-pointed star had been described as a 6-pointed star, instead of as a Star of David?
Hillary should be the go-to guy if anyone is looking for advice on building a strawman.
While some Hillary worshipers insist on claiming a 6-pointed star must be, can only be, a SOD if the Trump campaign uses it and a 6-pointed star is only a 6-pointed star if Disney uses it, this sounds like a double standard to me. Or another example of politics as usual.
You don’t think people are objecting to the “6-pointed star” all by itself, do you?
There’s nothing objectionable about “a 6-pointed star”: showing it alongside talk of corruption and money is objectionable; showing it alongside stickers and a Disney princess, not so much; showing it alongside Superman would probably be kind of awesome; showing it on my yarmulke is merely appropriate. And so on.
Many people in this thread have said that they originally saw a 6-pointed star in the tweet. Others saw a SOD. While still others have been trying to tell people what/how to think about the 6-pointed star in the tweet.
I’m under the impression that if Hillary’s poll numbers were higher, or she was better liked by the public, or if she were a more trusted individual, this 6-pointed star/SOD issue would never have become so popular.
The most succinct rebuttal is an Erick Erickson tweet directed to Trump:
You need to develop more accurate and realistic impressions, then. Try “If Trump weren’t being endorsed by people like David Duke”, or “If Trump didn’t have a history of this sort of thing”.
Are you suggesting that people can have different opinions about this, or any other, 6-pointed star? And that this should somehow be acceptable to the general public?
Maybe the Trump campaign ought to look into getting one of those parental-control Internet filters installed on its computers so their graphic designers won’t be able to continue perusing neo-Nazi websites. Admittedly, they’d have to come up with cash up front unless they’re lucky enough to find a vendor unfamiliar with Trump’s reputation, which might be a bit of a problem for them given their anemic fundraising, but they ought to at least give it a try.
Yep, old news that can not be dismissed as much as you like it, and it is better to reply to a repeat ot that bit of news rather than to what conservative radio talk show host Erick Erickson tweeted to El Trumpo. The source of the graphic is a very important reason why Trump is being criticized, and not just by the left.
I don’t care about the star – what I care about is why is Trump’s campaign going to white supremacist websites to get their attacks on Hillary? Someone in Trump’s campaign is digging through white supremacist websites and tweets, showing them to Trump and suggesting that they would be good attacks, and he’s saying “sure, go ahead”. Or else he just doesn’t care.
