John’s Support Of Trump: He’s Reduced To Asserting Various Fallacies Of Composition…

This is… precious. John can find so little to say about Trump — in support of him — that he is overnight reduced to talking about “ones and twos” — individuals, already GOP supporters who have liberal friends.

His claim is that Trump will be re-elected because… wait for it… these one or two voters are tired of Tump being “demonized.” [This appears on the same day that his compatriot argues that Trump does “nothing wrong” in criticizing Roger Stone’s coming sentence — and prior prosecution — all clearly to insulate Trump, should Stone squeal under what may amount to a life sentence. This illogical form of argument is called “reductio” — and it collapses the crime of obstructing justice into simple political banter. It matters greatly that Trump is complaining about a series of felonies undertaken to benefit his 2016 run for the White House. But John wants to waste paragraphs on a few would-be turncoat pussy hat knitters?! And now, by noon on Friday, another of his co-bloggers recites this sad and unbecoming theme. Hilarious.]

Where was I? Oh yes. John clearly needs a distraction from the Trump-Barr-Stone crime spree. Even if his contentions were factual — they are not — this argument of his, such as it is… commits the fallacy of composition. In logic, what is true of one case, likely will not hold — in ALL cases.

Of course, John debated in high school and college, and made a career of it, in the courts — so he well knows this is a strictly losing appeal.

But his readers — he thinks — are too stupid to know better. So he prattles on.

As I say, precious.

Be excellent to one another. Out.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.