I’m not giving the guy any points for stating a fact. Trump said he’d do a 20% universal tariff during his campaign, and this guy called liberals stupid for believing it. Now, he gets up to speed about half a year later, calls himself a man of honor, doesn’t apologize for his mistake, and I’m supposed to say that’s ok?
None of that has anything to do with what I said. I'm just responding to your comment claiming he wouldn't admit to being wrong if there wasn't a "record"
Right... I said it's not fair... To say he wouldn't admit to being wrong without a record... Because the other option still existed (just ignore it / delete it). Someone still should get credit for choosing to admit to being wrong
Normally, I’d agree with your last sentence, but I’m not giving any of these people (people who dismissed what Trump said he will do as an exaggeration, joke or hoax—and insulted anyone who believed them) any credit. Feel free to give them any credit you think they deserve.
So there's ZERO difference between a person who says it won't happen and then admits they were wrong, versus a person who just downright refuses to admit they were wrong about it? Who just deletes the tweet and pretends it didn't happen? Who tries to twist it into still being true? The one who admits they're wrong gets ZERO credit for that?
I’m trying to understand because (a) it makes no sense to me how there could be no difference between these two and (b) I think it’s bad because it disincentivizes people admitting they were wrong, if people just say “well f you anyways” there’s no reason for anyone to come around. Have to be able to forgive or there’s no point
3.6k
u/stereoroid 1d ago
Admitting he was wrong counts for something, though.