This is an uncomfortable thing to think about but there are plenty of parallels in history in other countries throughout the world. We all need to show Trump that we stand with him and we expect him to stay in office by any means necessary given the preponderance of evidence of the election fraud. It doesn't matter if every single politician is against him as long we we all stand behind him.
Comments (232)
sorted by:
Ought*
I don't understand how it says he should concede? The next three words are "under no circumstances".
Because they are wrong. While not the absolute best way to write it, it is still perfectly acceptable and accurate in meaning.
It’s ambiguous. Language in such important cases should have only one possible meaning.
It's clear, but it is an archaic phrasing. Perhaps we've read the Constitution and writings of the day so much that we've absorbed their grammar structure.
It isn't ambiguous at all. The way the words are arranged, it can literally only mean one thing.
Anyone struggling to understand what the sentence says needs to blame their own poor reading comprehension, not the sentence.
The only way you can mistake it to be saying the opposite of what it actually says is if you're a lazy skimmer and only read the first handful of words and stopped at 'concede' and completely ignore everything after that point.
I understood it. It’s obvious to me. But it’s clumsy and not the most clear possible language choice. If the phrases were flipped in order it would work better. Under no circumstances should Trump concede. Or Trump should not concede under any circumstances. Much better than a sentence that starts Trump should concede... It’s not a fatal failure but it’s not the clearest nor the most natural way to form the sentence. Ok I’ll stop now bec I’m not a leftist grammar nazi. Good day :)
Otter