You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #259: Gestalt difference: I see your interpretation as mostly dissonant [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-12-11 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #256
259. Gestalt difference: I see your interpretation as mostly dissonant
Much of the statement is preoccupied with the disparity. It makes sense to me to interpret that sentence as "my comments at the press conference weren't intended to endorse what she says about the disparity, as I just described." (I agree that that isn't the most natural reading of the sentence on its own -- although as you note below, the sentence on its own poses problems no matter what it means.) It makes no sense to me to interpret it as "my comments at the press conference have been misconstrued as meaning what they said, when actually what I meant to say was that, as vice-chair of the Democratic Party in this county and a member of the canvass board since 2004, I don't really know how a canvass works." Or something like that.

It's possible, however, that she was trying to convey something like "I find the revelation of the disparity so shocking that the more I think about it, the less confidence I have even in the canvass." It's fun to bicker politely about how to parse the words, but it would be better to know what she thinks.

Hopefully at some point we will hear a more concrete and detailed explanation. Even if my theory is correct, I still don't know why she says that she can't vouch. Is it because she was not shown the original sources or is it rather that she was shown those sources but realizes that she would have no way of distinguishing a forgery from a true document? In other words, is it because the canvass was not performed correctly or is it because she recognizes the limits of what the canvass could truly prove?

Yep. And even if my theory is correct, there are other things she could clear up for us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC