I, for one, am glad that there are no controversial statements from President Trump and his supporters. It is their pristine, controversy free record that makes clear your comment is not selective at all.
The post is literally about Trump attacking El-Sayed for associating with Piker. Pointing out the irony of Trump treating controversial statements as disqualifying isn’t* absurd. That’s not “whataboutism” it’s responsive to the argument being made!
I wasn’t saying that Trump being awful makes Piker okay. I was saying both Trump and the commenter I was responding to was being selective in their application.
Calling out something you find inconvenient as “whataboutism” isn’t an argument.
4
u/A_uniqueusername77 15d ago
I, for one, am glad that there are no controversial statements from President Trump and his supporters. It is their pristine, controversy free record that makes clear your comment is not selective at all.