

Thanks Nougat. I appreciate this response. Especially the “MAY implicate” part. It’s a nuance that was lost on me.
Thanks Nougat. I appreciate this response. Especially the “MAY implicate” part. It’s a nuance that was lost on me.
Not exactly.
It’s more like saying “answering this question may create a statement that would incriminate myself in wrongdoing.”
The fifth amendment affords you the right to refuse to self-incriminate. In layman’s terms, you can’t be forced to testify against yourself.
The way I interpret this, answering that question would have implicated himself (Epstein) so he did not answer it.
And if it would incriminate Epstein, well, then it stands to reason that the other party (Trump) in that question would also be incriminated by that answer.
I feel so sad.
That’s the gap between favorable and unfavorable.
Take 100 people.
60 find you favorable 40 find you unfavorable
You have a +20 favorability.
Now take 100 people
30 find you favorable 70 find you unfavorable
You have a -40 favorability.
As for the definition, “Favorable” could be just asking “would you vote for x?” Yes or No.
That part I am not 100% certain on. I am not an expert at polling.
The sheriff is near!
Galileo, the homeboy who discovered Jupiter’s moons and Saturn’s rings, was 43 years old when the first British settlers landed at Jamestown.