I have no trouble comprehending what I read.
If you can't use contextual clues to gather the meaning of a passage, you
must have trouble comprehending what you read. :shrug:
And just to be clear what you wrote was neither cute nor condescending, it was just dumb. But hey if you want to think they were something else feel free. I could care less.
allow me to provide for you a free lesson on the definition of context, as well as how one can use it to illuminate the meanings of statements.
Context - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Definition: the parts of a discourse that
surround a word
or passage and can throw light on its meaning
See, you initially quoted a passage of my post and then quoted a portion of that very same passage later when the importance of context was made evident to you). You did not seem to understand it's context, because you responded with something that did not relate to what was said (if one was aware of the context which surrounded that passage). The remainder of the post (which was not initially quoted, nor quoted later) would be the context which surrounded said passage which could have thrown light on it's meaning.
Had you went back and looked at the full context, you would have seen how the quoted passage was directly connected to an earlier passage in the post.
The parts about Illinois, Texas, and Ohio, specifically, in the quoted passage can be directly tied to the preceding passages of the same post that stated: "What I'm talking about is how the system is set up so that votes don't really matter that much. In most states, the election is just a formality, the decision is all-but-assured well in advanced. I live in
Illinois, so I know my vote is going democrat every
presidential election whether I like it or not. Someone in
Texas is always voting republican. Done deal.
In
swing states, votes kind of matter, but only a little bit. Even if
Romney had won Florida and
Ohio, he'd have still lost the election. Without those two states,
Obama would have still had 285
electoral votes.
Romney lost the popular vote by 5 million votes or so in total, or in other words, by the combined amount of votes he lost New York and California by."
I have used underlining and bolding to make the connections evident to you. The bolded words provide the direct link
between passages (contextual clues that the passages are related,
besides just being part of the same post). The underlined words are the contextual clues which would have alerted you to the fact that I was speaking about a
specific type of national election, had you been capable of comprehending what you read.
As I said before, I do not write my posts under the assumption that the reader is either an illiterate or they are only semi-literate.
