Of course, he said no such thing. He SAID “If I can take on 100,000 protesters, I can do the same across the globe,”
That is nothing like saying “handling protests trained me to take on terrorists”. It is saying that his handling of protesters showed the strength of character he has, that would also enable him to handle other adversity.
The whole thing is stupid — WHO could ever claim they had actually already led a nation in the fight against terrorists? You obviously have to point to things in your current situation as indications of how you’d handle different things.
It’s like if someone said to me “But are you sure you could fix a leaky faucet”, and I responded “Well, I was able to re-wire the lights, and I replaced my garbage disposal, and hooked up my ice maker, so I think I could handle fixing a faucet”. Note that NONE of those other jobs “prepared me” — they are just examples of things I was able to learn to do on my own, which makes me confident I could also learn the other task.
Walker keeps providing good answers, and the liberal media keeps pretending that the answers make no sense.
As bad as those who thought Palin said “I can see Russia from my house”, just because Tina Fey said it on SNL.
That is nothing like saying “handling protests trained me to take on terrorists”. It is saying that his handling of protesters showed the strength of character he has, that would also enable him to handle other adversity."
That's what Walker was getting at, though I do think he could have articulated it better. It's not something a candidate should say in an October primary debate, but it doesn't change much this far out.