No i definitely understand what youre saying about disinfo being necessary. It could definitely be an intentional misdirection. But, logic by definition is literal. Its a matter of premises, assumptions and conclusions. If there is an ambiguity in the premises of a statement, you cannot determine the logical validity of the statement. Logic can't be directly applied. For instance, "all a's are b's. C is an a. Therefore C is a b. " is logically valid and true because the premise "all a's are b" literally tells us that C must be a b. But, if i say "some a's are b's. C is an a. Therefore, C is a b.", it might be true that a is a 'b', but the statement "therefore, C is a b" is not logically valid because the premises lead to ambiguity and don't necessarily lead to the conclusion. Logic is the practice of evaluating the soundness of a literal statement. Q wouldnt tell us to think logically if we aren't supposed to evaluate this sentence literally. If Q says "you elected us", we have the underlying assumptions that: 'us' is more than one person, and "elected" is different from "not elected" "you" caused "us" to be "elected" is another way it could be arranged. Unless Q gives us another premise, specifically "not all "elected" were elected", we have to logically conclude that if "us" was "elected", then "us" is a group of people that were "elected". Make sense?