Hmm. You could model press conference discourses as a sort of game of taboo. You must answer all questions without using words or phrases that the outgroup uses as its shibboleths, since usage means you accept the frame being invoked, which means they win.https://twitter.com/vgr/status/1311431263081824256 …
-
-
There’s never a point to analyzing the transcripts of any adversarial conversation Trump’s in. It always shows a stream of incoherent bullshit that does not admit a clear reading. Noise wins, all lose. But importantly, nobody can declare victory, nobody need concede a point lost.
Show this thread -
One possible outcome that’s possible when the encounter is NOT framed as a hostile zero-sum/negative-sum one, is that somebody actually has a breakthrough positive sum insight, other acknowledges, conversation moves to “yes, and”, and both sides walk away win-win.
Show this thread -
Hasn’t happened in 4 years in any public conversation I’ve watched
Show this thread -
There’s a sense in which Democrats aren’t counterparty at all. For four years it’s been Trump vs. media. His base views the mainstream media as the primary adversary and he is required to fight them first, Dems second. He can concede to Dems in the back room, but never to media.
Show this thread -
Even Fox is not entirely to be trusted as far as the base is concerned.
Show this thread - End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
