I recently read an essay I'm almost certain Scott authored (but maybe not?) that I can't track down. It challenges this rhetorical tactic of, "I see you're attacking political candidate A because you believe they endorse position X, but if you just look at what they said during the most recent campaign, they said nothing close to endorsing X." The essay explains that there is context around a candidate they're obligated to speak to, and when they don't, legitimate concerns may be raised.
p
I recently read an essay I'm almost certain Scott authored (but maybe not?) that I can't track down. It challenges this rhetorical tactic of, "I see you're attacking political candidate A because you believe they endorse position X, but if you just look at what they said during the most recent campaign, they said nothing close to endorsing X." The essay explains that there is context around a candidate they're obligated to speak to, and when they don't, legitimate concerns may be raised.
Anyone recall this one?
More options
Context Copy link