Quality of messaging: fact-based versus post-truth Republicans

-- "Post-truth politics and why the antidote isn’t simply ‘fact-checking’ and truth," The Conversation
-- "Defining Post-truth: Structures, Agents, and Styles,"  Ari-Elmeri Hyvönen
-- "Truth vs. Lies," October 2020 special issue, Scientific American

Yesterday, the Washington Post released a blockbuster, "I just want to find 11,780 votes’: In extraordinary hour-long call, Trump pressures Georgia secretary of state to recalculate the vote in his favor," a story with the audiotape of a call made on Saturday by President Trump to Georgia's Secretary of State, asking him to come up with 11,780 votes in Trump's favor, so the previous decision awarding the state's electoral votes to Biden could be challenged.

-- "Here’s the full transcript and audio of the call between Trump and Raffensperger"

(I listened to most of it, and while Trump was repetitive and evasive and a wack job, I wouldn't say he sounded "mentally ill," as many others have said.)

Today, a different Georgian election official had a press conference ("Trump made false claims in call pressuring Georgia secretary of state to undo Biden win, official says," NBC News) where he refuted each of Trump's fallacious claims.

What struck me was the "presentation board" he used to support his presentation.  It's matter of fact.

NBC News photo.

I thought back to the Republican campaign by members in the House of Representatives to impugn witness Michael Cohen testifying about his experiences working for and with Donald Trump ("'Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire,’ and Other Contentious Exchanges From Cohen’s Congressional Hearing," New York Times). Here's the quality of their presentation boards.

Reuters photo.