In a starkly divided Washington, it was an adaptive minority, not the Tea Party, who emerged as the power in the default showdown, says game theory expert Neil Johnson.
Traditional game theory. Read it considers. To play us when we think. The original use of game theory which was saying the cold war one big side against another big side. That's how we might traditionally think amounts to politics and politics. Republicans Democrats I think what's really just think now is that picture of one idea on each side. No longer hold. Because I think what we're saying is that many guys and they will -- many days -- some damn game. What tends to happen. In. A situation where there are very polarized views is that. 90%. Of the players either born into one kind or -- Back then leave that 10% to act like that kind of that led to tip the balance. That's what we announced this. Corn and and the crowd. And it's very interesting to find out and some sad thing that the powerful ones that's out particularly effective around political minority gang. And the minority. Hold the power in that kind of -- you might think that it would be the Tea Party that play the role of the minority group I don't think that's the case. Fourteen senators. Who had worked very hard. On both sides of the aisle six Democrats. And one independent. Seven. Republicans. Who have come together in good faith. They'll be the ones that -- in that group would very dynamic. To be very powerful because it won't have precisely one stroll well known particularly that. And so it will be mobile's it will be actually it's not that you can ever gets an amicable situation. That is common and what you get is some kind of temporary compromise what we can expect to see is. Periods of calm before. A changes announcement expect the unexpected but there's going to be a lot of unexpected.