Is it True that “Gays vs. Traditionalists are a zero-sum game”?
Advocates often describe a zero-sum game, in which more of one inevitably means less of the other.
Yet the function of blogging in a big-media context is not a zero-sum game.
But gaining while your opponents are dropping is all you need to win in the zero-sum game.
But it is becoming a zero-sum game, where no party can win without others losing, and everyone is choosing sides.
The Palestinians initiated a zero-sum game that has given [Netanyahu] the upper hand.
The notion that justice is a zero-sum game, that any gains won by one group come at the expense of another, is nonsense.
Who then is the optimal trading partner in this zero-sum game?
Such hope is vital if we are ever to transcend the perpetual tit-for-tat, zero-sum game of everyday politics.
The Chinese do not view it as a zero-sum game in the manner of the Cold War.
zero-sum game A game in which the sum of the winnings by all the players is zero. In a zero-sum game, a gain by one player must be matched by a loss by another player. Poker is a zero-sum game if the house does not take a cut as a charge for playing. |
A game in which the winnings of some players must equal the losses of the others. Zero-sum games are mentioned in a political context when it is believed that resources are limited, and every decision will produce both winners and losers. In such situations, political decisions will be made on the basis of trade-offs between competing interests.