…Correction “Does it mean why didn’t he avoid answering the question?

changing the subject?

A classic tactic when wishing to change subject. ‘Agree,and redirect. ’

Quick admission of the subject’s existence, to appear empathetic,and/or accountable, then changing course so as to not dwell on the subject.

Usually a tactic deployed when one is ‘in the wrong. ’

When I teach new organizers how to handle hostile interviews, one of the tactics I teach them when they’re handed a loaded question is to simply answer a different question. For example, the media loved to try to “gotcha” me by bringing up the fact that I’m an anarchist. A typical interview would go something like this:

“Does that fact that you are an anarchist and believe in overthrowing the government interfere in your ability to represent the union with police and politicians?”

“That’s an excellent question, and I find that it’s often possible to reach a compromise which leaves all parties reasonably satisfied when we look for creative solutions. For instance…”

This works because of something referred to as the Photocopier Effect, named after an experiment by psychologist Ellen Langer in which she found that simply having a reason matters far more than the reason making any sense at all. What I’ve done is redirect the question into something I actually want to answer. It’s a technique commonly used by politicians.

That’s what I thought.

A talk show team of 2 who happen to be fans of Trump, were saying that, meaning if Trump answered the question directly it would make look very bad I guess.