Doxai and Critical Rhetoric: Thimsen's Turn on Dissensus

Maybe it's the lack of any decent coffee in my house right now, but Thimsen's theoretical position on demonstration and critique of doxai really made sense to me. I agreed with her foundational premise that both demonstration and critique are required for dissensual democracy, and found it interesting the way she wove aesthetics into so polemic a space as the area between ideological and critical rhetoric (pg 492). I was not entirely convinced of her treatment of doxa as the primary location of this tension however.  Maybe I am misreading her use of Doxa here, but I was of the impression that doxa implied a largely polysemic term that had come to be understood generally as one thing, but which could change over time, which would cut the legs out from underneath her ossification argument about the nature of the term "people" in the American democratic society.

I feel perhaps she may have overlooked the polysemic qualities of the taken for granted nature of doxa, in favor of a convenient example to fall back on in her critique. To a certain extent, I think she could have made a stronger argument about the use of the ideograph MtA is creating (or utilizing) of the term "people" and "We the People" as a subject of both demonstration and critique. Is that a fair assessment, or am I being too harsh here? Do I fundamentally misunderstand the application of dissensus in her article?