PoliBlog: A Rough Draft of my Thoughts


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. It’s a fine and interesting blog, with an interesting methodology.

    Basically, all he does is count partisan references, and whether the reference is positive or negative. The partisan reference part is pretty objective-reference to political party-and the subjectivity is minimal, since it’s just a “Positive, Negative, or Neutral” designation.

    It’s fascinating because you suddenly see who spends the most time bashing one party or the other, or praising one or the other.

    Comment by Dean Esmay — Sunday, August 24, 2003 @ 2:42 am

  2. Nifty.

    Comment by Steven — Sunday, August 24, 2003 @ 7:12 am

  3. Not all partisanship is equal; that’s what’s missed in this fruitless exercise. Partisanship, in and of itself, is not a bad thing. Belief in one’s views and the ability to advance these views in a logical and rational manner is a good thing.

    However, as I noted earlier, not all partisanship is equal. For example, is Ann Coulter’s reckless use of the word ‘treason’ to describe all things liberal the equivalent of, say, a Paul Krugman explaining how and why Dubya wasn’t being honest as to the effects of his tax cuts? Is a Cal Thomas ranting about how Democrats are anti-Catholic the same as a Robert Scheer comparing what this administration said about WMD before the invasion of Iraq and what wasn’t found in its aftermath?

    Ultimately, LIP’s partisanship boxscores are highly misleading because it treats all instances of partisanship equally, when it is clear they are not.

    Comment by JadeGold — Sunday, August 24, 2003 @ 10:44 am

  4. Comment by Anonymous — Tuesday, August 10, 2004 @ 2:51 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Close this window.

0.074 Powered by Wordpress