Comments on: Blogging on Partisanship http://www.poliblogger.com/index.php?p=1456 A rough draft of my thoughts... en Sat, 20 Nov 2004 15:07:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.2 by: Dean Esmay http://www.poliblogger.com/index.php?p=1456#comments Sun, 24 Aug 2003 02:42:39 -0400 5097:1456@http://www.poliblogger.com 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. 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.

]]>
by: Steven http://www.poliblogger.com/index.php?p=1456#comments Sun, 24 Aug 2003 07:12:04 -0400 5098:1456@http://www.poliblogger.com Nifty. Nifty.

]]>
by: JadeGold http://www.poliblogger.com/index.php?p=1456#comments Sun, 24 Aug 2003 10:44:41 -0400 5099:1456@http://www.poliblogger.com 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. 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.

]]>
by: Deleter Spy http://www.poliblogger.com/index.php?p=1456#comments Mon, 12 Jul 2004 02:45:54 -0400 5100:1456@http://www.poliblogger.com ]]> by: Anonymous http://www.poliblogger.com/index.php?p=1456#comments Tue, 10 Aug 2004 14:51:18 -0400 5101:1456@http://www.poliblogger.com ]]>