The Democratic presidential candidates covered a lot of ground during their debate Tuesday, but one issue received little attention: their theory of political change. How exactly would Hillary Rodham Clinton or her rivals pass the programs and proposals they advocate?
« New NYT: Deflategate polarization & conspiracy beliefs | Main | New NYT: The limits of the tobacco strategy on climate »
October 15, 2015
The comments to this entry are closed.
About Me
I am Professor of Public Policy in the Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan. I received my Ph.D. from the Department of Political Science at Duke University and served as a RWJ Scholar in Health Policy Research and a faculty member in the Department of Government at Dartmouth College before coming to the Ford School. I also tweet at @BrendanNyhan, contribute to The Upshot at The New York Times, and am a co-organizer of Bright Line Watch. Previously, I served as a media critic for Columbia Journalism Review, co-edited Spinsanity, a non-partisan watchdog of political spin, and co-authored All the President's Spin. For more, see my Michigan website.
Content feeds:
-Blog RSS
-Twitter feed
-Twitter RSS
Email:
bnyhan@yahoo.com
Recent Posts
- New Monkey Cage: Court legitimacy post-Kavanaugh
- Document Journal essay on information overload
- New Bright Line Watch report on U.S. democracy
- New report: Debunking "echo chamber" hype
- New NYT: Persuasion effects of fake news overblown
- New research on fake news consumption in 2016
- "You're Fake News!" The Poynter Media Trust Survey
- New Monkey Cage: A new way to fight misinformation
- New NYT: Facebook's fact-checking should be checked
- New Bright Line Watch survey results
Comments