A useful Reuters story points out that civility in campaigns may actually be harmful -- conflict sharpens choices for voters and helps hold those in power responsible for their actions. Along those lines, it's good to see that the lame debate among the Democratic candidates may finally be heating up. Voters deserve a choice on issues, not just a referendum on Hillary's persona.
« McCain joins Giuliani in attack on dissent | Main | More misleading tax cut claims »
September 19, 2007
Comments
The comments to this entry are closed.
About Me
I am the James O. Freedman Presidential Professor in the Department of Government at Dartmouth College. I received my Ph.D. from the Department of Political Science at Duke University and have served as a RWJ Scholar in Health Policy Research and a faculty member in the Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan. I am a co-director of Bright Line Watch. Previously, I contributed to The Upshot at The New York Times, 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 Dartmouth website.
Content feeds:
-Blog RSS
-Bluesky -Threads
Email:
[email protected]
Recent Posts
- Podcast on threats to democracy in second Trump term
- WHYY interview about assassination rumors
- Quoted on All Things Considered about conservative media
- Uncertain podcast on backfire effect persistence
- PBS NewsHour interview about Trump's rhetoric
- NPR interview about Trump's rhetoric
- New podcast on a second Trump term
- New podcast on polarization and democracy
- New podcast on US 2020 Facebook study
- New podcast interview on Sean Carroll's Mindscape
Obviously, negative advertising doesn't have to be true. So calling it "neative information" is really misleading.
Posted by: Sean-B | September 19, 2007 at 08:03 PM