A friend of mine who also teaches political science at a small liberal arts college just started a new blog. He's attempting to explain politics in a way that makes sense to "normal intelligent people (not just political junkies)". I thought I would help him out in his early days for search engine optimization. From everything I've heard, he is a really good teacher, so it should translate well to blogging. Honestly, I expect him to be better at this than I am.
Here's the link:
Trying to Explain Politics
I believe he takes requests, so if you want to know something specific about politics, he will do his best to answer.
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Friday, July 1, 2011
Political News Can Be Ridiculous
Even though I am a blogger and I study politics for a living, I don't really read political blogs. To be honest, I find most of them to be ridiculous. Political blogging is very agenda driven, so what the most popular bloggers have to say tend to be very predictable and somewhat laughable to people who really understand what is going on.
One of the few political bloggers I respect is Jay Cost over at the Weekly Standard. While it is true that, like most of his colleagues at the Weekly Standard, he does have a conservative bent, but he does it at least from a unique perspective. You see, Mr. Cost is literally a student of politics and history. Last I heard, he was a doctoral candidate at a top-10 political science department specializing in American Political Development (i.e., the history of American politics). He approaches things as an academic, but communicates them in a way that normal intelligent readers can understand.
His most recent blog demonstrates why I generally like him. He basically ridicules all the hype regarding recent Republican primary polls. As he notes, at this time in 2007, Obama was severely trailing both Clinton and Edwards in Iowa. Obama won. On the Republican side, Romney was in first and Giuliani was in second. Who won Iowa? Mike Huckabee.
Putting too much emphasis on the polls this early might be a way to attract readers (especially readers who fear and/or despise Michelle Bachmann), but it is not at all informative. To keep from getting wrapped up in too much hype, I generally don't read very much of the day-to-day political commentary. It saves me from having to spend a lot of time debunking the nonsense I let into my brain when asked for "expert analysis".
One of the few political bloggers I respect is Jay Cost over at the Weekly Standard. While it is true that, like most of his colleagues at the Weekly Standard, he does have a conservative bent, but he does it at least from a unique perspective. You see, Mr. Cost is literally a student of politics and history. Last I heard, he was a doctoral candidate at a top-10 political science department specializing in American Political Development (i.e., the history of American politics). He approaches things as an academic, but communicates them in a way that normal intelligent readers can understand.
His most recent blog demonstrates why I generally like him. He basically ridicules all the hype regarding recent Republican primary polls. As he notes, at this time in 2007, Obama was severely trailing both Clinton and Edwards in Iowa. Obama won. On the Republican side, Romney was in first and Giuliani was in second. Who won Iowa? Mike Huckabee.
Putting too much emphasis on the polls this early might be a way to attract readers (especially readers who fear and/or despise Michelle Bachmann), but it is not at all informative. To keep from getting wrapped up in too much hype, I generally don't read very much of the day-to-day political commentary. It saves me from having to spend a lot of time debunking the nonsense I let into my brain when asked for "expert analysis".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)