MARCH 7, 2008
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Dan Drezner thinks so. If he's right, maybe I can shake down some promising candidate in 2012...
P.S. I was hoping the "Scheiber effect" brand-name would be affixed to something more academic-y, but you take what you can get...
P.P.S. Apologies for the light--er, nonexistent--posting these last two days. My piece for the next issue consumed pretty much all my time since the polls closed Tuesday. Mercifully, we put it to bed last night.
--Noam Scheiber
4 comments
I had assumed no less than deadline fever setting in. But it was difficult, alright. What would we do without you, Noam?
By the way, has anyone else claimed originality for the Reverse Bradley effect? If not, you have certainly made a great contribution to folk political science.
- rozenson
March 7, 2008 at 12:37pm
Quick, write a long article about Hillary and McBush! How about a series of articles about both in the next two weeks?? That'll fix them!
- tnmats
March 7, 2008 at 12:39pm
you were right about Ohio and Democrats not wanting Hillary to either win or lose, you bastard. I thought your reasoning was too clever by half, but looks like it hit the nail on the head.
- blackton
March 7, 2008 at 2:46pm
blackton beat me too it Noam. It seemed to happen that way in New Hampshire too. I'd have thrown myself in that camp two months ago (didn't want anyone to win or lose), but I've seen enough of the candidates, and Clinton and her campaign's behavior since then, to have made a choice.
- jet
March 7, 2008 at 5:18pm