An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Tag-clouding the Democratic ‘Debate’
I did not watch the Democratic presidential wannabe gabfest last night because (a.) It was meaningless to me, (b.) It had no meaning for me, and (c.) I’m jealous of John Edwards’ haircut.
But Andrew Sullivan hipped his readers to a neat tag-clouding exercise by Janet Harris.
Tag-clouding, in this case off of Hilary Rodham Clinton’s remarks, is weighting words based on the frequency of use of them.
Neato.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
10 Responses to “Tag-clouding the Democratic ‘Debate’”
I work for a social polling site called Buzzdash, and they’re taking a vote right now to see who the public thought won the debate. It’s real-time, so you can watch it change as the day progresses. You should check it out!
http://www.buzzdash.com (top of the page)
Here’s another reference if you don’t have the patience to sit through the debates…
http://www.ExpertVoter.org
gary
Stacy, I like the idea of the site, but that the majority believes that Edwards of all peope won the debate is, umh…
At loss for words.
As a female college student this is why I am un-proud to be an american http://collegecandy.com/2007/04/27/american-pride-not-so-much/
Michael, you need to understand that websites such as these are heavily skewed by “visitors” of a certain age grouping. Not that I criticize the attempt, just that the results are not going to be representative of the total population of US voters. If you want to know who the 28 and younger population are going to vote for, these are the polls for you.
they forgot corporate and establishment with Clinton.
and aloof and snob with edwards
I want to leave the country until after the elctions and maybe beyond.
The debates are rated on a)sex-appeal and fireworks vs boredom, b) scrutiny of word use rather than meaning and c) any number of polling data, always suspect as to methodology.
This is a feeding frenzy for bloggers and news’ talking heads. It’s frightening how these air-headed (not you, Shaun) reviews suck up the information field.
We’ll go to the voting booths fighting and yelling. Few will know what they are fighting and yelling about.
Next: a review of the shoes the candidates wore.
Gary, interesting idea you have. I like it.
Although, if you have the inclination, adding a page on actual voting records (where they exist) might be an informative addition.
And position papers, if any, as issued.
I have to agree with the skepticism about Edwards winning the debate. Most bloggers (who are political junkies and follow this everyday) seem to think that no one really won or lost. But it matters more what the Average Joe or Jane thought.
A South Carolina poll taken immediately after the debate shows Obama as the winner. I haven’t seen a similar national poll.
casualobserver,
I’m finding it hard just to keep up with what I already have. It’s a one man operation (me) and I have to squeeze it in between my regular day job, yard work, and helping kids with homework. I think those are great ideas, but I’m afraid someone else will have to take it on.
gary
http://www.ExpertVoter.org