I’m putting this in the diaries because it’s a “meta” topic – but it’s still a very important one. I love the Swing State Project. I really do. I’ve been maintaining this site (often with all kinds of help, but sometimes on my own) for over five years. That’s an eternity in blog time.
I love this site because it’s focused – sharply focused – on a niche I find endlessly interesting and entertaining. For partisan political junkies, the horserace is the sine qua non of political change. Unless you elect the right guys and keep them there, you’ll never pass the bills you want passed, issue the regulations you want issued, appoint the judges you want appointed. It’s the alpha of whatever omega we’re all hoping for.
I also love this site because it’s a calm, civil place free from almost all of the incessant holy wars that almost any site with decent traffic regularly experiences. People here tend to keep their eyes on the prize. They analyze the horserace dispassionately and with good humor. They avoid the hot-button issues that produce a lot of heat and precious little light. They make this the kind of place that makes you feel smarter after you’ve finished reading.
We’ve worked really hard over the years to set the tone and keep things this way. Almost all the members of this community appreciate this, respect this, and maintain the calmness and civility this blog is known for.
But lately, we’ve seen conversations derail far too often. And it’s really disappointing to me. This is the Swing State Project. We talk about the horse race. Don’t get me wrong – there are a ton of issues that are important to me, whether it’s healthcare, the environment, gay marriage, or Employee Free Choice. There are also a ton of places I can discuss them to my heart’s content.
Just. Not. Here.
The main reason why people come to this site is to geek out about polls. The reason people keep coming back is because of the friendly, welcoming atmosphere. They know that there are a zillion-and-one other blogs out there for discussing any topic under the sun. SSP is for just one of them.
So, enough. Do not be this guy. Don’t take the bait. Don’t get sidetracked. This site is for one topic only. We like it that way, and so do you.
I already read dailykos. Why would I feel the need to read a mini-dailykos? I stopped reading a couple old blogs I used to frequent because they have like a tenth of the people dailykos has, and just rehash the same things, with less insight, and less discussion.
SSP is unique. There’s really nothing else like it on the internet. Certain people here I recognize from other sites and have disagreed with them strongly there, but here I find they are remarkably knowledgeable about past and current elections, trends, and demographics. The derailings make me sad, but I guess it’s more likely to happen now that traffic has picked up noticeably even in the absence of any impending elections.
We even have a few conservatives who read here, I guess because there’s no Republican equivalent to this blog with the level of dedication and professionalism for covering elections.
Keep up the good work.
I haven’t been a member here long, but I’ve been a reader since August 2004. This has always been the site for unadulterated horse-race coverage. It’s where I find out who’s up, who’s down, who’s running and who isn’t. For policy arguments, Daily Kos is by far the superior site (and sometimes even Daily Kos, of which I’ve been a member since the 2004 election, gets far too histrionic). This site, OTOH, is a forum for electoral gossip. At that it excels…some of the smartest number-crunchers on the intertubes are right here at SSP.
It was remarkably comforting to know that there were other stat and poll geeks out there (along with Nate Silver) and that we had a place to go.
This place needs to remain focused on what it is and ignore those who seek to push it off its mooring.
Thanks David, I love this place and wouldn’t change it for the world.
I’m mostly a lurker, but I hope that my few contributions over the years have been sufficiently geeky.
I whole heartedly agree. While an occasional discussion here or there is okay, what makes this blog great is the fact that it focuses on elections. I wish that there were more pages that were as good as this that also focused on the same material. You, James and all the rest have done an amazing job at keeping the tone friendly and fun here. This is the ONLY site I bother reading comments on, as the comments are generally helpful and mostly insightful. I learn what’s going on from the posts, but then can also learn a lot of information picking the brains of the posters here. We’re like a dysfunctional and strange family. Which is awesome!
If not I apologize for my delusions of grandeur. If so then I also apologize for starting off a mini firestorm. That was not my intention. I was actually simply trying to make the macro point you make here David.
I am sometimes that guy on xkcd – “SOMEONE IS WRONG ON THE INTERNET.” Particularly on Team Fortress 2. I get onto more political discussions in a video game than is probably healthy.
Having said that, I love Swing State Project (and for a similar reason, Congress Matters) because of just how wonky it is in elections. I want to work elections after college and this website allows me to ‘sperg out over pretty much everything in national and state politics.
I really enjoy this site and read it every day. Two things I love about it is it rarely drops into the mud, and the comments are manageable. One of the reasons I rarely read the “big” sites it that every post seems to have 400 comments, and I frankly don’t have the time to even attempt to wade through them. Here, there are generally 20 or so focused and rational comments that add to the discussion rather than turning into another segment in a long-running spitting contest.
Thanks for the great work on a site that really contributes to and advances an important discussion.
I hopped about last year between a number of sites but this was the only one without a lot of the personal charges and nastiness. So I spend more time here than any other blog.
Keep up the good work, James.
There are instances where it has seemed appropriate to discuss the issues, when the issues have a horse race aspect to them. Like the gay marriage thread on Maine, that has been a damn fine thread with around 100 comments. It’s pertaining to an issue but it’s being put into a context of a horse race.
And what made that thread successful is that no one there is discussing why we should have gay marriage, we all agree on that. So with the torture and pictures stuff, instead of discussing our opinions on it, it shouldve been more so what would be the political implications of releasing or not releasing the photos.
I just wanted to let all the contributors here know: David, James, Cristunity, that this is basically my favourite site in the netroots. The depth and amount of information is top-notch, everyone is very knowledgeable. I really enjoy it.
For all the kind words from everyone in this thread. I think we’re all on the same page, which heartens me.
I know we all have opinions on issues, some opinions stronger than others. (I sure know I do.) But I really hate it when we get ideological and start arguing.
In that sense, I must note how much more fun it is to discuss horse-race analysis with ChadInFL and IHateBush than to discuss issue opinions. Well, actually, Chad isn’t all that bad, but IHB tends to be pretty easily…excited. But still, the whole civil libertarian vs. authoritarian leftism debate is just…old and annoying by now, no matter who participates on both sides.
I’ve been tempted to jump in sometimes to note that, instead of saying whether torture is wrong or whether terrorists deserve to be tortured, we should be discussing how the issue is currently being used as a political football, both on the domestic political and on the international foreign-relations stage.
~~~~
I’ve found that anytime I tell people I’m interested in politics, I have to deal with them asking me my opinions on issues, and on presidential candidates if it’s a presidential year.
I unfortunately, have a tendency to lack answers, such that I’ve now done two things:
* I say that I’m interested in electoral politics, in particular.
* I have stock answers for such questions, especially on touchy subjects such as abortion, gay marriage, and such.
But, alas, few people actually have the interests that I have. First, I’m a horse-race analyst (who thinks more about elections than issues), and second, I’m a partisan (who thinks more about party victories than issues). Most people aren’t like that. Most people have pet issues, or pet candidates that they like (or anti-pet candidates that they hate), and that’s about it.
Here at SSP, I actually get to discuss things I’m interested in. I started off at Electoral-Vote.com, which introduced me to electoral analysis and strategy, then later found Senate Guru, and later Swing State Project. I still visit E-V, but my most attention (sometimes up to ten times a day) is paid to SSP. It retains a strongly “objective” component, horse-race analysis, while it tries its best to keep detrimental echo-chamber effects and useless-and-headache-inducing issue-wanking (and issue-flaming) to a minimum. (I don’t really go to SG anymore, partly because I’ve had trouble with getting YouTube videos to load after going there, and partly because he has far too many embedded YT videos, and partly because this site has the same info and then House races as well.)
where civil discussion can occur. The trolls, PUMAs, deadenders make some places unbearable.
You can’t have a discussion on healthcare on MyDD without someone like architek showing his bitter PUMA self lying about Obama’s healthcare proposals. All the blogs continuly claim single-payer advocates are shut out, but as Chadin informed me the other day, Gerald Shea of the AFL-CIO testified in favor of single-payer in front of the same committe hearing where people were throw out for disrupting the hearing, claiming there was no one there in favor of single-payer when there was.
You can’t discuss the economy on OpenLeft without hearing Obama is somehow a tool of Wall Street amd the biggest failure ever and your WRONG to even imply that Obama isn’t part of the conservative corporate clan.
You can’t discuss torture on DailyKos without it turning into a brawl.
I think we all recognized that and got caught up in debate here we’ve been missing everywhere else.
I appreciate all the thought that people put into gerrymandering, and I agree that it’s fun to think about, but I still have my ethical qualms about it. Intentionally D-favoring, intentionally R-favoring, and incumbent-protection maps all feel wrong, though I haven’t yet decided upon a way to solve this problem.