Liveblogging Immiment

I'm gonna liveblogging this here looming GOP debate. Let me say at the outside that I'm going to be doing this under a "no meta" rule. Statements of the form "candidate x did well" mean that I, as a citizen of the Republic, was, in fact, favorably disposed to what he did; not that I, as a mighty journalist, speculate that typical people were favorably disposed to what did.

I think the business of picking "winners" and "losers" in these things is basically bullshit. Normal people don't watch these things. The reason they matter is that they impact press coverage (and, these days, blog coverage). Which is fine. But people in the press should just cover the damn thing straightforwardly in a first-order way.

Photo by Flickr user irrational cat used under a Creative Commons license

Comments

"But people in the press should just cover the damn thing straightforwardly in a first-order way."

You assume that just covering the damn thing implies ignoring the theatrical aspects of political debate.

There's a reason they don't do these debates via email, y'know...

Posted by Petey | June 5, 2007 6:31 PM

And man, that Ambinder blog is fucking crucial.

You're in good company here, with the exception of Sullivan.

Posted by Petey | June 5, 2007 6:37 PM

Did it take you more than 20 seconds to write this post?

Posted by blah | June 5, 2007 6:41 PM

How did humanity survive thousands and thousands of years without the word meta?

Posted by Gary Sugar | June 5, 2007 6:50 PM

I agree. I wish we could go back. Meta has to be the most played out term in the blogosphere, recently supplanting meme. Is he using meta as the noun? (something with refers to itself). Or is he being the philosophy major? (meaning one level of description higher). The two definitons are interchangable more often than not. I don't understand your "context". I'm just a caveman.

Posted by sangfroid826 | June 5, 2007 7:17 PM