April 2, 2007

Trustee Coverage All on One Page

I've been asked to collect the posts I've made related to the trustee election. Here they are—even if you disagree with me and know what I'll say, the comments sections of each are pretty good—many comments are quite articulate and, I think, give a pretty good picture of the nature and underlying issues of the rhetoric of this election.

Digging deep into the archives, here is some coverage of the last trustee election, from site founder Chris Bateman:

Something else: It is possible that I have never read anything as smug as this editorial of the New Criterion's, supporting Smith. I realize it's an editorial, but the way that it just assumes that the most over-the-top accusations it can put to Jim Wright are true simply because they're saying them is genuinely bracing.

3 comments:

  1. Electioneering, Climbing Up the Walls7:04 AM

    Regarding the New Crapterion's comment that the "establishment" ran "an electioneering blitz, cold-calling alumni and filling their mailboxes with letters and flyers":

    Doesn't the magazine remember what actually happened, or was it not paying attention? The Common Sense cold-calling only emerged late in the campaign, as a reaction to the unprecedented and often misleading electioneering of conservative blogs and organizations. Common Sense was strategically unwise, but its effort was not inherent in the constitution proposal -- it was a reaction to the unexpectedly rabid response the constitution received.

    The campaign groups that prompted the formation of Common Sense include dartmouthviews.org (run by crackpot Tim Dreisbach, author
    of "A Battle for the Soul of Dartmouth"), the Hanover Institute (MacGovern), daog.org,
    alumniconstitution.org, voxclamantisindeserto.org (a student organization, so made up of people who couldn't vote), dartlog.net (which reported falsely "Tampering Already in
    Progress"); other negative and often baseless reports appeared in the Wall Street Journal and on the blogs of FIRE and ACTA, which thought (for some reason, perhaps ignorance) that they had a horse in that race.

    And if not the Clinton Group, who does Smith have behind his campaign? I've received two mailings from him already, sent from the University of Virginia's postal account (is he reimbursing them for this)? How did he get my name? Who's managing his website, which is slicker and therefore more cynically desperate than anything Common Sense ever put out? The impressive effort he (or someone) is putting into campaigning reeks of something.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous12:16 PM

    The New Criterion is written by Stefan Beck and James Panero, Dartmouth Review alumni who are basically fartlog incarnate. I wouldn't take it seriously.

    ReplyDelete