As I've mentioned before, one of the things Sitemeter can tell me is how folks end up at this site. There are numerous reasons, of course, referrals from other sites, e-mailed articles, search engine results, and just plain bad luck. When you don't have many visitors, it's easy to watch these things.
An interesting thing has happened recently, and I'm not sure why. Up until a week ago, people who visited the article On Attendance did so because they wanted to know about Barack Obama's attendance record, which, as I observed was pretty normal for a Senator who is a presidential candidate. This week, though, people have showed up because they were interested in Hillary Clinton's record, which I'd call better than average.
I've just looked at the Washington Post article on vote attendance, and it appears little has changed. Clinton's record is still better than Obama's, which is much better than John McCain's. Considering how long ago he dropped out, I'd say their records were both better than Sam Brownback's.
I don't understand the sudden shift in interest, but it's been remarkable.
1 comment:
Cujo - I know you don't like the mandates part of the Clinton (and Edwards) health care plan, but for what it's worth, have you read this today?
http://www.theolympian.com/adamwilson/story/352396.html
McDermott -- who I say, without caveats, is the congressional expert on universal health care -- prefers Clinton's plan to Obama's. He has stayed out of the endorsement game, but his statement in this article cannot be construed as anything but a boost toward Clinton's credibility on the issue.
But, shhh... don't tell the Obamamaniacs. They'll have simultaneous conniption fits.
-shoephone
Post a Comment