No, but when the author can't even get the basic facts straight in the first couple paragraphs
I guess that depends on what you call "the basic facts." He seemed to have those down just fine. I'm not going to waste time arguing the specifics.
Nothing empty about it. Just because I wasn't specifically addressing you doesn't mean it's empty, does it? Are you that self-centered? Can I not make general comments in addition to specific ones? I didn't realize that was a restricted activity.
First, your attempts at wit and sarcasm are tiresome and add nothing to the discussion.
Second, it had nothing to do with comments being addressed to me -- your statement didn't say anything, hence it was empty. We were looking at a study which showed that on six separate issues, the majority of Bush supporters were wrong about Bush's positions while the majority of Kerry supporters were correct about his. I said, "Bush supporters don't know Bush's positions." You replied with: "Yeah, but you can say that about either candidate." Well, not on these issues, according to the numbers. Which issues were you talking about? What support were you using? None. The same study showed that Kerry supporters mis-perceive some of his positions as well, and I'm sure this is true on other issues. But the amount of misperception was clearly much heavier on the Bush side. On average, 71% of Kerry supporters correctly perceived his positions, while 38.5% of Bush supporters were correct about his. This is a significant disparity. You dismissing this fact by making a vague and unsupported statement about how it goes both ways doesn't make it true, and it doesn't add anything to the discussion.
Anyway, I'm thoroughly sick of talking about the election with you. I won't reply to your posts on the subject in the future, and you can feel free to do the same to me.