It wasn't really made clear in the lede what the article was going to be about. I didn't particularly like this article because it was so convoluted that I only really grasped the topic after I had read the first third of the article. The article did pick a very interesting politician to discuss as a person who may be negatively affected by Clinton being nominated by the Democrats. The rebuttal by the Republicans was also very clear and concise, including a kicker quote from a Republican saying that Clinton has no effect on any other political nominees. The ending of the article was much more grabbing than the beginning.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/us/politics/04ballot.html?ref=todayspaper
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think that I understood what the article was going to be about from the beginning - the headline helps - but I do agree that I really liked the end. I did wonder if there needed to be attribution in the second paragraph to the idea that Clinton is "a long way from winning the Democratic presidential nomination." According to who? The author? I thought that that made it seem like he doesn't like her.
Post a Comment