I mean the 2000 spread (not the 2006 spread) when I refer to the 2000 spread.

Jeez, that chart tells me that when forced to choose, moderates side with Liberals, not those nasty selfish conservatives.

http://cellar.org/2006/75-1.gif

The rest of the data

http://cellar.org/2006/75-3.gif

The source

"And now you know why Fox gets the ratings that it does, and why AirAm can't survive."

Didn't Fox lose over 1/2 BILLION dollars in it's first few years?

ha ha ha

The biggest shift is the drop in "conservative-identified" Democrats, and the almost perfectly-corresponding rise in "liberal-identified" Democrats... You can almost see the boogey-man-ification of the words "liberal" and "conservative" right there in the data . . .

Anyone with half a semester of college prob & stats know you can skew data in clever enough ways as to go unnoticed and say what you want.

Data schmata. Rush is still an idiot, blowhard, pompous, self-serving...etc and so on.

The boogey-man-ification of "liberal" had already happened, that chart shows the de-boogey-man-ification as the conservatives displayed their incompetance.

I would assume that is always the case in cable networking; you would lose money until you get enough carriage and potential audience to become profitable.

Technically, wouldn't the perceived (I'm not debating this either way) incompetence be attahced to the actual ruling party, not so much an ideology?

Well, apparently the founders of Air America have taken their cash infusions to a new shell.

Can't be much boogyman factor to "liberal" amongst the "progressives" then.

Where in the chart are you seeing "moderates"?

I don't know, do you have another chart for progressives?

Moderates are the green line.

http://cellar.org/2006/75-2.gif
The green line that's just about the same level as the conservatives. Duh.