https://sites.google.com/site/johnbholbein/
No reasons to be jealous though
"productive" = churning out "pubs" by keeping them uninteresting and irrelevant so that nothing is actually produced. It's like a factory that fills up balloons and then leaves them in a corner to deflate. "Wow, 9 million balloons. This factory is doing something RIGHT. Send more money its way"
WOW. You guys sound very frustrated indeed. There are great qualitative papers published in top journals too. How many top publications do you have eh?
So they day you have half of this
5 APSR , 2 JoP, 1 AJPS, 1 Science, and varipus others "fillers" like BJPS
let me know!
but is it ? How likely is to publish 10 times in top journals with no idea ? Plus , why don’t you write a rebuttal ?
^Hi John!
The point is, your work is trivial and devoid of ideas. That you get published in the top quant journals reflects badly on the discipline. It also proves (once again) just how dire quants is and the damage it has done to the study of politics in the US.
Every time I get sick of the race baiters and Kuhronatroll and the other outsiders who muddy this board now... I remember that threads like this were the standard fare before those guys showed up. And then, frankly, I'm not so sick of them anymore.
This, 100x. It's not like a bunch of baseball fans sitting around talking trash about an MLB star; it's like a bunch of guys hitting .051 in Single-A ball sitting around talking trash about an MLB star.
"I don't like Bryce Harper. His home runs are so uninteresting."
"But you never hit home runs. You strike out all the time! Against worse pitching!"
"But my strikeouts are infinitely more interesting than his home runs".
The guy quits Twitter because of a bad take, then rejoins it to tell everyone he got an APSR. The constant need for admiration among people like this is so sad. I guess that’s what draws them to Twitter.
Bad take. The guy has promoted the work of literally hundreds of political scientists over the past few years.