Here are the top ten posts from 2016:

  1. Goodbye (Farley)
  2. Maureen Dowd is a National Embarrassment (Lemieux)
  3. Trump-inspired classism (Watkins)
  4. The Party Left Me and Other Complaints of the Voter-as-Atomistic-Consumer (Lemieux)
  5. If lawyers make too much money why is Matt Breunig panhandling on the internet? (Campos)
  6. The game is the game (Campos)
  7. Don’t Look at Us, We Didn’t Do It (Lemieux)
  8. Delete Your Column (Lemieux)
  9. The Rubiobot is No Poet and They Don’t Know it (Lemieux)
  10. Nefarious LGM (Campos)

That’s right; Loomis is shut out of the top ten. Sad!

Other random insights from Google Analytics:


  1. 35-44 (25.75%)
  2. 45-54 (22.97%
  3. 55-64 (21.20%)
  4. 25-34 (19.50%)
  5. 65+ (7.43%)


  1. US (87.63%)
  2. Canada (4.17%)
  3. UK (2.45%)
  4. Australia (1.03%)
  5. Germany (.56%)


  1. California (14.52%)
  2. New York (10.63%)
  3. Massachusetts (5.07%)
  4. Illinois (4.96%)
  5. Washington (4.86%)

Top Traffic Days:

  1. November 8
  2. November 9
  3. November 21
  4. October 11
  5. March 14

Total Posts: 3267

Total Comments: 348621

Thanks for enduring 2016 with us!


  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • CrunchyFrog

    I’m curious about the breakdown by state/city.

    On the retail sites Google Analytics provides a “conversion rate” which is the percentage of people who visit who end up buying. Is there a similar “comment rate” provided for blogs?

  • Nobdy

    Thanks to management for providing this oasis of semi-sanity in a truly insane time.

    Looking back at those most popular posts (at least the political ones) is like looking at a time capsule from an alternate universe (and a much better universe than we inhabit.) People upset and angry about Trump but not yet actually scared of him. People mocking Marco Rubio under the assumption that ideas about policy, intelligence, and norms of behavior in politics were still somewhat applicable and that you couldn’t win the presidency through bullying and braggadocio alone.

    Can you imagine what the top posts of 2017 are going to look like? I don’t even want to try. Hopefully they will look something like those of 2016. Even more hopefully there won’t be two consecutive days of top traffic the way there were this year, signifying some horrific event that people flocked to the site to read its patented “sane takes” on*.

    Of course if things go really bad there’s also the possibility that the site won’t exist in 2018 to do an accounting. Not just in a worst-case nuclear winter scenario, but we really don’t know what Trump plans to do to the press, nor what the Republican congress or courts will let him do. His hyenas have already snapped their jaws at Loomis (and for his political opinions, which are good, and not his condiment opinions, which are bad, no less) and there’s no way of knowing how much damage they can do how quickly once they’re in power.

    So thanks again to the management, and here’s hoping that in 2018 there’s a post that looks a lot like this one, with the 10 most trafficked articles focusing on relatively mundane stuff like the law school scam and the nitty gritty of policy. Heck, maybe one of Bspencer’s art posts will go viral and make the list! Would be cool.

    *Of course what we really want is a flurry of popular posts about the big scandal that brought down the Trump administration, but I almost don’t want to articulate that hope, as if doing so reduces the chances.

  • I’m shocked that neither 100 posts on trade policy nor the grave series reached the internet stratosphere!

    • DonN

      You could totally optimize and win if after each grave entry you had a “click here” button to vote for who you visit next

      • Nobdy

        I’ve often said that Loomis’ key weakness as a historian is his lack of SEO. Too much focus on “historical accuracy” and “good, clean, prose” and not enough on the Bing algorithm.

    • Brett

      You had a lot of good posts that only got 10 comments each because everyone here already agrees with you. It was only when Certain Commentators decided to start a Nitpick Fight that they exploded (or when the topic was Bernie).

    • tsam

      You don’t pick enough fights!

      • Thom

        Erik is so easygoing.

    • Warren Terra

      1) you could petition to have all the graveside posts counted as one entity

      2) or, pick more fights with condiments

  • jim, some guy in iowa

    thanks to the front pagers and thanks to the commenters and best wishes to all in spite of where we look to be going

  • Joe_JP

    Remember the post on Election Day full with comments predicting a Hillary Clinton win, one or more predicting over 350 electoral votes? Ha ha!

  • EliHawk

    Curious what the most commented posts were. I would have guessed the epic Greenwald shit show that made it to 1,000, but there might have been something during the primaries that got that long, back when joe from lowell was taking personal offense at seemingly every other post.

  • Alworth

    Be interesting to see the top ten posts by comment number (though I don’t think Google tracks that). Loomis might have made that one. I recall a post by (I think) Shakezula getting 1000 comments.

  • BobBobNewhartNewhartSpecial

    Other random insights from Google Analytics:


    35-44 (25.75%)
    45-54 (22.97%
    55-64 (21.20%)
    25-34 (19.50%)
    65+ (7.43%)

    How do they figure our ages?

    • trashdog

      There’s some algorithm that guesses. I’m under 30, and I’ve been reading this blog daily for a decade. I’ve checked my Google ad analytics profile, and it thinks I’m 35-45 years old.

  • elk

    Although I’m scarcely looking forward to it, it’s good to have LGM with us in 2017. Thanks for your good work in ’16.

It is main inner container footer text