The 2004 election was a kind of prototype: candidates started realizing the relatively-young Internet's potential for raising campaign funds -- and to get votes. In Campaign 2008 candidates in both parties are nurturing weblogs (with conference calls to friendly sites), blog outreach activists (by hiring bloggers to pitch ideas and positions to other bloggers) and to raise funds (Rep. Ron Paul set a record). But will any of this truly make a REAL difference in the final vote count?
Can candidates in 2008 truly rely on blogs to increase their portion of votes -- or have most weblogs evolved into partisan echo chambers?
To get some answers on this (and some other things) we went to an expert: Cass Sunstein, the Karl N. Llewellyn Distinguished Service Professor of Jurisprudence, Law School and Department of Political Science, University of Chicago. He is a contributing editor to The New Republic and is a frequent witness before congressional committees. He is also a supporter of Democratic Senator Barack Obama.
In this original interview, he deals with the issue of weblogs' value to political candidates in early 21st Century America, whether comments on blogs (supposedly a tool for dialogue and convincing people) have lived up to their potential, complications that ensued when campaigns have hired veteran bloggers -- and answers some some questions about Obama plus other matters.
Read the whole thing.
