« Utah's Misconception of the Disabled | Main | America at the Crossroads »
Political Blogging
Ralph Becker sent me a note this morning asking me to add Utah House Democratic Caucus to the UtahPolitics.org blogroll—something I was happy to do. For now, my rule is that I’ll add any blog that’s about Utah and politics to a significant degree. At some point, I may have to exercise more editorial control.
UtahPolitics.org was conceived as non-partisan. That is, while things I write will naturally reflect my conservative attitude, I’m happy to have other people write for UtahPolitics.org who don’t share my political opinion.
If I do a quick look at the postings that show up on the UtahPolitics.org homepage, my gut tells me that liberals are winning the blog wars. There are more liberal postings at any given time than conservative ones. I’m not sure we can read much into this at this point, but I am sure that liberal blogs are making their case better-even here in Utah.
Jesse at CoolestFamilyEver might contend that it doesn’t matter anyway. He argues that “blogs have proven themselves to not be effective in the political realm except among a very small and specific segment of the electorate” and uses the Hatch vs. Ashdown race as proof.
I have a few thoughts:
First, we ought not to confuse campaigns with political discourse. I agree with Jesse that blogs are a necessary but insufficient part of a good campaign. Necessary because there is a portion of the electorate who will read blogs for an in-depth review of a candidates position. But no one’s going to win on the strength of their blogging alone.
On the other hand, I think blogs have made a real difference in the public discourse in Utah and provided a means for hundreds of people to participate in public policy discussions who would have never gotten in their car and drive to the Capitol to testify at a public hearing. The intelligent design debate of last December was a good case in point. Because Sen. Buttars posted his ideas on the Senate Site blog, there was a lot of comment on the ideas that would have never seen the light of day before blogs.
Now on to Pete’s race with Orrin. Ashdown vs. Hatch is a case study in a lot of things, but not the effectiveness of blogs in a campaign. Much as I dislike Hatch, its hard to have much hope for Pete. He doesn’t have nearly enough money, the right strategy, or the right pedigree to beat Hatch as a Democrat. Matheson with $2 million is more in the ballpark and that would be an uphill fight.
If Pete had run as a Republican, we might have gotten somewhere. You have to take out a popular incumbent like Hatch in the convention in Utah. If it goes to a vote of the general electorate (and in Utah the Republican primary is nearly that), you’ve lost unless the incumbent really screws up. Blogs can’t compensate for a strategic shortcoming.
Posted by windley on September 25, 2006 10:36 AM
Comments
Some points of clarification if I may.
I'm not saying that blogs aren't effective mediums of political communication, but they are a terrible medium of reaching Joe Voter. The reach of blogs right now is confined mainly to other bloggers and the policitcal elites, so while it's a good way to influence the policy-makers, there isn't much of a trickle-down effect at election day.
My main point is that bloggers don't effectively translate strong words and positions into meaningful action and thus are marginalized as being little more than talking heads. Bloggers, when was the last time you went to a county council meeting, wrote a Congressman, or even put up a simple yard sign? For all of the bluster, there's very little follow-through on the most basic acts of civic involvement.
If even a quarter of these folks did something to help Ashdown's campaign, he might have a shot on his smaller bankroll. As it stands, I wonder if any of them have even asked for a free yard sign.
Posted by: Jesse at September 25, 2006 01:42 PM
I agree with you there. People are great at talking and poor at acting. The blogosphere is just the latest incarnation of that fact.
Posted by: Phil at September 25, 2006 01:56 PM
While you've made some extrememly valid points I should say, on behalf of the bloggers (at least in Salt Lake) many have, indeed gotten their free lawn sign.
But, I should point out that it isn't inaction on the left alone that has kept Pete Ashdown's war chest hungry. Many Ashdown supporters, myself included are part of Utah's "working poor." I donated to his campaign, but what is my 10 bucks compared to a 500 dollar a plate dinner with The Hatch and The Bush?
Posted by: Tracy at September 26, 2006 08:38 AM
Interesting observations, Phil.
FYI: I have a free lawn sign, walked two parades with Pete Ashdownthis last weekend (and I have a lot of other things for him in the real world), attended several county meetings during the last year, attended a political debate, etc. I am relatively active in the real world realm.
Also, while Ashdown is not a cookie cutter Democrat, his moderate social views would not fly in Mormon conservativism.
Posted by: Steve at September 26, 2006 04:36 PM
The Mormon blogosphere has a unique name, the "Bloggernacle" that identifies it's distinct boundary and seperation as a community and subset of the larger blogosphere.
Couldn't we come up with a name for Utah political blogging community other than the ubiquitous "blogosphere"?
How about the "Bloghive"?
What do you all think? Any other suggestions?
Posted by: Tom Grover at September 27, 2006 10:03 AM
Post a comment