Yes, there would be problems, because a corporate-sponsored "weblog" could barrel through and destroy all sorts of CFR regulation.
The alternative? Treat websites and posts promoting candidates as being "independent expenditures" on behalf of campaigns, and figure out a way to value them. Only expenditures aggregating over $250 in value have to be reported under current law so, presumably, only websites reaching huge numbers of people will be contributing sufficient value to have to report their activities.
Well, if you make a post that advocates the election of a candidate, and it's seen by 100,000 people a day, it's something of value. Either (a) you're a member of the media, and are exempt from FEC law, or (b) it's an independent expenditure, and must be reported if it's valued at over $250.
Oh, sure -- I take as valid current polls which show Casey to be the most electable of the major candidates as of right now, and I believe those who say that Casey's not being encouraged because he's pro-life but because he's popular.
I would rather support Hoeffel or Murphy or Hafer or Williams, and I believe they could defeat Santorum as well. I also have severe concerns over Casey's ability to fundraise in SE PA, that he'll have the same cash issues that Ron Klink did in 2000, no matter what the DSCC is promising him now.
Well, hold on: Rendell did win the 5-county Philadelphia area, but I wouldn't call Berks, Northampton, Lehigh or especially Lancaster counties to be Philadelphia-area.
decent analysis here: "Even if Philadelphia is left out of the equation, Rendell still received almost 50% of the vote statewide and while his strongest support was close to home, he had friends in many places.
"In the four suburban counties closest to Philadelphia, Rendell had even wider margins of victory than in the city itself, securing 81.7% of the vote in Bucks; 82.6% in Chester; 86.1% in Delaware; and 88.4% in Montgomery. Collectively, Rendell won the five-county Philadelphia area by more than 293,000 votes.
"The total Democratic statewide turnout was 32.5%, for a total of 1,221,006 voters, but the geographic distribution of the votes was unlike any election in a generation.
"In contrast to the unusually strong turnout (36.4%) in Southeastern Pennsylvania, voters in the rest of the state were surprisingly apathetic about this election. In Northeastern Pennsylvania, near Casey's hometown of Scranton, turnout was consistent with the state average of 32.5%, but much lower than would have been expected based on his candidacy for governor. In the Lehigh Valley, midway between the candidates' home counties, the turnout was approximately 30%. In Southwestern Pennsylvania, the turnout was unusually low at 32.2%. In the rest of the state, turnout averaged approximately 27%."