yea, blockquotes is one of those things on the list. Right, that sort of disclaimer is all that's needed. They've (Kerry's PR blog) now linked themselves to having to police every single website they link to, and make sure it's on message. They might as well delete all their links.
what Everitt Ehrlich argued: Now, anyone with a Web site and a server, a satellite transponder and about $100 million can have -- in a matter of months -- much of what the political parties have taken generations to build. Technology, of course, has changed politics before. Television changed the two parties, for example, but it didn't make the parties obsolete. In fact, in the day of Richard M. Nixon and John F. Kennedy, television strengthened the two-party duopoly (the economist's term for a shared monopoly), as only those two parties had the resources to use it competitively.
But the Internet doesn't reinforce the parties -instead, it questions their very rationale. You don't need a political party to keep the ball rolling -- you can have a virtual party do it just as easily.
So, though the 2004 election is very likely carved in stone already, a mixture of the ingredients is happening. Perhaps the Democratic Party has hit it's 34 year low, and is about to rebound, using the internet as it's new-found backbone. That'd be the best outcome, for sure.
There's a difference between the opportunity and the actual occurance. I'm not predicting that a now unknown candidate will swoop in and clean up, that'd be pretty heady. The choice between Kerry and Bush looks pretty damn solid 8 months away, and there are only about 5-10% that haven't already made up their choice.
Hey, I actually thought I had this in "editing" mode, didn't reealize it'd went public. But let's run with it, basically, I was looking at the numbers, and trying to figure out what the increase in 'other' meant, which Harris polled.