Currently, the political blogs are seen as agitators and outsiders. That's true now. But that doesn't mean it will stay true through all of time. In fact, not only do blogs have a bright future, but they are an indication of what the future might hold for the whole political system.
People who read blogs are among the most politically educated people in the country. They care to know what's happening in current events and politics. So, they knew there was no link between Al Qaeda and Iraq well before the general population. Not because they were privy to some secret information, but because they cared to find out right away.
The facts always catch up to the American people. But sometimes it takes awhile. Bush didn't earn his 30% approval rating over the last year and a half, he did that in the last five and a half years. It just took awhile for the general population to catch up to what the bloggers and blog readers already knew about.
Cenk is certainly right about bloggers being outsiders. Those who would argue that many "short head" progressive blogs have become otherwise, like Daniel Schulman factually-challenged discussion of the subject at Mother Jones, have a remarkably low threshold for what being an "insider" means. Bloggers are simply not decision makers in the progressive ecosystem. Bloggers have no say in deciding where progressive money goes for infrastructure building (if we did, there wouldn't be a funding problem in the blogosphere). We are not involved in policy decisions on the Hill. We are not offered a seat at the table in determining strategy for major electoral, media or legislative campaigns (if we were, why would we constantly complain about these strategies?). On the rare occasions when we do talk with Democrats and people in power, it is virtually always in one of the following capacities:
As a mini-press gaggle where we are allowed to ask questions just like other media.
To provide some variation on the "introduction to the blogosphere" speech for the millionth time.
To be told how an existing campaign is developing, and how we can then become cogs in plans that were developed without our insight or approval.
Insiders are decision makers, and bloggers don't make decisions for the broader progressive ecosystem. Whatever influence we have is most definitely leveraged from outside agitation.
However, are we leading indicators? It is an argument we have heard before, and which has been proven true in instances such as opposition to the Iraq war and rank and file Democratic opposition to Joe Lieberman. But what about the 2008 primaries? Right now, Hillary Clinton holds the overall lead, but in the blogosphere she seems to be clearly lagging in second-tier status. Is that a leading indicator of the future direction of the nomination campaign, or is it instead a reflection of the demographics of the blogosphere, and our isolation from the rest of the progressive coalition?
Right now, I would actually lean a bit more toward the latter position. While I think it is probable that Clinton's lead will decrease in the final two months before the Iowa caucuses, I also think that the long standing blogosphere tendency to move toward other candidates is, at least in part, reflective of the demographics of the blogosphere. Consider the crosstabs from Pew on the right. Virtually every demographic group where Clinton underperforms relative to her national standing also happens to be a demographic group that is over-represented in the progressive blogosphere:
Clinton does worse, and is basically tied with Obama, among self-identified liberals than she does among self-identified moderates or conservatives. The progressive blogosphere is teeming with self-identified liberals.
Clinton does worse, and is basically tied, with Obama, among men. The progressive blogosphere is something like 65% male.
The younger voters become, the worse Clinton seems to do. While the progressive blogosphere is certainly not young, with an average age of 46, it is younger than the Democratic primary electorate as a whole. Again, this means one would expect Clinton to not perform as well in the progressive blogosphere as she does nationally.
Clinton is losing to Obama among Democrats with a college degree. Well, 80% of the progressive blogosphere has a college degree, and nearly half have post-graduate degrees.
Clinton is losing to Obama among Democrats who make more than $100K a year, and barely ahead among Democrats who make $75K-$99K. With a Median annual income of about $80K, once again the progressive blogosphere matches a demographic where Clinton uderperforms.
Clinton is getting annihilated among seculars. While this is a less explored area of progressive blogosphere demographics, every indication I have seen is that seculars make up an enormous percentage of the blogosphere-possibly as high as 45-50%.
I would like to see a national Democratic preference poll that weighted liberals as 75% of the electorate, seculars as 45%, men as 65%, an average age of 46, 80% with college degrees, and an average income of $80K. I bet Clinton is losing nearly as badly among that an electorate like that nationwide as she is losing in the progressive blogosphere. Seriously, I bet she is in third place at best, and Obama is probably doubling her up.
This isn't to say that the progressive blogosphere still won't be a leading indicator in the 2008 Democratic nomination campaign. However, it is to say that in order for the progressive to be so, it will have to rely on ideas and narratives about the 2008 campaign that cross large cultural barriers. As Grance Franke-Ruta notes, that might be particularly difficult with a field this diverse:
My point was simply that a lot of likely Democratic primary voters (55-60 percent of whom overall will likely be female, and nearly 50 percent of whom will be black in SC -- though not Iowa, NH, or Nevada) are excited by the prospect of democratic change that Clinton and Obama -- two very qualified candidates in their own right, though perhaps more centrist than some in these parts might like -- also represent, and that we can't discount the appeal to members of historically disenfranchised groups of having a democracy where, all other things being equal, they also get to see people who have shared their social position represented in positions of power where they can help determine solutions, for good or ill, to public problems, through reasoning together with others.
Whatever narratives and ideas the progressive blogosphere has about 2008, it might be very difficult to overcome a very understandable desire among many Democrats to see a historic breakthrough in representation for women, African-Americans, or Latinos in the highest office in the land.
As a side note, the reason for the long-standing stagnation in the size of the audience of the progressive blogosphere might also be its demographic isolation. The progressive blogosphere may have simply hit a point of market saturation among its most loyal demographics. The progressive blogosphere seems to cater to people to meet three of the six demographics listed in the bullet points above, and who have both a high level of interest in politics and regular broadband access. Basically, the 2-4 million daily readers account for the entire online activist segment of the progressive "creative class." In order to keep growing, the progressive blogosphere needs to break out of this demographic box and reach a larger audience. What the progressive blogosphere has become is truly remarkable, but there are also clearly ways that we can become even better.
STATE BLOGS
